Here's a situation I seem to run into frequently;
Our named protagonist, say Joe, walks into a scene where other characters are in some sort of confrontation. Their respective backgrounds/motives may become clearer later on, but for the moment Joe has no idea who these people are. These mystery figures argue for a bit before making some mysterious deal/breaking out into a gun fight/one poisons the other.
The question is, how do you address each characters actions when Joe doesn't know any of their names? Since Joe is obviously walking into some unfolding sequence, there's not really time to introduce everyone longer than a one liner on their appearance is there? How do you go about the scene without sounding too wordy (so the first guy says to the second guy while staring at the girl to his left), especially when there are three or more characters involved?
What i've done in the past is to reveal only one of the names ("Don't do this, Bob!"), thus addressing him as Bob for the rest of the scene, and naming everyone else by some characteristic that Joe has identified (Blue Jays cap walked up and grabbed pug face by the arm), but still it is coming out awkward for me.
----------
0 / 50,000
Jul 16, 2008 - 08 30
I'm guessing this is written in first person?
50,121 / 50,000
Jul 16, 2008 - 10 56
It's written in third person, though i think similar problems would occur in first person view as well
0 / 50,000
Jul 16, 2008 - 11 19
Well, in the third person, as an omniscient narrator, you would automatically know their names, which could be an easy way of getting past it. "Joe walks into the bar where two men, Steve and Tom, are arguing." That's a very simple way of putting it, but you could throw in that Joe would meet them more in-depthly (is that a word?) later, or that they will have some kind of impact on him in the future and that is why their names are important to know right off.
77,000 / 50,000
Jul 16, 2008 - 12 12
But it sounds like the original poster is using Third Person Limited, where only things can be perceived or known by that character can be in the scene, just the same as with First Person. Omniscient is a different variation on Third Person and would work as you describe, but it's used much less these days. Limited is far more popular at the moment.
50,103 / 50,000
Jul 16, 2008 - 12 32
You have good ways to get around the problem. Just take it a little bit further. Give each character a one or two word title -- instead of "Blue Jays cap" call him "Blue Jays." Or "the redhead." Something very distinct about each one. And possibly have more names shouted. It can be done. And not everyone in this scene will be central to it; not everyone needs a name at all.
89,004 / 50,000
Jul 16, 2008 - 13 31
I think we tend to label people, whose names we don't know, with what we see. Go with visual. Bald man, or bald man in suit. Guy in ripped jeans and dirty T-shirt. Man with scar. What does Joe see when he looks at this group? His mind will most likely put a tag on each one. I'm not sure I'd go with more than one name, so as not to confuse the reader, and even then make sure we know some small thing about named character. I honestly don't see why you can't do more than one line, especially right away. Our mind can take in a whole scene in a blink yet it will still automatically use labels.
For an experiment you could play cop and have Joe tell you what he saw. Do it at the scene or take him to the station, whichever you feel might work best. Might give you some good ideas on how to play the actual scene out when you write it.
0 / 50,000
Jul 16, 2008 - 14 42
My suggestion may not have been as clear as I liked; I was on the phone here at work when I was typing it.
Anyway, if you are using third person limited, and you say they may become part of the story later on, you could always say something like, "Joe walked into the bar and saw Steve and Bob fighting. He didn't know who they were at the time, but he would later regret not paying closer attention to their argument..." or something of that nature. That way, you introduce the characters and throw in a little foreshadowing. Two birds, one stone.
I also like the descriptive idea. This is something everyone can relate to...my girlfriend and I have names for half the regulars on our bus to work. Confused Pete, Cruella DeVille, etc., based solely on the personalities we perceive during the half hour we see them every day.
0 / 50,000
Jul 18, 2008 - 23 56
When you watch CSI or Law and Order, the descriptions are like:
the tall guy
the man with the scar
the blonde
I was thinking of just naming one guy by making the other guy yell at him. But if a 3rd party also yelled at the 2nd fighter, you could have 2 names, making it a little easier. "You're gonna get it Bob! I've had enough!" "Johnny, don't do it!"
the first guy in the red jacket
the second guy
the little dude
the man with the gold ring
the lady with a belt
Also look at the emotions and actions of the fighters to depict them with...
the jumper
the scared boy
the rock thrower
the fence climber
If you have culturally different people you might describe them by skin shades.
the bright boy
the dark skinned man
jade