Any Clever or Novel Ways for Creating a Setting?

[HappySpouse]

I find that the setting descriptions are often the worst parts of books and stories. Usually, it's a full stop on a story's action where the author walks on the scene and talks about the draperies for a bit. They are also, usually, poorly written in comparison to the surrounding text. (I don't mean to say the structures or verbiage is substandard, just that is a perfunctory section written in a perfunctory manner.)

I can think of some descriptions that I have enjoyed in books where a place is built up as something remarkable beforehand. Then a reader might eat up the details of the grandeur, but taking the time to make a location into it's own character seems less practical in most erotica.

There is the idea of spreading a description out over the text of a scene, but that is not without it's own issues. It is a fairly impossible task to predict how thousands of individual readers will fill an image while we move the characters around for a few sentences. Then when a door or piece of furniture have to appear (or even change color/texture) it can pull them out of a story. So instead of coming to a complete stop, it feels more like occasionally pulling the handbreak on the highway.

It seems like most of the author's on this site aim for minimal time spent describing places, which I agree is best, but "minimal" is rarely none. So, I would love a discussion of any methods you use to smooth over the description process.

I'm not asking anyone to reinvent the wheel. I just want to know what kind of wheels you like to use. To give an idea of what I am looking for here are a couple I like. Feel free to judge them harshly:

1. Using an existing trope to carry the burden. For example, in my Summer Lovin' story, I wrote,

"Stephanie's apartment was not at all what Emma had expected. It was nice enough and it was tidy, but it was also kind of bare and sad looking...it reminded her of an apartment a divorced dad might move into in a movie."

For me, that creates a clear picture in my mind of a well kept place with little personalization, little or nothing on the walls, and perhaps out of place furniture.

2. Taking advantage of the halting nature to intentionally press pause on a story. I recently read a book that had all manner of wild and impossible things going on. Then suddenly the narrator said, "before...Let's take a look around." It was jarring and intentional. I found it pretty clever because it was a unique setting that required a lot of describing for the reader to get handle on. At some point the story was going to stop moving anyway, so why not take advantage. I rather like the idea of using this in erotica as literary edging.

 

[NotWise]

"Setting" is one of the fundamental components of a story, but I tend to downplay details. That's something I've learned by writing. For my early stories I put a lot of effort into describing settings.

My usual approach is to a create setting by having a character or characters move through it. That can develop the character and the setting at the same time. My Summer Lovin' story provides an example in the opening paragraphs.

I think you're safe using a common trope, similes, or metaphors to develop a general setting. That's especially useful if you're writing a short story.

If an author broke into a story to describe the setting, then I might close the book.

 

[MelissaBaby]

I find that the setting descriptions are often the worst parts of books and stories. Usually, it's a full stop on a story's action where the author walks on the scene and talks about the draperies for a bit. They are also, usually, poorly written in comparison to the surrounding text. (I don't mean to say the structures or verbiage is substandard, just that is a perfunctory section written in a perfunctory manner.)

I can think of some descriptions that I have enjoyed in books where a place is built up as something remarkable beforehand. Then a reader might eat up the details of the grandeur, but taking the time to make a location into it's own character seems less practical in most erotica.

There is the idea of spreading a description out over the text of a scene, but that is not without it's own issues. It is a fairly impossible task to predict how thousands of individual readers will fill an image while we move the characters around for a few sentences. Then when a door or piece of furniture have to appear (or even change color/texture) it can pull them out of a story. So instead of coming to a complete stop, it feels more like occasionally pulling the handbreak on the highway.

It seems like most of the author's on this site aim for minimal time spent describing places, which I agree is best, but "minimal" is rarely none. So, I would love a discussion of any methods you use to smooth over the description process.

I'm not asking anyone to reinvent the wheel. I just want to know what kind of wheels you like to use. To give an idea of what I am looking for here are a couple I like. Feel free to judge them harshly:

1. Using an existing trope to carry the burden. For example, in my Summer Lovin' story, I wrote,

"Stephanie's apartment was not at all what Emma had expected. It was nice enough and it was tidy, but it was also kind of bare and sad looking...it reminded her of an apartment a divorced dad might move into in a movie."

