# Is there a name for this literary device? (Character's physical description = good/bad guy) **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [February 8, 2014, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-name-for-this-literary-device-characters-physical-description-good-bad-guy/680800 "2014-02-08T00:19:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Hermione](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/cdc98d/32.png) [@Hermione](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hermione)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2014, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-name-for-this-literary-device-characters-physical-description-good-bad-guy/680800/21 "2014-02-09T15:41:16Z")
Also, in defense of Dickens…it’s true he wrote about character traits (physical traits, mannerisms, catchphrases) that both summed up a character and were repeated often (Uriah Heep’s hand-rubbing and “umbleness”, Rosa Dartle’s scar, and so on). But one must remember that his longer works were serialized in magazines, month to month. Dickens repeated these particular character traits or catchphrases so a reader that was following along might easily remember who this character was and what his personality was like. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2014, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-name-for-this-literary-device-characters-physical-description-good-bad-guy/680800/22 "2014-02-09T22:05:06Z")
> [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](#): > > . . . How about “Portrait of Dorian Grey”? Is that trite? The notion that evil and sinful behavior can leave physical marks was a well-established part of philosophy/theology/wossname. . . . Not the same thing, is it? He’s reasoning backward. Not, “You’re ugly, so you have to be bad,” but “Your bad actions are making your soul ugly.” It’s a realization metaphor. Something nearly everyone seems to get wrong when they make movies of Jekyll and Hyde: Hyde wasn’t ugly! He was daunting, and brusque, and coarse, and threatening, but it wasn’t a body thing. > [@](#): > > Goes right along with fat bankers are almost always cheats/villainous. Movies, like books, only have so much time, and often don’t want to take 10 minutes (or three chapters) to establish that so-and-so is wicked. It’s not lazy to short-cut a description of the physical area down to one or two sentences, either. It’s just the author decided what things to spend time on (and what things for the reader to spend time on) and what not. Well, I can’t agree. “He’s a fat banker, so he’s evil” is, to me, the very essence of a lazy short-cut in writing. (Watching Jurassic Park. The guy who mentions he’s a lawyer. We knew, right then, he was dino chow. Lazy writing.) > [@](#): > > I don’t disagree that it CAN be lazy and overused and trite; but I don’t think it’s ALWAYS (or even MOSTLY) those things. I’m not sure even I would say “always,” as a really good writer can break the rules in creative ways. But…how about “too damn often.” ---
**Author:** ![C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b2d939/32.png) [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/C_K_Dexter_Haven)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2014, 12:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-name-for-this-literary-device-characters-physical-description-good-bad-guy/680800/23 "2014-02-10T12:49:41Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > I’m not sure even I would say “always,” as a really good writer can break the rules in creative ways. But…how about “too damn often.” I’ll go along with you there. It _can_ be annoying and trite and overused. My point was that it can also be well-used and interesting (including variations and reversals, like _Hunchback of Notre Dame_.) I think that the examples I cited from the 1800s are similar to Dorian Grey: there was an underlying assumption that a corrupt, evil, or immoral life would leave visible “scars” of one form or another. ---
**Author:** ![ftg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ftg/32/2801_2.png) [@ftg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ftg)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2014, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-name-for-this-literary-device-characters-physical-description-good-bad-guy/680800/24 "2014-02-10T16:43:13Z")
The first thing that came to my mind is the tvtrope: [Exactly What It Says On The Tin](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ExactlyWhatItSaysOnTheTin). While usually thought of as applying to titles, as the article points out, it can apply to people and objects. ---
**Author:** ![Jragon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e19b73/32.png) [@Jragon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jragon)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2014, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-name-for-this-literary-device-characters-physical-description-good-bad-guy/680800/25 "2014-02-10T23:20:46Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Something nearly everyone seems to get wrong when they make movies of Jekyll and Hyde: Hyde wasn’t ugly! He was daunting, and brusque, and coarse, and threatening, but it wasn’t a body thing. As I recall, he was actually described as a bit dashing, if a bit short. I recall the book mentioning him wooing women. The vibe I got from Hyde as the book described him was essentially that he was an asshole, but a charming and well put together asshole (with a bit of a temper). He was the jerkish, confident extrovert to mirror Jekyll’s quiet, kind introvert. ---
**Author:** ![Andy\_L](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c67d28/32.png) [@Andy\_L](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andy_L)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-name-for-this-literary-device-characters-physical-description-good-bad-guy/680800/26 "2014-02-11T00:59:53Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Something nearly everyone seems to get wrong when they make movies of Jekyll and Hyde: Hyde wasn’t ugly! He was daunting, and brusque, and coarse, and threatening, but it wasn’t a body thing. Also he was distinctly shorter than Jekyll, which is something that is also gotten wrong all the time. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-name-for-this-literary-device-characters-physical-description-good-bad-guy/680800.md?page=1)