SciFi and Fantasy Book Club discussion

When reading a book, if you're a reader who visualizes characters, I was wondering how closely you try to keep to the author's description, or if you sort of just get a notion in your head and stick with it?

I'm a bit both, and it seems to partially depend on when the first physical description comes.

I thought of this recently because there's a book where I was imagining the group of people as being darker skinned - either Indian or African - because it's set in a desert location, and then they describe the characters as pale with blonde hair and I'm like, ugh really, and then I'm like, nope, too late, I'm running with my first impression because blonde haired blue eyed heroes are so overdone.

They do explain in the book that these people are actually invaders who kicked out the original inhabitants, so it sort of makes sense in context, but by then I was already wrapped up in my own ideas.

So, anyway, just curious as to how other people handle these sorts of things when reading.

I run with my own idea based on context clues. I actually get kind of frustrated when characters are described in detail since I go with my own idea anyway.

I think this is why we get so upset sometimes with casting in TV/Movie versions of books. The actors don't fit our expectations.

On the other hand, in one of my many rereads of LotR, I imagined all the characters and settings as though they were in a Disney animated movie. That was quite entertaining.

I sometimes get a strong impression that is very different from how the character is described, and I can't change it no matter how I try. It's like trying to imagine your own mirror image with a different nose or skin color. I think it mostly happens when I feel drawn to the character. If I don't care about them, I usually don't try to picture what they look like. Often they're just a blur, even the main characters, they're more a feeling than a picture, if that makes sense. I see the world and the places much more clearly than the people. I could almost walk the labyrinth on Atuan, but I couldn't tell you what Tenar looks like in my mind. I know how she's described, but she's just a feeling in my head.

And I agree, the longer the author takes to describe the character, the harder it is to see them in a specific way. I don't mind if they're not described at all, but it does throw me off when there's a sudden description of hair color or something 75% into the book.

I try to stick to the descriptions but my mind does what it wants lol. This actually happens to me A LOT. There are so many times I've gotten to the middle or end of a book (or even on a reread) and I'm like "oh this character was actually white this entire time, or oh this character didn't have long brown hair". I have been reading the Bel Dame series by Kameron Hurley. The main character (Nyx) is constantly described as tall, muscular and broad shouldered. I always imagine her to be smaller so every time I come across that description I'm like "oops, totally forgot!" lol.

I was rereading ACOMAF by SJM and realized I had imagined a character (Mor), who had long blonde hair, as having a short black bob for the ENTIRE book. at this point though it's stuck and I can't imagine her any other way.

I was reading a sci-fi romance and imagined the male lead as black and then towards the end it was mentioned that he was actually pale. Again, at this point it was too late so he will forever be black in my mind.

I don't know why my mind can't stick to the description on the page lol.

I'm pretty much the same as you, Colleen. I generally form an idea of the character in my head based on the info we have early on and go with that... but, if it's revised later, I will try to update it to match.

An example of this is in Sleeping Beauties, which takes place in rural West Virginia, there's a family who I assumed (based on it being RURAL W.VA) were white, and then over halfway through the book it was stated that they were black. I revised my mental images of them, but it made me somewhat angry, because their experiences would have been VERY different based on that, and so I felt that it did the characters something of an injustice to be tokenized like that. But still, I did start picturing them as black after that.

But then other times, even if there's a clear description from the outset, even an image or picture, I kinda just go my own way. Like with Ron Weasley. I picture him as a sort of blend of book Ron (tall and gangly with a very long thin nose) and Rupert Grint. He's not as reedy in my head, not as sharp features... but still tall, because of the PJs that are too short. >_< (Poor Ron.)

Reading these made me realize that I don't visualize character appearances. I have very clear visualizations of settings and I build models of how characters think and feel. But that doesn't include character appearance. Weird.

Well that's not quite true. I remember reading a story containing a character who reminded me very much of a friend. So that was my visualization. I mentioned it to her later on and it turned out that the author had indeed based the character specifically on her. I had to appreciate that bit of writing.

Wow Raucous, how random is that that your friend featured in a book you read and you amazingly visualized her!

I’m with you, Raucous, I rarely have any specific mental image, of anyone or anything. I’m just not a very visual person.

Same here. If there are illustrations l go with them (like for the Stormlight Archives), other than that I don't visualize characters.

I usually try to visualize as close as I can to what the author is describing. sometimes I just have to laugh when a book get turned into a movie and the character is so far off from the actor playing.example the short story I robot and I am legion.

My brain does the visualisation thing pretty well straight away. I'm absolutely fine with authors not being completely descriptive about their characters, but if they want to describe them, I'd prefer it early on.

