An idea crossed my mind a while ago about how it is possible for a single character trait to be both an asset to a character and a burden. Or, how one trait can lead to sister traits that can be good or bad.
An obvious example of the first scenario--a trait that is simultaneously an asset and a burden--would be Adrian Monk's OCD and hypersensitivity to stimuli in the TV show Monk. His OCD and hypersensitivity allow him to see clues the cops miss, but they also make his life harder. Similarly, a seemingly good trait can be misapplied to a situation, resulting in an undesired outcome. For example, Henrietta makes cookies for Martha, and instead of seeing them as coming from the goodness of Henrietta's heart, Martha takes offense at the cookies because she thinks they are pity cookies.
For sister traits, take for example Celaena Sardothian of Sarah J. Maas's Throne of Glass series. Celaena is independent, clever, educated, and very competent. She's also rather arrogant and selfish. It makes sense that those traits go together, doesn't it? The same way it makes sense that shyness and insecurity go together, or tidiness and attention to detail. Those traits don't always go together, but it makes sense when they do.
As I recall, this train of thought came to me while I was thinking about
how virtues and vices can sometimes come in pairs or groups, and how
this might be a tool I can use to help brainstorm character traits. If I
know my character is kind, and need a negative trait for him, what's a not-so-great trait that goes with kindness? Some ideas might be being easily manipulated, feeling insecure about
always doing the right thing, and being so diligent in the care of
others that one neglects oneself. On the flip side, if I know a
character has temper issues, what are some good traits that could go
with them? Some ideas would be honesty (assuming the character doesn't
blow things out of proportion when riled up) and predictability--it
often doesn't take long to learn what will upset someone with temper
issues. Or, in a different scenario, perhaps I have a character I know is a bit of a rebel, but I don't want her to have stereotypically rebellious traits, so I think about traits that don't commonly go with rebelliousness, such as having a taste for gourmet food or hating loud music.
In addition, these ideas can be used to add conflict, such as in the Henrietta's cookies example. Traits and behaviors can be misunderstood. If you have two characters, you have two different views on the situation, and two different perceptions of the events and actions that occur in it.
That's as far as I've thought on this subject so far, though I suspect there's more I can think about and learn here. Now I turn to you, dear reader. What do you think about these ideas? Have any thoughts of your own to add?
Showing posts with label Character Development. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Character Development. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 19, 2015
Sunday, December 28, 2014
Things Left Unsaid
My friend Liam recently posted about the things characters leave unsaid on his blog, This Page Intentionally Left Blank. It's a really fascinating topic, so I've written a follow-up post.
People leave things unsaid all the time. Greg never tells Harriet he loves her. George never finds the courage to thank Charles for believing in his nutty dreams. Sandra tries to be a people pleaser and never tells Patty that Patty's whining drives her crazy. Mike never tells his wife that her cooking really is as terrible as she thinks it is. These things left unsaid, while not outright lies, will still influence who a character is and how they react to their situation.
There are lots of reasons for leaving things unsaid. A lack of courage. A fear that saying it will change things forever. A desire not to be seen as someone who complains. To illustrate I'm going to expound on those examples.
First, we have Will. Will works for a mob boss. Will has no interest in making the boss mad and paying for it in blood. However, one day Will sees that there might be a better way of interrogating prisoners. He wants to bring this up to the mob boss, but he doesn't want to challenge the boss lest the boss see the suggestion as uppity and disrespectful. As a result, Will will be even more aware of how the boss reacts to Will's actions. He'll be thinking about ways he could make the suggestion that won't provoke violence. He'll be having nightmares about what will happen if it did. He may be trying to get on the boss's good side even more than usual.
Second, we have Roland. Roland is in love with Maria, whom he has been friends with for years. He wants to tell her he loves her, but is afraid that if he admits his love for her, it'll ruin their friendship. As a result, romantic stories and such make him a little uncomfortable, because they remind him of the secret he keeps locked up. Going somewhere alone with her makes him nervous. Maria and her friends notice these things.
Third, Claudia works for a man who loses his temper a lot. He's a nice guy, but he has no emotional self control. Claudia sees that some things could go a lot smoother if he just learned to keep a cool head. She wants to say something, but she also wants to be the good employee, and fears that talking to him would ignite his temper and get her fired. So, as the weeks pass and she doesn't say anything, she starts to get frustrated. Things could be so much better if he just made a few small adjustments. She works hard to control her temper, why can't he do the same? Her frustration keeps building and building, but she never says anything because she wants to keep her job. It stresses her out, so she starts taking kickboxing classes to burn off her frustration.
See how this works?
In some cases, leaving something unsaid may be directly related to bottling up emotions, which could result in an emotional explosion. For example, perhaps one day Claudia's boss does something that really ticks her off, and she can't control her frustration anymore and so she starts yelling and screaming at him.
Also, as Liam pointed out in his post, if the other characters see how one character is acting but don't know what that character isn't saying, they may make assumptions that aren't true, or they may have things they themselves aren't saying, and this will affect how the characters interact.
So, let's look at those examples from the other side.
