Xjyuk

I have written a novel in which none of the characters are ever described. It started out by accident (3 chapters in when I realized).

Question: Is this a good/unique approach or shot myself in foot?

Note: Due to a number of characters being cryogenic subjects, it was not necessary to describe them. All characters do have names but no descriptions. Thank you.

It depends if their appearance has anything to offer/indicate about the character. If not, then I'm happy to go without, and I'm sure I'm not the only reader to think that. Generally speaking, my characters' appearances are described with the bare minimum to indicate something about the character.

Muscular to the point of masculine woman: Someone who prioritises physicality over societal norms.

Smudged clown makeup on a former clown-turned-mass-murderer: Madman who cannot let go of his past monstrous actions.

Bald-on-top old man who grows his sides long and covers his bald patch with a hood: A man who cannot accept his growing age and enfeeblement.

I think you get my point. Describe what is necessary; character is more important than looks.

If their appearance doesn't matter to the story, then there's no need to bring it up. But if it does matter, the story can be confusing if you don't explain, and it can seem like cheating if you don't bring it up until the instant when it becomes relevant.

For example, if you never describe George physically, and then half way through the book you suddenly say that a character was able to crawl through the ventilation duct when no one else could because he is a midget and very thin, (a) Assuming there was no clue about this before, the reader likely imagined him as average height and build. Now suddenly the reader finds that the way he has pictured every scene up to this point is wrong, and he has to re-imagine the whole story. (b) A reader is likely to think, Oh come on, suddenly the author needs to explain why only this character can get into the locked room, and so he just makes something up to make it work.

But if you picture a character in your mind as, say, having a broad nose and a dark sun tan, but this never comes up anywhere in the story and is never relevant, then sure, just don't mention it.

If you don't give a description, the reader will generally assume that the character is like themself, or that he is typical for the setting. Like if I read a story set in Japan and where all the characters have Japanese-sounding names, I'd assume they all look Japanese unless you tell me otherwise.

In this story you'll see I have two characters who are never named, never described, and only one of whom is assigned a gender. Since they have a clear working relationship and clear roles within the narrative they don't need further development to tell the tale.

I have read a number of stories with little to no physical description of individual characters and others that go into exhaustive detail; both are valid approaches because what really matters is that the author has a clear vision of the character and conveys it to their audience. If the physical nature of the character is important to the narrative then they should be described sufficiently for the physical aspect discussed to make sense. On the other hand character, as in personality and motivation, is always important, your audience needs to know what makes the narrative's actors tick and how far they're willing to go more than what they look like.

First, good for you, it is a good sign that you aren't feeling compelled to describe characters.

To me, physical descriptions stalls the story, it is a lot of "telling", not showing.

To the extent physicality is important to the plot, I'd rather it be revealed without much detail. If it is important that Josh is tall, invent a scene in which his height plays a factor; for example Josh can reach something another character wants but cannot without a stepladder. I don't want to read "Josh was extraordinarily tall, six foot eight."

If it doesn't matter to the story somehow, don't tell us.

If the reader has to know because appearance influences the story or personality (positively or negatively), don't just state it. Reveal it within scenes where it determines how people treat the character, or make it matter in emotions or thoughts of the character, revealing how it affects them. If the traits don't matter to the plot, action, or inner life of the character, they don't need to be described.

Since your novel is already practically finished, you can ask your beta readers if no character descriptions works. Ultimately, that's the only way you can really know if something works or not.

As others have pointed out, having no physical description of your characters can theoretically work. As an example, I have very little recollection of what the men in Hemingway's The Sun Also Rises look like (other than Pedro Romero). Maybe Hemingway described them, but if so, it didn't leave much of a mark on me. Or, another example: it is not until midway through Ursula Le Guin's The Left Hand of Darkness that we get a hint of the MC's skin colour, and I don't recall a mention of any of his other physical features.

It could be, however, that for some reason or another, it doesn't work in your story. It could be that for whatever reason your readers would feel they need a description. Or maybe it does work, and you're worrying without need. Let your beta readers tell you.