For me, that creates a clear picture in my mind of a well kept place with little personalization, little or nothing on the walls, and perhaps out of place furniture.

2. Taking advantage of the halting nature to intentionally press pause on a story. I recently read a book that had all manner of wild and impossible things going on. Then suddenly the narrator said, "before...Let's take a look around." It was jarring and intentional. I found it pretty clever because it was a unique setting that required a lot of describing for the reader to get handle on. At some point the story was going to stop moving anyway, so why not take advantage. I rather like the idea of using this in erotica as literary edging.

I think the setting serves two purposes, the purely utilitarian need to lay out the space so that the leader can imagine the action, and as a reflection of the characters, as in your first example. When describing home or work spaces, I think it's usually best to describe the setting through a character's point of view, even when writing in the third person.

Describing broader settings, such as neighborhoods and towns, I think the focus needs to be on how the setting reflects the themes or mood of the story.

Funny you brought this up, I just wrote this yesterday, for my work in progress. I think it's a good example of what I mean:

The Gold Dollar Lounge and Showbar sat at the east end of the parking lot of the Pine Tree Plaza shopping center, in a building that had once been a Bonanza Steakhouse. At the other end of the parking lot, TJ’s Citgo station was the only other business in the plaza that was still open daily. The K-Mart, once the center’s anchor, housed the U-Save flea market on Saturdays, but sat empty the rest of the week.

When the Gold Dollar opened, the plaza was bustling with business. But over the years, the appliance store was replaced by a nail salon, and the Blockbuster Video gave way to first a Chinese restaurant, then a comic book store, until, eventually, neither space displayed anything more than whitewashed windows and yellowing For Rent signs. All that remained was TJ’s and the Gold Dollar. People still needed to put gas in their cars, and men still liked to look at naked women.

My general attitude regarding description, whether of place, clothing, appearance, etc, is to not give much more than what is needed, and to allow the reader plenty of head space to imagine things in the manner that brings the scene alive for them.

 

[Paul_Chance]

I'm in the minimalist setting crowd myself. Unless some detail of the setting serves a purpose within the story, I'd just use any handy trope.

That said, I know there are a goodly number of readers who want detailed description. I think it's just a different style of writing/reading and to each their own.

(Here's a weird tip - if you're looking to fill out background details get a copy of the local yellow pages and just pick things at random by opening to any page and set your finger down. It'll let you quickly build a rather detailed group of settings to use in your tale.)

 

[HappySpouse]

I think the setting serves two purposes, the purely utilitarian need to lay out the space so that the leader can imagine the action, and as a reflection of the characters

What about doing that in a literal sense?

“The building was much like it’s owner; broad, short, and somehow simultaneously intimidating and thoroughly unimpressive. Both, it seemed to me, had been made dangerous by neglect.”

 

[vanmyers86]

I like to drop in setting details the same way I do with descriptions of characters - bit by bit, not all in a giant dollop, and preferably with some type of action attached. There are exceptions, of course, but I really don't like to notebook dump, because as a reader, I find it dull (and as a writer too, really).

Examples are - a character walks into a room; what does she see and smell (like MelissaBaby outlined in her post). A character is out on a run - how does the air feel, what does he hear, what's happening with his body as it interacts with the environment, etc. You get the picture.

I do find the sensory input varies by setting, so I might focus on sounds with one setting, visuals with another, and so on. For instance, when I did a hot air balloon ride years ago, I was amazed at how clear the sounds from the ground were, and that detail made it into The Unbucket List.

 

[HappySpouse]

I do find the sensory input varies by setting, so I might focus on sounds with one setting, visuals with another, and so on. For instance, when I did a hot air balloon ride years ago, I was amazed at how clear the sounds from the ground were, and that detail made it into The Unbucket List.