The mob boss knows something's up with Will. Will's been acting weird. He doesn't want to say anything because he wants to see if he can figure out what's going on. But he has a growing suspicion that Will is an undercover cop who's trying to expose a great big drug trade that's about to go down. (In reality, Will is not a cop and has no idea about the drug trade.) So boss starts to plan how to deal with this.
Maria is also in love with Roland, and she's just as afraid of ruining their friendship as he is. But she sees his discomfort with all things romantic, and thinks it's because he's figured out she's in love with him, and he isn't in love with her. This depresses her.
Claudia's boss gets really annoyed at stupid people, and thinks the best way to deal with them is to let them know how stupid they are and how their stupidity causes problems. He also knows that he's screwed up with his temper before, and he's incredibly grateful to Claudia for keeping a cool head when he couldn't. But he can't tell her that because if he did he'd be admitting he has anger management issues and he's afraid that would make him look just as stupid as the people who trigger his temper.
And because character is inextricably intertwined with plot, all of this affects plot too.
The mob boss decides to make a deal with the police by holding Will hostage and saying he'll hand over Will if the cops back off, still laboring under the misapprehension that Will is a cop. If the cops don't back off, Will dies. When the big day of the drug trade dawns and the cops are there with guns pointed, the mob boss pitches his deal and the cops say "He's not one of ours." The mob boss is confused, Will is freaking out, and the police are trying to figure out what's going on.
Roland and Maria grow apart over the course of a couple months, both of them too wrapped up in their own interpretation of the situation to realize there's more to it than they think. Then Roland is in a car crash. He gets pretty banged up, but lives. Maria rushes to the hospital in tears. When she gets there, Roland is asleep. She starts sobbing, freaked out by the fact that she nearly lost him when they weren't on the best of terms and when she hadn't confessed her true feelings. She starts blubbering despite the fact that he's still sleeping, and he wakes up in time to hear her say "I love you."
Claudia and her boss argue. Her frustration erupts in a volcano of her opinions of his behavior, and the resulting ash cloud ignites his temper, this time as a defense mechanism (and because it's his default emotion when he gets upset.) But in this outburst of hasty words, Claudia mentions something about how her boss nearly screwed up a certain business transaction. As her boss takes a breath to shout something back at her, he realizes that what she says doesn't make sense with what he knows, and that if it went down the way she said it did (as angry as he is, he still trusts her) the other people involved in that transaction are the ones who have been skimming off company profits. When they confront the thieves, Claudia's newly acquired kickboxing skills come in very handy.
Pretty cool, huh? There are a whole bunch of ways one can play with this, both in regard to character and plot. Obviously it may not apply to every character in every story (I actually had a hard time finding something my MC leaves unsaid), but it can be lots of fun in the stories where it works.
Now that you've read this post, go read Liam's. He talks about several other cool things I didn't touch on here, like how stereotypes and how characters want to be seen fits into all of this. It's pretty sweet.
What are your thoughts on this concept?
People leave things unsaid all the time. Greg never tells Harriet he loves her. George never finds the courage to thank Charles for believing in his nutty dreams. Sandra tries to be a people pleaser and never tells Patty that Patty's whining drives her crazy. Mike never tells his wife that her cooking really is as terrible as she thinks it is. These things left unsaid, while not outright lies, will still influence who a character is and how they react to their situation.
There are lots of reasons for leaving things unsaid. A lack of courage. A fear that saying it will change things forever. A desire not to be seen as someone who complains. To illustrate I'm going to expound on those examples.
First, we have Will. Will works for a mob boss. Will has no interest in making the boss mad and paying for it in blood. However, one day Will sees that there might be a better way of interrogating prisoners. He wants to bring this up to the mob boss, but he doesn't want to challenge the boss lest the boss see the suggestion as uppity and disrespectful. As a result, Will will be even more aware of how the boss reacts to Will's actions. He'll be thinking about ways he could make the suggestion that won't provoke violence. He'll be having nightmares about what will happen if it did. He may be trying to get on the boss's good side even more than usual.
Second, we have Roland. Roland is in love with Maria, whom he has been friends with for years. He wants to tell her he loves her, but is afraid that if he admits his love for her, it'll ruin their friendship. As a result, romantic stories and such make him a little uncomfortable, because they remind him of the secret he keeps locked up. Going somewhere alone with her makes him nervous. Maria and her friends notice these things.
Third, Claudia works for a man who loses his temper a lot. He's a nice guy, but he has no emotional self control. Claudia sees that some things could go a lot smoother if he just learned to keep a cool head. She wants to say something, but she also wants to be the good employee, and fears that talking to him would ignite his temper and get her fired. So, as the weeks pass and she doesn't say anything, she starts to get frustrated. Things could be so much better if he just made a few small adjustments. She works hard to control her temper, why can't he do the same? Her frustration keeps building and building, but she never says anything because she wants to keep her job. It stresses her out, so she starts taking kickboxing classes to burn off her frustration.
See how this works?
In some cases, leaving something unsaid may be directly related to bottling up emotions, which could result in an emotional explosion. For example, perhaps one day Claudia's boss does something that really ticks her off, and she can't control her frustration anymore and so she starts yelling and screaming at him.
