Take a look a the fine gentleman to your left. We form a distinct impression of him, clearly based on his expression, his apparent age, and whatever it is that left one side of his face in such a state.
In writing we can share the character of a character with readers in one of two ways; we can tell them or we can show them. The words they use, how they speak, the rhythm and meter of their voice; all this will give us a better impression and opnion of them than whole paragraphs of italised thought expositions á la 1984 Dune movie.
If the above is done well, we can actually see the character, identify with them or even hate them.
Visual art is, at least in the static medium we call the portrait, currently silent. But is the medium any different than what I was just speaking about?
We are definitely showing rather than telling, are we not?
Asmodeus here, is clearly not what could be considered a normal young man. A lot about his is communicated by his posture, his expression, the set of his jaw….how his eyes glow like that and…well his face?
I started making basic, pencil-drawn portraits of my characters for myself, an aid to the writing process. I found it easier to write about and describe a person I could see and, more curiously, my limitations as an artist occasionally had unexpected side effects.
Accidental imperfections could become a part of the character. Asmodeus, as orginally written, was quite the boss demon masquerading as a human stereotype, a two dimensional throw away character, he had no visible facial scarring at all. I fudged an early digital portrait of him and found my perfectionism needing to explain the obvious asymetry of his face. In trying to fix it I created a fairly basic version of his now infamous scars; a minor character became a fascinating study…
That is art; it challenges, it awakens, it often does take on a life of its own.