You set that scene up very well for yourself. A moving scene really yields itself to that kind progressive description. It was memorable and beautiful. On a side note, congratulations.

 

[yukonnights]

I always blend the mental images that I want the reader to get in with the movement/action of the scene. This includes the Setting. Here's an example from what I'm working on now. The prior narrative introduces the new private club that a group of men are forming in an old abandoned bar that's gone belly-up;

… The gathered men shout their agreement to Carl's hopes and then the old abandoned bar falls silent. The dim sunlight streaming though windows clouded by dust and cobwebs is the only illumination, the dark walls swallow up most of it. The dust is heavy on everything, the floor, the abandoned tables and chairs are too dirty to use. But every eye ignores all of that and are fixed on the two men on the old stage. Tony slides his tee-shirt over his head and lays it on a chair that for some reason found it's last resting place on the stage. He kicks off his Birkenstock sandals, his clean bare feet now stand on the dusty planks of the stage. The two men keep their eyes focused on each other as Tony unbuttons his jeans and slides them down until they puddle around his ankles — with deft grace he steps free of them. He is clearly aroused — poking out stiff as he faces the man before him...

To me, this sets the scene while still moving and/or setting up the story. I often use walks in nature in a similar way — describing bits of the surrounding beauty while the character's walk, talk, resolve issues, argue, kiss, get naked and make love, etc. To my mind, this is more true to actual human expereince.

A dry "telling" of most any part of a story is enough for me to back out. Often it's a dry "telling" / "describing" of a character's physical appearance — booooring. A dry "telling" of a back-story needed for clarity — boooooring. It's not just the setting that needs life, everything should be alive and exciting. That's my opinion and by golly, I'm sticking with it

 

[MelissaBaby]

What about doing that in a literal sense?

“The building was much like it’s owner; broad, short, and somehow simultaneously intimidating and thoroughly unimpressive. Both, it seemed to me, had been made dangerous by neglect.”

That would depend on context. In most cases I think it would be a little heavy handed, but it sounds just right if you are writing something like a hard boiled detective story.

 

[HappySpouse]

That would depend on context. In most cases I think it would be a little heavy handed, but it sounds just right if you are writing something like a hard boiled detective story.

You're so right. I was just trying to illustrate an idea, but it reads in sepia tone like the next character to walk in would have hips that play swinging eighths on a tom-drum.

 

[HappySpouse]

A dry "telling" of most any part of a story is enough for me to back out. Often it's a dry "telling" / "describing" of a character's physical appearance — booooring. A dry "telling" of a back-story needed for clarity — boooooring. It's not just the setting that needs life, everything should be alive and exciting. That's my opinion and by golly, I'm sticking with it

I'm trying to put effort into not being hypocritical about this. As a reader I will skip past anything like that. Boooooooring is an apt description. However, I'm also a control freak, and when writing things, erotica or not, I have the compulsion to shove an exact image directly into your brain.

 

[Erlikkhan]

I may be wrong, but I don't think most readers give a damn about the details of the setting other than in general terms (bedroom, kitchen, beach, car, classroom, elevator, etc). These are fuck stories, so I tend to get right to the action. Who cares what type of hood ornament is on a car someone is draped over when getting pummeled from behind, or the color of the paint when being driven up the side of the wall? I tend to let the reader fill in the setting anyway they want unless it is germane to the sexual aspects of the story, like in the sentence below

The rock was rumored to hold mystical powers. It was a jagged overhang down by the lake behind the college. The myth said that no virgin ever returned from a visit to the rock with her date. It was a favorite place for the upperclassmen to bring freshman girls. Many of the students swore that it worked but there was never any proof, just boyish boasting.

For me, fuck stories are much more about character where I want the reader to feel what they are feeling...and the author too!

 

[Bramblethorn]

That would depend on context. In most cases I think it would be a little heavy handed, but it sounds just right if you are writing something like a hard boiled detective story.