Also, as Liam pointed out in his post, if the other characters see how one character is acting but don't know what that character isn't saying, they may make assumptions that aren't true, or they may have things they themselves aren't saying, and this will affect how the characters interact.
So, let's look at those examples from the other side.
The mob boss knows something's up with Will. Will's been acting weird. He doesn't want to say anything because he wants to see if he can figure out what's going on. But he has a growing suspicion that Will is an undercover cop who's trying to expose a great big drug trade that's about to go down. (In reality, Will is not a cop and has no idea about the drug trade.) So boss starts to plan how to deal with this.
Maria is also in love with Roland, and she's just as afraid of ruining their friendship as he is. But she sees his discomfort with all things romantic, and thinks it's because he's figured out she's in love with him, and he isn't in love with her. This depresses her.
Claudia's boss gets really annoyed at stupid people, and thinks the best way to deal with them is to let them know how stupid they are and how their stupidity causes problems. He also knows that he's screwed up with his temper before, and he's incredibly grateful to Claudia for keeping a cool head when he couldn't. But he can't tell her that because if he did he'd be admitting he has anger management issues and he's afraid that would make him look just as stupid as the people who trigger his temper.
And because character is inextricably intertwined with plot, all of this affects plot too.
The mob boss decides to make a deal with the police by holding Will hostage and saying he'll hand over Will if the cops back off, still laboring under the misapprehension that Will is a cop. If the cops don't back off, Will dies. When the big day of the drug trade dawns and the cops are there with guns pointed, the mob boss pitches his deal and the cops say "He's not one of ours." The mob boss is confused, Will is freaking out, and the police are trying to figure out what's going on.
Roland and Maria grow apart over the course of a couple months, both of them too wrapped up in their own interpretation of the situation to realize there's more to it than they think. Then Roland is in a car crash. He gets pretty banged up, but lives. Maria rushes to the hospital in tears. When she gets there, Roland is asleep. She starts sobbing, freaked out by the fact that she nearly lost him when they weren't on the best of terms and when she hadn't confessed her true feelings. She starts blubbering despite the fact that he's still sleeping, and he wakes up in time to hear her say "I love you."
Claudia and her boss argue. Her frustration erupts in a volcano of her opinions of his behavior, and the resulting ash cloud ignites his temper, this time as a defense mechanism (and because it's his default emotion when he gets upset.) But in this outburst of hasty words, Claudia mentions something about how her boss nearly screwed up a certain business transaction. As her boss takes a breath to shout something back at her, he realizes that what she says doesn't make sense with what he knows, and that if it went down the way she said it did (as angry as he is, he still trusts her) the other people involved in that transaction are the ones who have been skimming off company profits. When they confront the thieves, Claudia's newly acquired kickboxing skills come in very handy.
Pretty cool, huh? There are a whole bunch of ways one can play with this, both in regard to character and plot. Obviously it may not apply to every character in every story (I actually had a hard time finding something my MC leaves unsaid), but it can be lots of fun in the stories where it works.
Now that you've read this post, go read Liam's. He talks about several other cool things I didn't touch on here, like how stereotypes and how characters want to be seen fits into all of this. It's pretty sweet.
What are your thoughts on this concept?
Monday, January 20, 2014
Character Study: Rumpelstiltskin
WARNING: THIS POST WILL CONTAIN SPOILERS ABOUT THE FIRST SEASON OF ONCE UPON A TIME, AND THEY MAY BE INACCURATE SPOILERS, AS I HAVEN'T SEEN THE SECOND SEASON YET AND THEREFORE DON'T KNOW THE WHOLE STORY.
My family recently finished watching the first season of the TV show Once Upon a Time, the premise of which is that the Evil Queen has banished all the fairytale characters to a world where there are supposedly no happy endings: our world.
My very favorite character arc is that of Rumpelstiltskin, one of the villains. Now, I'm not a girl that loves villains. I know there are people out there who just love Loki and Moriarty, but I am not one of them. Rumpel was the first villain (in recent memory) that I really, really liked. For this post, I'm going to try and explain what I think caused me to like him so much, and what makes him such a compelling character and villain. I've thought of two big reasons.
1. His back story. Actually, I just looked at his page on the OUAT Wiki, and there's a lot about him that I don't know yet, so I'm not sure I can accurately speak on this subject. The point I had in mind was that before he got his powers, he was very weak. He walked with a limp, he was scared of losing his son, and he was a bit of a coward. After he got his powers, though, that all changed. He went and single-handedly stopped a war, he had powers that let him do pretty much whatever he wanted, and people were scared of him. He wasn't the weak man people picked on any more. After a lifetime of being a weak coward, I imagine the confidence and powers he gained were addictive, and fed something in him that relished being the powerful one people feared. Therefore he loved his powers, and never wanted to go back to the way things were before.
We sympathize with that. We feel for the underdog and like to see him rise to greatness... it's just that Rumpelstiltskin's form of greatness was also a form of evil.
2. There are things that he loves, and they come into conflict. I've heard the advice before that giving your villain something he loves makes him more interesting, and Rumpel really drove that home. There are three big things he loves: his son, Belle, and his power. Twice during this season, he has to choose between a person he loves and his power. Both times, he chooses his power. And he regrets it.
