How do you show character reactions without making them do something physically that is unrealistic?
I've read stuff like these:
- she sat up. Startled.
- His face flushed (how does that happen in real life)
- He felt his neck muscles tense up, his temples started bulging, he started breathing more heavily as he heard his subordinate's report
- Suddenly she felt hollow inside
You get the idea. There are a many descriptions of characters having some kind of physical indication about their reactions. This is especially true in the writing of Sydney Sheldon, Dan Brown, Dean Koontz and several popular authors.
What other ways are there to bring out character reactions, instead of adding dramatizing effects to emotions? Also, is there any way which is recommended in terms of making it more realistic?
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/37605. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
2 answers
Skip the physical actions you find unrealistic (although most of them are metaphorical, not 'unrealistic'). Tears welling in eyes, trembling, etc are realistic enough.
Also, go inside; physical symptoms are not all you can show:
He felt his neck muscles tense up, his temples started bulging, he started breathing more heavily as he heard his subordinate's report.
Versus,
As Richard listened to his lieutenant's report he felt a building rage, the urge to strike somebody down, break things, to roar to stop this idiocy. He was sure these feelings showed on him, but internally he struggled to repress any actual movement at all. Not only would it be unprofessional, but it was too late, the deeds were done. Now he needed a response, something besides killing everyone. When his lieutenant finished, Richard took a long moment to calm himself, eyes closed. He finally looked up to meet the lieutenant's eyes.
"Heard and understood. Give me fifteen minutes, and return for orders. Dismissed."
The lieutenant nodded once and turned to leave. A good man. A smart man.
0 comment threads
Lamentably, a great many authors today are mentally acting out scenes in their heads because they are subconsciously directing a movie rather than writing a novel.
Both the screen and the page are limited media. They do some things well and some things badly. Showing facial expressions and body language generally is something the screen does well and the page does badly. Thus a movie script will often put more of the responsibility for expressing emotion onto the actors rather than on the dialogue. In fact, movie dialogue is often incredibly trite because it is meant almost as a blank canvas for the actor to use to paint in the emotions they want to portray.
The page, on the other hand, does not give much scope for acting. You can certainly mention an action or a frown now and then, but there cannot be any of the subtlety of expression or movement that an actor can bring to a scene. Only the crudest movements can be described. The novelist, therefore, puts more of the emotion into the dialogue than you would find in real life. People give speeches, they use elevated language, they use more varied vocabulary and extended metaphors and similes that people would rarely use in real speech.
This is how you express emotion in prose, therefore: not in actions but in words. And, also, not in the moment but in the setup. The real trick to creating powerful emotion in a story is not how you write individual scenes but in how you set up the scene beforehand so that the reader has the desired emotional reaction just from hearing that some dreaded or hoped-for event has happened.
In short, use the techniques appropriate to the media you are working in.
0 comment threads
0 comment threads