The Eyes Have It

"Dammit!" Dr. Raoul Martinque’s eyes spat fire.


Unless you’re penning Fantasy, Horror, or Alternate Universe, you should never write anything about someone’s eyes spitting fire.

Or shooting icicles.

Or turning to liquid pools.

Or dropping to the floor, or flying to someone else’s face, or flashing, snapping, crackling or popping.

Well, maybe I’ll give you popping. Because sometimes people’s eyes really do seem to pop open. That one’s arguable. But I’ve never seen anyone’s eyes spit fire or shoot icicles -- or even daggers.

Granted, I know what you mean by these descriptive phrases -- I think we all know what you mean -- but this is beyond cliché, this is just plain old bad writing. So why do inexperienced writers (and a few hacks) keep latching on to them?

Well, partly because these kinds of descriptives used to be popular in the days of pulp fiction -- and, unfortunately, are still popular in the kind of romance fiction that gives romance writers a bad name.

By the way, for a really entertaining, and ultimately instructive book on writing, get hold of a copy of GUN IN CHEEK by Bill Pronzini. It’s one of the funniest things I ever read.

Also these phrases have a primitive effectiveness about them. We understand what the writer means by “eyes spitting fire.” We know it’s not meant to be taken literally, and people’s expressions do change when they’re angry or affectionate or amorous. Good writing is precise writing, so it’s natural to want to capture these expressions and emotions.

I think there’s a lot of truth to the idea of eyes being the window to the soul; you can read a person pretty accurately when you’re able to look her in the face. Which is one reason why eyes are so important in writing romance -- if someone meets someone else’s eyes, it should signify A Moment. It shouldn’t be there just because the author thought it was time to throw in some stage business.

Eyes narrow, they widen, and…I’m going to regret saying this, I bet…they do sometimes seem to darken, lighten, even…uh…sparkle. They don’t really sparkle, but writing is a delicate balance between realism and symbolism. So to an extent readers understand that characters in romance novels have sapphire eyes or emerald eyes or even topaz, silver, golden, or jade eyes that sparkle -- all of which I personally really, really hate, but here I know I’m outvoted by many romance readers who like these artistic liberties. In fact, these descriptions seem to function like code. Which means they’re a useful shorthand between author and reader.

And even I have to admit that there are people who have a certain glint or shine in their eyes -- a liveliness that for lack of better word could be called “sparkle.”

My personal thought is you should always try to capture the physical reality of what you’re trying to describe. Faces tighten with anger, they soften with tenderness, brows draw together in thought -- these are clichés too, but they more accurately capture the physical possibilities of the human face. You can get away with a bit of this if you use it sparingly.


What you want to do, if possible, is describe things in fresh ways, but there’s a limit. You can strain a metaphor too far, and any description that brings the reader up short, is not effective. Anything that yanks the reader out of the story, makes her or him go…huh? Or, worse, laugh, is a mistake. You want the reader in the moment with you -- with the characters. Not squinching his own face in an effort to figure out whether something is anatomically possible.

Now where you can get away with using some of these hokey descriptives is if they show up in the internal dialog or thoughts of your POV character. A certain smart-ass tone of voice allows for observations that in flat narrative would be cliché, but in that character’s head become “voice.”

The point of writing romance is…it’s supposed to be romantic. So you have a certain amount of artistic license. Use discretion. Use moderation. Use common sense. Don’t make me flash my eyes at you.