I think part of what makes this work is that we also love the people he loves. We want to see him pick them. Because the people he loves are good, and they have just a little bit of power over him, there's always a shred of hope that they'll turn him to the good side. And that doesn't fade when he chooses his power over those he loves, because he regrets those choices, and we hope that he will learn from his regret and become good.
And despite the fact that he's freaky and scary, we feel sympathetic toward him, because he lost someone he loved (and we loved), and that's sad.
If what he loved was a really nasty cat that bit and clawed everyone but him, we wouldn't care. He's evil, and he loves and evil cat. So what? That's not as interesting as an evil person loving someone good, and seeing the conflict between their goodness and evil. In the cat example, we'd just want to see the cat die. Now, if the cat DID die, and we saw him suffer for it, that might be interesting, but I don't think it would have the emotional impact that Rumpelstiltskin losing his son had.
In my opinion, the things Rumpel loves and the fact that they conflict with each other are the main reasons why he's such and interesting and complex character. The back story just informs this and makes it all the more powerful.
And just for fun, what if cat in the cat example were actually a person? Say, and evil wife or brother or best friend, but who was just as evil as the villain. If he lost that person, the audience wouldn't care as much. Actually, depending on the context of the story, it could still be interesting, but my point is that if the audience as well as the villain cares for this brother/best friend/wife/whatever, then we will mourn their loss with the villain, instead of just understanding why he's upset and waiting for the heroes to shoot him.
What do you think of my analysis? Have you come to other conclusions? I'd love to hear what you think, even if you've never seen Once Upon a Time and want to use another character as an example.
And a lovely day/afternoon/morning/whatever to you.
My family recently finished watching the first season of the TV show Once Upon a Time, the premise of which is that the Evil Queen has banished all the fairytale characters to a world where there are supposedly no happy endings: our world.
My very favorite character arc is that of Rumpelstiltskin, one of the villains. Now, I'm not a girl that loves villains. I know there are people out there who just love Loki and Moriarty, but I am not one of them. Rumpel was the first villain (in recent memory) that I really, really liked. For this post, I'm going to try and explain what I think caused me to like him so much, and what makes him such a compelling character and villain. I've thought of two big reasons.
1. His back story. Actually, I just looked at his page on the OUAT Wiki, and there's a lot about him that I don't know yet, so I'm not sure I can accurately speak on this subject. The point I had in mind was that before he got his powers, he was very weak. He walked with a limp, he was scared of losing his son, and he was a bit of a coward. After he got his powers, though, that all changed. He went and single-handedly stopped a war, he had powers that let him do pretty much whatever he wanted, and people were scared of him. He wasn't the weak man people picked on any more. After a lifetime of being a weak coward, I imagine the confidence and powers he gained were addictive, and fed something in him that relished being the powerful one people feared. Therefore he loved his powers, and never wanted to go back to the way things were before.
We sympathize with that. We feel for the underdog and like to see him rise to greatness... it's just that Rumpelstiltskin's form of greatness was also a form of evil.
2. There are things that he loves, and they come into conflict. I've heard the advice before that giving your villain something he loves makes him more interesting, and Rumpel really drove that home. There are three big things he loves: his son, Belle, and his power. Twice during this season, he has to choose between a person he loves and his power. Both times, he chooses his power. And he regrets it.
I think part of what makes this work is that we also love the people he loves. We want to see him pick them. Because the people he loves are good, and they have just a little bit of power over him, there's always a shred of hope that they'll turn him to the good side. And that doesn't fade when he chooses his power over those he loves, because he regrets those choices, and we hope that he will learn from his regret and become good.
And despite the fact that he's freaky and scary, we feel sympathetic toward him, because he lost someone he loved (and we loved), and that's sad.
If what he loved was a really nasty cat that bit and clawed everyone but him, we wouldn't care. He's evil, and he loves and evil cat. So what? That's not as interesting as an evil person loving someone good, and seeing the conflict between their goodness and evil. In the cat example, we'd just want to see the cat die. Now, if the cat DID die, and we saw him suffer for it, that might be interesting, but I don't think it would have the emotional impact that Rumpelstiltskin losing his son had.
In my opinion, the things Rumpel loves and the fact that they conflict with each other are the main reasons why he's such and interesting and complex character. The back story just informs this and makes it all the more powerful.
And just for fun, what if cat in the cat example were actually a person? Say, and evil wife or brother or best friend, but who was just as evil as the villain. If he lost that person, the audience wouldn't care as much. Actually, depending on the context of the story, it could still be interesting, but my point is that if the audience as well as the villain cares for this brother/best friend/wife/whatever, then we will mourn their loss with the villain, instead of just understanding why he's upset and waiting for the heroes to shoot him.
What do you think of my analysis? Have you come to other conclusions? I'd love to hear what you think, even if you've never seen Once Upon a Time and want to use another character as an example.
And a lovely day/afternoon/morning/whatever to you.
Sunday, January 12, 2014
TCWT January 2014 blog chain: Dream Co-authors
Time for another Teens Can Write, Too! blog chain. This month's theme is:
“If you could co-write a book with one author–living or not–who would it be and what would the book be about?”
This is a good one.