Expanding on this, I think that passage says more about the narrator than it does about the building and owner. The technique pulls focus away from the scene being described, onto the person describing it. If that's the intention of this scene, it works pretty well, but if you want the reader concentrating on building and owner, better to lose the joke.

 

[HappySpouse]

Expanding on this, I think that passage says more about the narrator than it does about the building and owner. The technique pulls focus away from the scene being described, onto the person describing it. If that's the intention of this scene, it works pretty well, but if you want the reader concentrating on building and owner, better to lose the joke.

Since it's just a line made up during this discussion, there is no greater context. I do agree that there is a significant difference between the two sentences together versus the first one alone. I think just taking out "it seemed to me" and adding an introductory phrase of some sort could keep the feel without determining so much about the story or distracting from the description. Either way, I doubt a description like that would ever make it in a story of mine, so I don't see any point in working it out.

MelissaBaby's comment translated in my head to the idea of trying to simultaneously describe a place and character, and that is the first thing that shook loose. I probably should've gone somewhere more sexy and less supervillain, but now I keep thinking of lines like that. Maybe a good one will surface in time. Then again, maybe not.

 

[NotWise]

MelissaBaby's comment translated in my head to the idea of trying to simultaneously describe a place and character, and that is the first thing that shook loose. I probably should've gone somewhere more sexy and less supervillain, but now I keep thinking of lines like that. Maybe a good one will surface in time. Then again, maybe not.

I thought your description of place and character was a little too short for much comment. One thing I'll add to the discussion is that it described the character well (except for gender), but it misses one or two words that would help the description of the setting. Tell us if it's a hotel, an office building, a warehouse, or something else. That seemed like an omission.

I see no problem with developing characters and locations simultaneously. I tried to do that in Oscar's Place, which was one of my early stories, and fairly short. In that case, the setting (an old hotel) could be viewed as a character in the story.

 

[MelissaBaby]

Since it's just a line made up during this discussion, there is no greater context. I do agree that there is a significant difference between the two sentences together versus the first one alone. I think just taking out "it seemed to me" and adding an introductory phrase of some sort could keep the feel without determining so much about the story or distracting from the description. Either way, I doubt a description like that would ever make it in a story of mine, so I don't see any point in working it out.

MelissaBaby's comment translated in my head to the idea of trying to simultaneously describe a place and character, and that is the first thing that shook loose. I probably should've gone somewhere more sexy and less supervillain, but now I keep thinking of lines like that. Maybe a good one will surface in time. Then again, maybe not.

Let me offer up an example from my stuff.

Here's Mary seeing Alvin's bedroom for the first time. I think you can pick up a lot about the kind of guy he is from the description of the room, and something about Mary from what she notices.

Mary pushed the half open door and entered the bedroom. Alvin stepped in behind her and flipped the wall switch. When the room lit up, Mary looked around. It was cluttered but clean. It appeared that Alvin was neat enough to make sure his clothes were clean and folded, but was not in the habit of actually putting them in drawers or on hangers. There was a dresser with a large round mirror against one wall, and a tall chifforobe in the far corner, but the room was dominated by a big wooden four poster bed. Mary crossed to it and sat on the edge. It was what her mother had called "half made," the covers pulled up, but not tucked in or straightened out.

 

[capnjs]

Everything I learned about setting I learned from Sleepy Hollow and Salem's Lot.

 

[HappySpouse]

Let me offer up an example from my stuff.

Sure, I can get behind that. Something as personal as a bedroom or home giving us insight into a person while also letting the reader look around. I like it. I used the lack of personalization in an apartment to hint at a hidden sadness in the story I mentioned earlier. Sort of the other side of a similar coin.

 

[HappySpouse]

Everything I learned about setting I learned from Sleepy Hollow and Salem's Lot.

I haven’t read Sleepy Hollow, but Stephen King has his own section in my house. He so often gives a single line description of something that makes me feel like I know everything about it. Conversely, he’ll sometimes spend whole pages without seeming to finish a single thought, but it’s all part of the charm.

