Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/33306
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/33306
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

### _Realistic detail_ does not necessarily mean _describe unimportant characters in greater detail_ - it may for example mean _more details about the environment_

Judging from the comment conversation it seems that you interpreted the feedback you received to mean that people want more information about the people, even if they are not important to the story. And your confusion comes from the fact that people seem to be okay with, in your eyes, superfluous descriptions of the environment but not with named side characters.

I am taking the examples you posted in the comments (emphasis mine and with added paragraphs to make it easier to read):

> 'two nurses, Mary and Sue, checking his IV and dressing his wound'
> 
> **is harder for a reader than**
> 
> 'three windows, one of which was open, and blinds that were half drawn. The sun hit his eyes straight on, and he squinted and twisted in the sheets, wishing he was able to walk to close the blinds. The sheets tangled around his legs, and he hit the call button.

The first one is not harder to read. In fact, it's quite easy to read. But it sets expectations. When reading the first one I thought that Mary and Sue will be important characters and I expected you to mention them in your second example.

Here is my comment response:

> The general expectation is that a named character will play an important role in some way - that's why he gets a name. And that's why a reader has to reserve some memory whenever he comes across a new named character. In your example it looks like you could leave out "Mary and Sue" because the names themselves add nothing to the story.

The names themselves are not important and do not add anything, but they signal to the reader that these people will be important later on. Read up on [Chekhov's Gun](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ChekhovsGun) (obviously a very dangerous TVTropes link). _Chekhov's Gun_ applies to names. If you name a character you definitely, absolutely have to use that character for _something_. Maybe as a conversation partner. Maybe the main character will just remember them because they were kind or cruel or clumsy. Maybe they help the main character in some way. Or maybe they are casualties in a terrorist attack and he later sees them dead somewhere. Maybe they are just there to show in which situation other characters are because of how the new character treats them. The details depend on your story and what you want to use these characters for - but you _have to use them somehow_.

The reason why the second example you mentioned is better is because the reader gets a feeling for his surroundings. What does it look like? What is the main character's current condition? What time is it (roughly)? It's adding to the setting and theme of your writing and gives the reader a way to imagine the environment in which the character is currently acting.

The first one on the other hand mentions some nurses. And at the same time these are just [unintentional promises](https://writing.stackexchange.com/questions/33235/how-do-i-spot-an-unintentional-promise-in-my-story).

Whenever a reader comes across a name he will try to remember the name because it will surely be important somehow at some point. This will put more _stress_ on the reader than the description of the room. Three windows are pretty generic. Imagine three windows. See, there is not much to it. Of course I _could_ add stuff to make them unique, but apparently they are not _that_ important so any image that crossed your mind is okay.

Now imagine _Mary_. See how your mind jumps to a couple characters and munches them together? You have an image of what a _Mary_ is supposed to be like. Maybe you even know a Mary in real life and have to think about her when you read the name.

A _name_ carries a lot of meaning. It's what most humans identify with - because it's used as an identifier for humans. That's what a name is suposed to be. Therefore we associate _importance_ with a name. And with _importance_ come other associations of situations where we encountered for example a _Mary_. And these associations on the other hand set up _expectations_. _Expectations_ of what a _Mary_ should be like. And it produces _anticipation_ about whether this _Mary_ will be like other _Mary's_ or different and what her role in the grand scheme of your universe will be.

A window on the other hand is a window. You can look through it most of the time. It may be bigger or smaller, but it serves a practical purpose and as long as there is nothing special happening with the window it's nothing else. Maybe a possible exit if you are in an action-driven mood, but that's about it.

Descriptions of mundane objects do not carry a lot of meaning. Special objects, like guns hanging around, carry a lot more meaning. And names are one of the most important things for _people_, so they carry a whole lot of meaning for these _people_ and therefore they should carry quite a whole lot of meaning for _us_ as readers.

### Conclusion

Now we come to the nearly boring conclusion: the ideal pacing for introducing new characters is that you introduce a new character whenever that character first plays a role in the story you are telling.

That's it.

You introduce them when they become important. Not earlier. Not later.

And you only introduce them _with a name_ if they will play an important part later in the story _somehow_.

It doesn't matter how many characters you have. It doesn't really matter how many characters you introduce at once. As long as they are distinct and important and it's their moment to come into existence for the reader they should be introduced.

Maybe you introduce a whole group because they are a group of friends or colleagues who just happen to run across the main character and are discussing some event that the main character should be part of. Then you introduce a whole lot at once. Or you introduce one character every three or four chapters in one-on-one dialogues with your main character. This, like always, depends on the details of your story.

### To answer your _additional_ part

> "I'm Mary, but it's alright if you don't remember. You just get well."

That's just weird. Why would you say that? This would make me curious as to _why_ she would say that and again I would have expectations - expectations of the character trying to uncover why she feels that she is so unimportant that she wouldn't even give people a name to _identify_ her.

Just leave it out. Don't make it a dialogue. Just state that your character is thinking about how his arm hurts while the nurse asks him a few basic questions and that he can't even remember whether she told him her name.

Or you could just show his internal monologue describing his broken bones, how he thinks about getting out of the hospital while the nurse tells him the usual stuff: _her name so I can ask for her, that she will care for me until I am better and where I can find everything_. No need to _explicitly_ use her name to show that the main character knows her name. You could even later use this to something like _I told the old man in front of me the name of my nurse and he wouldn't stop talking about how she is 'such a sweet girl'._

> "I'm Mary but I don't show up in this book again."

You can do that - in a comedy where breaking the Fourth Wall is common and acceptable. But normally you would never do something like this. Except for when you suddenly add an omnipotent being that is above all normal characters and _knows_ it's in a book. So, again, expectations. Very high expectations even.

Original score: 2