First of all, I'm not sure I'd want to actually co-author something, but maybe just be apprenticed to a great writer and learn from them. Of course, if I did that, I'd probably give my input on the book, so I'd sort of be co-authoring.
Anyway.
Since this prompt includes dead authors, I choose Charles Dickens. I've only read Little Dorrit, and the first chapter or so of Bleak House, but I've seen the miniseries based on each multiple times, and the characters and plotting are amazing. Everyone is connected to someone else and influences the plot in some way. It's spectacular.
Example from Little Dorrit (CONTAINS SPOILERS): Ms. Wade, a side character you don't see too often, meets Arthur Clennam (the love interest) in Marseille, where they also meet the Meagles. Arthur starts to fall for the Meagle's daughter, Pet. Pet, however, as the story progresses, falls for Mr. Gowan. Who you later find out jilted Ms. Wade. Now, Ms. Wade also tries to lure Harriet, the Meagle's adopted daughter-but-they-treat-her-like-a-favorite-servant away from the Meagles. When, in the middle of the story, Harriet finally leaves the Meagles and goes to live with Ms. Wade, you find out Ms. Wade is involved with Riguad, a creepy-as-all-get-out murderer. He gives her a box to her for safe keeping. Eventually, out of boredom, Harriet opens it, and finds blackmail-worthy documents about Arthur, his family, and how it connects to Little Dorrit's family. Ms. Wade is also involved with Mr. Casby, who monkeys with the plot in other ways, and who's daughter was once in love with Arthur.
(END SPOILERS.)
Oh, delicious complexity. I could learn so much from Dickens. About characters, plotting, weaving together subplots...
The downside, other than his being dead, is that while his stories are genius (at least the one's I've read/seen) his prose can be kind of... tedious to read sometimes. Given that the man was paid by the word, this is not surprising, but it might drive me crazy. However, the opening chapter of Bleak House starts with this wonderful description of fog, so I could still learn from it. I could learn to be patient with lengthy and verbose prose if it meant I could write with him.
As to what our book would be about... Well, it'd be set in Victorian England, obviously, and be nice and complex, with lots of different emotions and subplots. Maybe the MC(s) would go through a couple of changes of circumstance. Rags to riches, perhaps. Maybe it could involve pirates. And one character could be a grave digger. (Random ideas.)
My second choice would be Brandon Sanderson (and he's even alive!), the author of the Mistborn books, which are currently my favorite series. I've learned so much from his Writing Excuses podcast, I'm sure I'd learn even more working with him. (Confession: I've daydreamed about being a guest star on Writing Excuses.) Like Dickens, his plotting and characters are wonderful, as are his magic systems. The biggest downside to working with him would be the fact that he writes books the size of my thesaurus. Of course, so did Dickens, and Sanderson's prose isn't such a loquacious quagmire. So, were I to co-author with either of them, I would have to learn to be patient with very long books. There are worse things to endure.
If I were to write a book with Sanderson, it would have an awesome magic system, mind-blowing plot twists, and characters I adored. Maybe it, too, would be about pirates and grave diggers. Grave digging magic system, maybe...?
Maybe not.
I believe that is all I have to say on this matter at this time. Be sure to check out the rest of the posts on the chain!
5th – http://thescribblingbook.wordpress.com/
6th – http://thelittleenginethatcouldnt.wordpress.com/
7th – http://miriamjoywrites.wordpress.com/
8th – http://www.oyeahwrite.wordpress.com/
9th – http://musingsfromnevillesnavel.wordpress.com/
10th – [Andrea. No link for her yet.] ... Hmm. Okay then.
11th – http://randomofalife.blogspot.com/
12th – http://www.lilyjenness.blogspot.com/
13th – http://maralaurey.wordpress.com/
14th – http://insideliamsbrain.wordpress.com/
15th – http://unikkelyfe.wordpress.com/
16th – http://www.brookeharrison.com/
17th – http://nasrielsfanfics.wordpress.com
18th – http://teenscanwritetoo.wordpress.com/ (We’ll be announcing the topic for next month’s chain.)
And a lovely day/night/whatever to you all!
“If you could co-write a book with one author–living or not–who would it be and what would the book be about?”
This is a good one.
First of all, I'm not sure I'd want to actually co-author something, but maybe just be apprenticed to a great writer and learn from them. Of course, if I did that, I'd probably give my input on the book, so I'd sort of be co-authoring.
Anyway.
Since this prompt includes dead authors, I choose Charles Dickens. I've only read Little Dorrit, and the first chapter or so of Bleak House, but I've seen the miniseries based on each multiple times, and the characters and plotting are amazing. Everyone is connected to someone else and influences the plot in some way. It's spectacular.