The trouble for me comes if the book is turned into a movie, and the character description and the actor don't match at all (in my mind). One that comes to mind is the first Shadowhunter movie.

To start with, one of the major characters is called Jace. We have a dog called Jace. He's a staffy/kelpie with endearing brown eyes and he knows how to use them. First of all I had to contend with my brain picturing a cute doggie every time his name was mentioned, and then when I'd finally managed to build an image based on the author's description (basically a blonde Greek God), I watched the (very bad) movie with a weedy, non-Greek God actor.

🤷‍♀️

I don't visualize them with clear pictures, but I do get miffed when movies get the looks all wrong. This was a HUGE problem for me the first time I saw the first Hunger Games movie, since I'd read the book several times. Now I'm used to how they look.

The other problem is if I read the books after seeing it on film. When I read the Poldark novels, after seeing the original BBC miniseries, I was really put off by Demelza in the books having dark hair. It was the BBC series that turned her into a redhead--I see the remake has done the same, but am not going to watch it as I want to keep a happy memory of watching the original one.

My brain just gives me a picture and I go with it even if it’s nothing to do with how they look. The way a character acted in Artemis Fowl made me think that he looked like Inspector Brackenreid in The Murdoch Mysteries. Big and brash but he was really only slight. With an attitude.

I can’t concentrate on character descriptions in books most of the time anyway.

I usually see characters close to how they are described except for the main character. Since I find myself seeing the world through their eyes I generally don't spend too much visual capital focusing on what the MC looks like, I just get a general feeling for them and go with that unless there is something about their appearance that results in the character being treated differently or being acted on differently by factors in the environment.

I’m super visual. I picture everything described *as* described.

In years past that used to get in the way, as I would try to imagine how I would stage and film scenes (I’m a filmmaker), which would bring me to a complete stop. I had to actively untrain myself from doing that. Sometimes I still do it, almost like a reflex.

The ability comes in handy in other aspects of life, though. Last year I managed to pack a truly ridiculous number of Xmas gifts into a fairly small car by Tetrising the hell out of them.

LOL, Trike. You crack me up.

Describing in detail physically a character is not really needed in my opinion, unless that character is some kind of circus freak, alien creature or monster. Even then, too much details would tend to kill the rythm of the story. For 'ordinary' characters, only traits that would attract attention, like a prominent scar/tatoo, a Hulk-like built or an extremely sexy woman with generous curves would deserve more than a description in a few words. When reading about some heroic or outstanding character, I often imagine them in the image of some known celebrity (actor/actress, singer, dancer, athlete, famous soldier, etc.) who played or were somewhat similar characters. However, Hollywood often completely miscasts characters out of books. For example, in books, Jack Reacher is is a big, scary hulk-type. Who did Hollywood choose to play him on film: diminutive Tom Cruise. Go figure!

I do not care to much about visualisation unless the author describes some attributes that seems important to the character, which can be annoying as I always has to look up if a 6.4 foot guy is especially big or small or if a 12 stone person is fat or slim.

After seeing a movie adaptation, even a poor one, I will always visualise the characters as that actor, even with LOTR which I had read several times before the movies.

This may sound strange but I can only see a character clearly if I can hear them clearly. When I read I have a very definite sense of how every character sounds, long before I can easily visualise them.
I can’t remember ever differing that much from an author’s visual description of a character except in a series where honestly everyone could be divided into generic male/female person and they all blurred together for me. The characters hair and eye colours were described repeatedly but those details never stuck in my mind when I couldn’t distinguish who was who from the dialogue. There are authors that give each character truly different ways of speaking but neglect to describe them visually at all and yet I have no trouble picturing them.
It’s much more important for me for an author to describe the way a character moves, their expressions and tone of voice than their hair and eye colour. I can only remember the details of their face if I have a sense of how they express themselves.
I hope this makes sense to someone beside me!

My brain just does it's thing, and then when my imagination doesn't match the book description I get mad and then revise.

Sometimes I can't get the image so I'll do an image search to jump start my imagination. The Library at Mount Char is an example of when I needed help visualizing.

Lars wrote: "After seeing a movie adaptation, even a poor one, I will always visualise the characters as that actor, even with LOTR which I had read several times before the movies."

At least Peter Jackson tried to make the actor look like the book character making dark haired people blondes (Orlando Bloom) or blondes dark haired (Viggo). Most of his characters looked like I visualized them except for Eowyn who should have been more like the actress who played Brienne of Tarth

Yes Rachel, each character does have to have their own voice. Not just what you'd hear from an audiobook (or maybe not that at all), but a way of speaking, subtle inflections, word choices, preferred length of sentences. etc. Those books that shift among points of view should not need (but still should have) the heading introducing each shift.