 

[HeyAll]

I'm a minimalist in terms of settings and those sorts of details, mainly because I don't have those skills.

Also because my style is 2 Lit page stories, so I like getting to the point, which are characters and what's going on.

I'm a big believer that you just need to give the readers the right information and they can imagine it themselves.

 

[Jada59]

It depends on what I'm writing.

I'm working on a novel where the main character sometimes escapes to another realm. I do give plenty of detail there because I want the reader to feel like they are living it.

But in a Lit. story? I've been accused of writing fapping fodder. Yep. True. The only details I mention are things that I would personally notice if I myself were in that situation.

 

[Sextified]

My general attitude regarding description, whether of place, clothing, appearance, etc, is to not give much more than what is needed, and to allow the reader plenty of head space to imagine things in the manner that brings the scene alive for them.

Your comment about "head space" is actually what I think is the proper way to do any descriptions. As a test, I had some of my old pre-readers answer the exact same questions about the same scenes, as they went thru my first novel.

In general, I asked them if they had developed a very clear image in their heads about what the main characters looked like. Then I asked if they felt their mental picture of the most commonly used locations were real enough, to them, that they could sort of 'sketch' them out on paper.

I took a few of their answers, and compared them, and was GLAD that they were all radically different.

The trick is to give the readers enough detail to create a framework for them to work off of, then let their own wishes, desires, experiences, fondest memories and worst nightmares fill in the rest.

If as a reader, I am FORCED to think a person looks only ONE way, then I feel I am just a captive and not always a willing audience. For me, fiction works best as a collaborative effort, between the writer and the observer.

My pre-readers all had old first loves, co-workers, neighbors, favorite actor actresses, and fantasy figures in their heads. The same police sketch artist would have a field day doing separate drawings of Keeley, Emma and Kyla, from each of my pre-readers imaginations.

As long as all three women were beautiful, real and vivid in their minds, as a writer I would feel happy and that I had done my job well.

If the artist came out with a series of repetitive nearly identical pictures of the three women, I would know that I had FORCED my mental picture on to them, and I would feel that I had failed in doing a proper job.

To a person, all the pre-readers said that they loved the Rescuer's tiny apartment, and felt that they could walk around it in their mind, and feel at home. I had several readers describe their feelings and thoughts about the third floor efficiency 'back' to me. They were WILDLY different, but each had created their own details and taken it into their hearts. Yet they all thought they could walk into the kitchen and make breakfast, go right to the clothes closet and locate the box where certain items where kept, and what they thought the view from the balcony would look like.

I never described the place in such detail. They had created their own world for themselves.

To them, it was 'home' for the series, and the level of 'comfort' in that small space let them concentrate on what all the character's attempted to overcome there.

I like to work directly from what a character sees, feels, hopes and fears, then let the readers add their own level of detail it requires for them to enjoy the story and the character's growth.

To pick up from another comment, it is about the style of writing and reading, and to each their own.

I like more detail than less, but prefer more 'insights' than detail, so I use any trick that works to draw the readers into both the world and the character's minds. When I started writing again, my goal was to attempt to be able to create what I wanted to read, but was having trouble finding.

 

[Sextified]

Sure, I can get behind that. Something as personal as a bedroom or home giving us insight into a person while also letting the reader look around. I like it. I used the lack of personalization in an apartment to hint at a hidden sadness in the story I mentioned earlier. Sort of the other side of a similar coin.

To increase the difficulty level. What about characters we already know/understand arriving at a location new to all of them?

My first instinct would be to use the reader's knowledge of the characters by describing a single character's reaction or sensory input. I would worry that giving each character's reaction or forcing a character to say a visual description, beyond perhaps a simile, would make the reader feel the author too much.

I think that the length, type, purpose and POV of the story usually has as much influence on the level of detail as the style of the writer.

For most people, going thru their day, conversation comes in bursts and batches. The silences are as important as the dialogue. So to help the pacing of some of my scenes, I do what comes natural. My current projects have hybrid POV's, mostly first person, with the characters taking parts of a scene in turn.