Example from Little Dorrit (CONTAINS SPOILERS): Ms. Wade, a side character you don't see too often, meets Arthur Clennam (the love interest) in Marseille, where they also meet the Meagles. Arthur starts to fall for the Meagle's daughter, Pet. Pet, however, as the story progresses, falls for Mr. Gowan. Who you later find out jilted Ms. Wade. Now, Ms. Wade also tries to lure Harriet, the Meagle's adopted daughter-but-they-treat-her-like-a-favorite-servant away from the Meagles. When, in the middle of the story, Harriet finally leaves the Meagles and goes to live with Ms. Wade, you find out Ms. Wade is involved with Riguad, a creepy-as-all-get-out murderer. He gives her a box to her for safe keeping. Eventually, out of boredom, Harriet opens it, and finds blackmail-worthy documents about Arthur, his family, and how it connects to Little Dorrit's family. Ms. Wade is also involved with Mr. Casby, who monkeys with the plot in other ways, and who's daughter was once in love with Arthur.
(END SPOILERS.)
Oh, delicious complexity. I could learn so much from Dickens. About characters, plotting, weaving together subplots...
The downside, other than his being dead, is that while his stories are genius (at least the one's I've read/seen) his prose can be kind of... tedious to read sometimes. Given that the man was paid by the word, this is not surprising, but it might drive me crazy. However, the opening chapter of Bleak House starts with this wonderful description of fog, so I could still learn from it. I could learn to be patient with lengthy and verbose prose if it meant I could write with him.
As to what our book would be about... Well, it'd be set in Victorian England, obviously, and be nice and complex, with lots of different emotions and subplots. Maybe the MC(s) would go through a couple of changes of circumstance. Rags to riches, perhaps. Maybe it could involve pirates. And one character could be a grave digger. (Random ideas.)
My second choice would be Brandon Sanderson (and he's even alive!), the author of the Mistborn books, which are currently my favorite series. I've learned so much from his Writing Excuses podcast, I'm sure I'd learn even more working with him. (Confession: I've daydreamed about being a guest star on Writing Excuses.) Like Dickens, his plotting and characters are wonderful, as are his magic systems. The biggest downside to working with him would be the fact that he writes books the size of my thesaurus. Of course, so did Dickens, and Sanderson's prose isn't such a loquacious quagmire. So, were I to co-author with either of them, I would have to learn to be patient with very long books. There are worse things to endure.
If I were to write a book with Sanderson, it would have an awesome magic system, mind-blowing plot twists, and characters I adored. Maybe it, too, would be about pirates and grave diggers. Grave digging magic system, maybe...?
Maybe not.
I believe that is all I have to say on this matter at this time. Be sure to check out the rest of the posts on the chain!
5th – http://thescribblingbook.wordpress.com/
6th – http://thelittleenginethatcouldnt.wordpress.com/
7th – http://miriamjoywrites.wordpress.com/
8th – http://www.oyeahwrite.wordpress.com/
9th – http://musingsfromnevillesnavel.wordpress.com/
10th – [Andrea. No link for her yet.] ... Hmm. Okay then.
11th – http://randomofalife.blogspot.com/
12th – http://www.lilyjenness.blogspot.com/
13th – http://maralaurey.wordpress.com/
14th – http://insideliamsbrain.wordpress.com/
15th – http://unikkelyfe.wordpress.com/
16th – http://www.brookeharrison.com/
17th – http://nasrielsfanfics.wordpress.com
18th – http://teenscanwritetoo.wordpress.com/ (We’ll be announcing the topic for next month’s chain.)
And a lovely day/night/whatever to you all!
Monday, December 23, 2013
Giving My MC Flaws (and Also My Birthday)
So, for the past...Oh, I forget how long, I've been worried that my MC, Gwen, is not flawed enough and too much like me.
I think I have fixed that. Here's what I did:
Sitting at the table the other night I thought "Well, if she needs flaws, and I'm worried about her being too much like me, why don't I give her flaws I don't have?"
Obvious though that may seem in hindsight, it was totally a light bulb moment. So, I started brainstorming a list of general flaws to pick-and-choose from. Greed, pride, prejudice, vanity... And after a few minutes I went and did a Google search to see if anyone had already made a list so I wouldn't have to do all that list-building work. What I found is this: Dark World RGP Character Flaw list. This is actually something I'd seen before in a Character Therapist blog post, but this time I actually looked through the list for possible flaws for my MC.
So. Much. Fun. Yes, I know that's weird. But I love brainstorming, and basically what I was doing was going through and picking out potential flaws and brainstorming why she might have them and how they might affect her and the story. Doing that helped me dig into her character and made her feel less flat and me-like.
Something else I thought: Not all flaws are created equal. Some flaws will be more prevalent in your character and do more damage than others. I haven't really put this to use yet, but I have it written down to think about as I revise/write.
(Another resource I found, but didn't really use is the TV Tropes Character Flaw Index. It looked useful too.)
The point of this post condensed into one sentence: If you're having trouble with your MC being flat or too much like you, try brainstorming flaws for him/her that you don't have and that fit into the story, hindering or helping the characters as need be. Actually, let me rephrase that. Give them traits that make them act in ways you wouldn't.
So. That's that. Hopefully someone will read this and it'll help them figure out their characters. In other news, today is my 18th birthday, and also the two year blogoversary of this little corner of the Internet. This means I have now known some of my online friends for over two years, and that makes me happy. In celebration of all this, I might be changing the appearance of this blog soon. I've been thinking it needs a makeover, I just haven't done it yet.
Chances are I won't post again until after Christmas, so happy holidays to you!