And yes, if the character also has mannerisms or movement patterns, that's lovely. Not just a girl who chews on the end of her braid or an aunt who can't tell a story without huge gestures, but also a man who drums his desk with pencils or a boy who can't keep all four legs of his chair on the floor or a grandma who winks.

Leonie wrote: "My brain does the visualisation thing pretty well straight away. I'm absolutely fine with authors not being completely descriptive about their characters, but if they want to describe them, I'd pre..."

so agree. Some movies i just cant watch until i calm down and try again. I have a printed out joke on my office wall with a woman standing up in a movie theater shouting "his hair is supposed to be brown".

I get great delight in noting that people who laugh are usually readers

ps i also need to visualize characters, and sometimes scroll through actors and models images on line to get one that will fit the character i am reading about. I am edgy until i find a picture that will fit.

In his early science fiction, Isaac Asimov often avoided physical descriptions of characters, unless it was a plot point, as in a couple of the Foundation stories.

(His late Black Widower mysteries were a little different -- a lot of the characters were clearly based on long-time friends, and it was something of an inside joke, perhaps more apparent to science fiction fans than readers from a strictly mystery background.)

He attributed this practice to the advice of an older science fiction writer, I think Clifford Simak, who was especially careful not to describe the beautiful heroine in any way: he would let the readers (mostly male in those days) fill in the blanks to suit their own tastes.

Ian, that's interesting, makes sense, thank you.
Reinforces what Rachel says, in a certain way, too.

I tend to build up a picture of a character from whatever the author gives me, but I get annoyed if I'm given nothing to work with but a bare name. At least give me a general idea of sex/age/type ... a sentence or two will do.

I'm not a very visual person, so I don't have detailed images in my mind of what characters look like. What few attributes I do come up with, I usually do on my own and disregard the descriptions the author gives that conflict with the ones I've already imagined.

Some things mentioned in the thread made me think - my visualizations are more sort of abstract impressions rather than really clear. I was never good at the "casting" of a book from actors because my impressions of them usually aren't quite that particular - more just rough sketches.

I do tend to visualize an actor if I'm reading a book after seeing a show/movie, though. This always creates fun moments when you're reading something like Harry Potter which describes the twins as shorter and somewhat squat, but my visual is the Phelps twins, and then my brain tries to do both at the same time and it just... doesn't work.

Michel wrote: "Describing in detail physically a character is not really needed in my opinion, unless that character is some kind of circus freak, alien creature or monster. Even then, too much details would tend..."

Too much detail, especially when written in very metaphoric language, can actually distort the character in my mind beyond me being able to think of them as a real person.

For example, the first paragraph in Dashiell Hammett's The Maltese Falcon …

Samuel Spade's jaw was long and bony, his chin a jutting v under the more flexible v of his mouth. His nostrils curved back to make another, smaller, v. His yellow-grey eyes were horizontal. The v motif was picked up again by thickish brows rising outward from twin creases above a hooked nose, and his pale brown hair grew down—from high flat temples—in a point on his forehead. He looked rather pleasantly like a blond satan.

What. The. Actual. F?

Wow. That description defies comment.

So he looks like this:
...~~~
...\ /
..(- -)
......v
.....V

?

In fairness, this is more or less as detailed as I'm ever able to picture characters, barring someone already having been selected to play them in a movie/show haha

Micah wrote: "What. The. Actual. F?"

No, no, that’s an Actual V, not an Actual F. Weren’t you paying attention to the text? ;) Allison’s picture was much more detailed than the one in my head. I just saw a big V on top of a neck.

An Actual F would be a guy with a moustache, and whatever you call that hairstyle where the hair sticks out past their forehead, who only ever lets you see him from the side.

To answer the original question, I’m another one who sees the characters mostly as blurs in my head. The blurs do tend to vaguely resemble the descriptions provided if they were provided soon after the character was introduced. If I’m very attached to a character, then I have a very strong impression of them in my head, but it’s more based on mannerisms and personality than on actual appearance.

It's pretty much the same way I am with people in real life, really. I have horrible facial recognition skills and I’ve been known to introduce myself to somebody who I had just met a week ago. Once I know who a person is, then I’ll remember all our conversations and my impressions of them, but somehow the visual aspects just don’t stick well in my memory until I’ve known somebody for a while. Even when I know somebody pretty well, I have trouble recognizing them if I run into them in an unexpected place.

Elowen wrote: "I struggle to remember real people's faces if I don't know them well, so unless a character's physical description is somehow relevant to the story, or described in a memorable way that makes the c..."

I have the opposite problem, constantly forgetting names.