I absolutely love taking my established characters to new locations and having new experiences. Letting the readers learn the differences in thier feelings, about what action is taking place where, can add a new level to the scene. The 'learning' process of communicating the story elements and plot can jump forward by leaps and bounds that way.

As pointed out earlier, hiding the 'author's hand' while doing that is important, and can often be a matter of taste. I'm editing out huge chunks of old/new material in my rewrite project, to bring the story setup back into the 'now'.

A little bit goes a long way. (Advice I usually ignore in the rough draft, then have to pare back viciously when editing)

Think of four random friends meeting at a new lunch spot, after a month of not seeing each other at all. One person might be a "foodie", one is looking around at the cute staff, the other is worried about the cost, and the last hates/likes the place and in their head compares it to their regular haunt.

That's four bites at the apple, so to speak, to move the story forward forward with dialogue and private internal thoughts.

The Foodie might be still getting over a breakup, and in their thoughts knows that their old lover would have loved the dish they chose to order. The Broke character might look at the prices, thinking how much the impromptu meeting was going to kill their budget, and make the wait for the next unemployment check unbearable. The Carouser might embarrass everyone by hitting on the entire wait staff, holding stubbornly true to the saying that you automatically strike out with every woman you never ask for a date. The Nitpicker contrasts every little difference between their preferred location, that the readers already know so well, shortcutting the amount of words it might take to describe the new eatery.

So in the brief time it (usually) takes most writers (not me) to get the group seated and place their orders, just a few words and thoughts from each can accomplish what scene setting is needed, and a whole lot more.

 

[HappySpouse]

Think of four random friends meeting at a new lunch spot, after a month of not seeing each other at all. One person might be a "foodie", one is looking around at the cute staff, the other is worried about the cost, and the last hates/likes the place and in their head compares it to their regular haunt.

That's four bites at the apple, so to speak, to move the story forward forward with dialogue and private internal thoughts.

The Foodie might be still getting over a breakup, and in their thoughts knows that their old lover would have loved the dish they chose to order. The Broke character might look at the prices, thinking how much the impromptu meeting was going to kill their budget, and make the wait for the next unemployment check unbearable. The Carouser might embarrass everyone by hitting on the entire wait staff, holding stubbornly true to the saying that you automatically strike out with every woman you never ask for a date. The Nitpicker contrasts every little difference between their preferred location, that the readers already know so well, shortcutting the amount of words it might take to describe the new eatery.

So in the brief time it (usually) takes most writers (not me) to get the group seated and place their orders, just a few words and thoughts from each can accomplish what scene setting is needed, and a whole lot more.

It seems we are almost universally agreed on minimizing the details. Also that what is minimal depends on the characteristics of the story. I would also agree that I don't like to be forced to see things one exact way. When I feel that happening I often start skimming for a few sentences until it's over.

This specific suggestion is intriguing. I would read a whole short story with this as a synopsis. I do think that it would have to be very well written to avoid having a big neon sign that says "Plot Device" appear over it, but that could be avoided by a bit of good writing.

 

[yowser]

I perhaps read differently than others. The general advice has been 'minimalism' but one of the most extensive weaknesses of many stories on Lit is excluding even any hints at all as to where and when the events happen, which frustrates me as a reader. Minimalism can be overdone, to create an awkward syllogism.

What beach is the scene of the dunes action? Australia? California? Please give me something to hang my hat on, doesn't need to be much.

If going minimal, the unique detail, a striking and perhaps even small observation, will go a long way. (Okay, I see the setting is an office building, anything unusual about it? The boss yelling on the phone to someone? One messy cubicle amongst all the tidy rest?) If you let the reader know that you, the narrator, are perceptive, confidence in the rest of the story will grow.

I don't think you will have happy readers if you don't give them something to address the 'where.'

The advice about outlining the setting from the emotional point of view of one or more characters is excellent.