I think I have fixed that. Here's what I did:
Sitting at the table the other night I thought "Well, if she needs flaws, and I'm worried about her being too much like me, why don't I give her flaws I don't have?"
Obvious though that may seem in hindsight, it was totally a light bulb moment. So, I started brainstorming a list of general flaws to pick-and-choose from. Greed, pride, prejudice, vanity... And after a few minutes I went and did a Google search to see if anyone had already made a list so I wouldn't have to do all that list-building work. What I found is this: Dark World RGP Character Flaw list. This is actually something I'd seen before in a Character Therapist blog post, but this time I actually looked through the list for possible flaws for my MC.
So. Much. Fun. Yes, I know that's weird. But I love brainstorming, and basically what I was doing was going through and picking out potential flaws and brainstorming why she might have them and how they might affect her and the story. Doing that helped me dig into her character and made her feel less flat and me-like.
Something else I thought: Not all flaws are created equal. Some flaws will be more prevalent in your character and do more damage than others. I haven't really put this to use yet, but I have it written down to think about as I revise/write.
(Another resource I found, but didn't really use is the TV Tropes Character Flaw Index. It looked useful too.)
The point of this post condensed into one sentence: If you're having trouble with your MC being flat or too much like you, try brainstorming flaws for him/her that you don't have and that fit into the story, hindering or helping the characters as need be. Actually, let me rephrase that. Give them traits that make them act in ways you wouldn't.
So. That's that. Hopefully someone will read this and it'll help them figure out their characters. In other news, today is my 18th birthday, and also the two year blogoversary of this little corner of the Internet. This means I have now known some of my online friends for over two years, and that makes me happy. In celebration of all this, I might be changing the appearance of this blog soon. I've been thinking it needs a makeover, I just haven't done it yet.
Chances are I won't post again until after Christmas, so happy holidays to you!
Friday, September 6, 2013
Why my MC Acts like Me
One of the problems I've had in the two novels I've written is that the MC acts like me. The first time that might have been intentional, but the second time it wasn't. When I created my second MC, Gwen, I didn't want her to be like me or Lizzie, my first MC.
But she started acting like me anyway. And sometimes my different characters will act/react in the same way.
I found this vexing.
Today, I think I figured out why that happened. When I write my MCs, or any character for that matter, I write the emotional reactions that make sense to me. I write my own.
Just because I tend to hide negative emotions like anger, doesn't mean that everyone else does. And it doesn't mean my MC or any of my other characters should. Some may explode in a flurry of irrational, hastily spoken words. Some may become passive aggressive. Some may start blaming others. Some may not react at all. There are a myriad of possible reactions to each emotion.
No two people react the same way to the same emotion. Characters should be no different. There may be similarities, but no two people are exactly alike. Everyone has lived a different life that has shaped their emotions and emotional responses in a way that is unique to them.
So when you're fleshing out your characters, keep this in mind.
And a lovely night/day/mid-morning/whatever to you.
But she started acting like me anyway. And sometimes my different characters will act/react in the same way.
I found this vexing.
Today, I think I figured out why that happened. When I write my MCs, or any character for that matter, I write the emotional reactions that make sense to me. I write my own.
Just because I tend to hide negative emotions like anger, doesn't mean that everyone else does. And it doesn't mean my MC or any of my other characters should. Some may explode in a flurry of irrational, hastily spoken words. Some may become passive aggressive. Some may start blaming others. Some may not react at all. There are a myriad of possible reactions to each emotion.
No two people react the same way to the same emotion. Characters should be no different. There may be similarities, but no two people are exactly alike. Everyone has lived a different life that has shaped their emotions and emotional responses in a way that is unique to them.
So when you're fleshing out your characters, keep this in mind.
And a lovely night/day/mid-morning/whatever to you.
Sunday, July 21, 2013
Mistakes, Stupidity, Regrets, Losing it, Failures, and Disagreement.
Lately, I've been thinking about things that move plot along and develop characters at the same time. I thought I had a good introduction for this post in my head, but it escapes me now, so we'll move on to my ideas, observations, and hypotheses.
Mistakes and Stupidity:
People make mistakes. Fact of life. And at some point, everyone has done something that looks stupid, be that in the eyes of the character himself, another character, or the reader. Now, I don't think stupidity for the sake of stupidity would move the plot on, but an act of stupidity that lets the characters learn something new, or sets them back a bit on their mission, can move the plot along. Mistakes work the same way.
Let's use an example. I stole this one from a book, but to avoid spoilers, I've changed the names and situation. (Bonus points if you figure out what book I stole it from.)
Kat's assassin group is very low on morale. They have a very, very small chance of beating Lucy's assassin troop to killing the king and getting lots of money. So, Kat gives a grand speech, blowing things slightly out of proportion and exaggerating the greatness of her own group, boosting morale. They'll succeed in their plan to sabotage Lucy's group. Yay for them. Then, Kat has to go take care of something in another city, and she leaves Yolanda in charge of the group. Yolanda, greatly impressed by Kat's speech, takes the group on a practice run, with the thought of taking out one of Lucy's best, unbeatable assassins. But, it all goes wrong, and half of Kat's group dies, and now the police are after the half that is alive. BUT, the police are after Lucy's group too, and they have more leads on Lucy's group. When Kat gets back, the original plan is in shambles and she only has half as many assassins, but the commission for killing the king is all hers, as Lucy had to leave town on the run. She got what she wanted in a convoluted, twisted way that made her sick.
