: How much should I describe things or persons, that are not important for the story? I discussed a book with a friend, and he disliked that the author described a person who is dying shortly

Vote Up Vote Down

Personal opinion; description is meant to place the reader in the same room with the character. They -- the reader -- need to be able to see, hear, smell, feel the same things as the character. If the character enters a new location the reader needs to be aware of their surroundings as well.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

Think, Stephen King vs Dean Koontz; Stephen King is big on describing things in deep detail in all his stories. Most of these things are relevent to the plot and some of them are relevent to the character. Dean Koontz on the other hand, has a tendency to describe things about characters that you either dont care about or are way too unnesissary, try reading the last Brother Odd book or By The Light of the Moon and really observe the way he discribes his characters, thier actions, thier history etc

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

should I include things that have no importance for the story?

Everything you include in your text is by definition part of the story and will affect the reading of every other part: Every part is automatically important whether you want it to be or not.

The factors to take into account when considering whether to include something are:

is it interesting?
is it relevant/consistent?

Consider two extreme cases:

An unrelated character who is about to die is described at length. The reader's mind may now be seeded with thoughts of death, mortality, futility, tranquility, etc. (depending on the nature of the description) while they read the next part of the text, and their interpretation of it will be coloured by these themes.
A book that consists of a slim plot, riddled with tangential and meandering asides. This has the effect of exposing the reader to a vast field of disparate subjects. They are free to draw their own connections between topics and become very active in their interpretation of the text. They will judge the action of the main plot within the context of the wider world. In fact, the plot can even be so slim as to appear non-existent: The best example I can give of this is the film Koyaanisqatsi, but The Instruction Manual by Julio Cortázar and Life A User's Manual by Georges Perec are good examples in literature. You may not even have to try to make the deviations relevant to each other: the human mind will find stories in the most minimal stimulus, as shown by the experiments of Lev Kuleshev.

These illustrate that relevance is a complex and sometimes unintuitive issue. Further, relevance trumps interestingness. Consider The Princess Bride by William Goldman, ostensibly a rewriting of another book in which "tedious" parts of the "original" text form a sub-plot about its author.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

Your friend is right. Don't describe things that aren't important for the story. However, keep in mind that things can be important for a variety of different reasons. You may want to describe to establish:

Setting. This is obvious, and it's what most people think of.
Character: Peter's apartment was full of empty pizza boxes crusted with dried cheese. Neither the boxes nor the cheese are important to the story per se, but this detail tells us that Peter is a slob.
Mood: Think of the opening chapter of Dracula, where Bram Stoker describes the approach to the Count's castle. Most of the things described are not important in themselves, but they establish the mood of mystery and menace.
Theme: In a war story, you might not need to describe the bullet-riddled body your protag finds in the field. On the other hand, doing that might be crucial to illustrating that War Is Hell.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

Strunk, White, King and the editor on the paper King interned at all agree, the key to successful writing is:

Omit Needless Words

As a further note Chekhov pointed out that if you place a loaded gun over the mantelpiece and nobody fires it before the end of the story it shouldn't ever even have been there. He was talking about plays but the principle is valid in all storytelling.

(0)