Everyone in my life makes fun of me while I’m watching Jeopardy because I’ll shout out, “Bet it all, Dave!” and the guy’s name is Phil... which is written right in front of him. 😂

Kateb wrote: "ps i also need to visualize characters, and sometimes scroll through actors and models images on line to get one that will fit the character i am reading about. I am edgy until i find a picture tha..."

I do this too! If I am having a hard time getting into a book, sometimes I'll go on Pinterest and cast all the characters using actors' images, usually actors I am familiar with enough to imagine how they might play their assigned roles. Then I can happily read my book.

When I read, it's easier for me to imagine the characters. If given a relatively good description to work with. For me it's hard if I see TV show or movie then try to cast them in the book. ( for example Game of Thrones- Tyrion Lannister vs Peter Dinklage)

Charlton wrote: "When I read, it's easier for me to imagine the characters. If given a relatively good description to work with. For me it's hard if I see TV show or movie then try to cast them in the book. ( for example Game of Thrones- Tyrion Lannister vs Peter Dinklage)."

but Ellaria Sand was spot on - she was the first actress i thought of for the part. The woman who played Eowyn in Lord of the Rings was woefully miscast.

eta: oops, I'm still harping on the casting of Eowyn.

Several of the Dornish fit my imagination. If I read the book first, it's between my imagination and the author. If they make a movie or TV show it's at that point I decide whether or not it's a fitting actor/actress.

What's up 2022, any new comments on this topic? :)

Whatever you think of that “blond satan” description of Sam Spade, it certainly doesn’t fit Humphrey Bogart. To me I guess this is just an aspect of the fact that the John Huston movie adaptation of the Dashiell Hammett novel “The Maltese Falcon” is really a new and different creative work, though inevitably derivative. (Both works are excellent.)

On a lesser level, I do think that casting Tom Cruise as the intimidatingly large Jack Reacher character is kind of ridiculous. However the movie Reacher is just a different character. This is true for me in most cases. Neither of the two actors I’ve seen play Dalgleish in tv adaptations of P. D. James replaces the idea of the character I get from the books. Etc.

While I don't get clear pictures, I do get ideas. It made it difficult for me to watch The Hunger Games the first time. Haymitch was far to trim and handsome, Peeta was completely wrong for the description plus many others. Also, I'd listened to the audiobook once so Katniss' voice sounded wrong. Plus in the book Katniss is an amazing singer but the actress was not.

However, the reverse is also true. If I love a miniseries with a redhead and then it turns out she's got dark brown hair it pulls me right out of the book.

However, I don't picture characters like real actors or people.

I always picture characters vividly. If there's a description, then I picture them as the description, with my brain filling in the missing bits. If I see a movie with the character in it, then my brain usually ends up with that actor inside it - unless the actor is so incredibly wrong for the part as described, or if it's a story I've read so many times that the character is ingrained deeply.

It is jarring when the actor is really wrong.

I’m so pleased reading that many of you guys also don’t really picture every detail of a character’s look - so I’m normal. 😋😂
For me the characters are also more of a feeling than the looks. I only picture them so rough like a body shape or distinct skin color or if they really have an outstanding trait, but the feeling is much more present.

When there’s a movie or series made from a book I always wonder if I should watch it or not, or read the book first. I imagine whatever you choose, one will kind of spoil the other. 😅

I agree Julia! Reassuring to know I'm not the only one who mostly just goes by feeling and not a clear image. I definitely do this for the majority of characters and stories.

The only exception for me is if I'm reading a long series or with stories that I return to over and over. For example with Harry Potter I have built up a really specific image over the years of how all the characters look, some influenced by the film actors but many based on my own interpretation of the characters. Also when I started reading The Stormlight Archive last year I went and looked for fanart of the main characters - I knew I was going to be with them for a long time so I wanted to form a clear visual based on my fave elements from the examples I could find.

Lucy wrote: "I agree Julia! Reassuring to know I'm not the only one who mostly just goes by feeling and not a clear image. I definitely do this for the majority of characters and stories.

The only exception fo..."

Julia wrote: "I’m so pleased reading that many of you guys also don’t really picture every detail of a character’s look - so I’m normal. 😋😂
For me the characters are also more of a feeling than the looks. I only..."

This is because people are different--some people think more in pictures than other people do, but it's not as simple as think in words vs think in images. Some things I think about are only in feelings or other impressions.

Also, reading words is a very different experience for me and I don't hear voices, either, unless I actively try to. However, if I have heard and audiobook it can change things if I do that first. There is one series I can't read because I listened to a couple of audiobooks so I can't separate how the narrator read or how she voiced characters, and it doesn't help at all. However, if I have read a book more than once, I can listen to it once but later reread it without that voice (eg To Kill A Mockingbird, Pride and Prejudice, The Hunger Games.)