Drawing with Words: How John Byrne’s Backgrounds Influence My Writing

John Byrne is my favorite comic book artist of all time. Along with George Pérez, he shaped my appreciation for visual storytelling, and his influence extends beyond comics into my own writing.

One of the frequent criticisms of Byrne’s work is that he didn’t spend much time drawing backgrounds. Byrne himself pushed back against this notion, emphasizing that he drew what was necessary to achieve whatever effect he wanted. His focus was on clarity, action, and storytelling, ensuring that the reader’s eye was always where it needed to be: on the characters, the drama, and the momentum of the scene. He could incorporate more background information to slow the reader down or omit it to pick up the pace. At times, Byrne argued, backgrounds can simply be a distraction.

📌 (For example: Byrne’s own comments on backgrounds)

Like much of Byrne’s art, my writing prioritizes foreground action—the conversations between characters, the interpersonal dynamics, the tensions simmering beneath the surface. My descriptions of setting exist to support those elements, not to overshadow them.

Yet, when running my manuscript through automated editing software like AutoCrit, it frequently criticized my lack of setting descriptions, suggesting that I should provide more detail about the characters' physical surroundings. But in other instances, it flagged what it deemed to be mundane details—objects, actions, or brief observations—as unnecessary distractions.

The Problem? Those details were anything but unnecessary.

Just as Byrne strategically decided which background elements to include, I choose which descriptions to highlight in my prose. Sometimes I include mundane details because I want the reader to slow down. Sometimes I provide a tedious description because I want the reader to feel the tedium. If a list of items feels overwhelming, it’s because I want the reader to feel overwhelmed. Some details may seem trivial to an algorithm, but they serve a purpose—whether to reveal something about a character, establish a tone, or subtly reinforce a theme. AI tools, for all their utility, cannot distinguish between unintentional omission and deliberate minimalism; between filler and suffocating detail to create an effect.

The irony is that Byrne has, at times, faced a similar type of criticism from actual human fans. Some readers saw a lack of backgrounds and assumed it was laziness, rather than an artist making conscious storytelling choices. But Byrne knew exactly what he was doing. He knew what mattered.

(To be fair, Byrne did admit that the allegation of a lack of backgrounds was occasionally true, but almost never where or when the accusation was being leveled!)

And that’s how I approach writing. I’m not trying to describe every leaf on every tree. I’m telling the story I want to tell, in the way I want to tell it. It doesn’t mean I’m perfect. I don’t always make the right choices. But they are choices, not accidental omissions.

John Byrne, the artist, told the story he wanted with pictures. I’m telling the story I want to with words.

And I can only hope I’m doing anywhere near as good a job with my words as he did with his drawings.

(I should note that John Byrne is an accomplished writer, as well.)

Javier

© 2025 Chapelle Dorée Publishing, LLC. All rights reserved. This content may not be reproduced, distributed, or modified without permission.