I love this example. Kat gave that speech to make things better, and it did, but in a way that didn't turn out very well. One could say that what she did was a stupid mistake in retrospect. What Yolanda did was outright foolishness. She left their group exposed, and got half of it killed. She shouldn't have let the speech go to her head.
Not only is that a great plot twist, but seeing how Kat and the others deal with it adds depth to their characters. Do they berate themselves for acting foolishly? Do they blame others? Etc.
Mistakes made out of ignorance work well too. Pollard wants to win Patricia's heart, so he gets her a silver bracelet. Problem? Patricia is a werewolf and allergic to silver. Pollard doesn't know that, and when Patricia puts on the bracelet she reacts violently and her secret is exposed, and she nearly dies.
Or Mary does the right thing saving a little girl from death. But the little girl is actually an evil shape-shifter, who turned into a little girl so Mary would save her. Now that the shape-shifter will live, she can begin her crusade to rule the world.
Mistakes made for the "greater good" that are actually just manipulations by the bad guys to get the heroes to act in their favor are awesome. Heart-wrenching, and potentially fling-the-book-across-the-room worthy, but fascinating.
Regrets:
How a character reacts to something they regret can move the plot along, and adds to character depth. Viola might have been headstrong and brave before, but after watching someone die because of something she indirectly did, she may see those traits as vices. However, Jenkins was counting on her headstrong-ness to get something done, and now she won't be a part of his plan. OR maybe she can't deal with the thought that she caused this person's death, so she tries to ignore that fact, and as a result becomes more reckless, trying to prove to herself that it wasn't her fault.
Losing control:
Sometimes when people are caught in a maelstrom of extreme emotion, they lose it. Words are flung like projectiles from a trebuchet, things smashed or blown up, alliances broken, plans changed. What happens when control is lost and how the characters deal with it can add to both character development and plot.
Failures:
Characters that always do everything right and whose plans always turn out better than planned are boring. But, a character whose plans always fail, and who gets constantly forced back and can't move forward is boring too. The plot must go on! If it's trying to go up a down-escalator, and continually gets knocked back down to the bottom, the reader starts to think "Is anything actually going to happen that actually makes a difference?".
I quite like the going up a down-escalator simile, actually. The characters and plot should travel upwards. It'll be tricky, and they'll slip and fall back sometimes, they may even fall back to the bottom (a black moment), but things must happen. There must be changes. They must get closer to the top, and, in the end, actually cross that threshold. Hard work lost can be very powerful, but that work must actually achieve something for that to be so.
Partial failures are good for this. Plans that go wrong half-way through. The end result is achieved, at least in part, but with unforeseen consequences. Example time. (This one also stolen and modified from something I read.)
The characters need to get over a rainforest. So, they steal an airplane. Half-way over the rainforest, however, thunder booms and lightning fractures the sky. Visibility is practically non-existent, and they go down. When they all gain consciousness again (maybe some of them don't), they're over the rainforest, so they are one step closer to their goal, but they're injured, without transportation, AND they are in enemy territory.
Much more fun than if they all die or make it over the rainforest in one piece.
Disagreement/conflict with other characters:
Characters that always get along are boring. *Glares at her own characters.* People disagree. Another fact of life. They disagree about ice cream, philosophy, politics, what colors are in this season, whose dragon is cooler.
You've probably heard this before, and if you're a writer and you haven't, write it down in big red letters and tape it somewhere where you'll see it all the time: In story writing, conflict is everything. Characters who have conflicting personality traits, conflicting life philosophies, or conflicting ideas about how to take the city are far more fun to read and write about than ones that get along about everything. They can openly disagree, secretly disagree, whatever.
Now, of course the villain will disagree and conflict with the hero. But, even close friends and family disagree about things. The heroes companions will disagree with the hero and each other about something. Maybe some of the companions don't even get along with each other. Adding this kind of conflict adds to the story. Example time again!
Joy needs Horace to hack into a website to get a piece of information. But, Fred overhears, and he doesn't want them to hack that particular website. They can hack any other website, just not that one. Joy and Horace protest that this site is the only one with the piece of information they need. Fred can't abide that, and they argue. Joy doesn't give in, and Horace listens to Joy. Fred loses it, and walks out. He quits. He's not going to be part of their plan anymore.
This adds good character development, and adds a plot twist.
EDITED TO ADD: Be sure to read the comments on this post, as there are more interesting thoughts on character development down there.
Well, that turned out to be longer than I expected. I think that's all I have to say for now. What do you think? Have anything to add, or that you disagree with? Have you made other observations? Let me know in a comment!
And a good day/evening/afternoon/whatever to you.
Mistakes and Stupidity:
People make mistakes. Fact of life. And at some point, everyone has done something that looks stupid, be that in the eyes of the character himself, another character, or the reader. Now, I don't think stupidity for the sake of stupidity would move the plot on, but an act of stupidity that lets the characters learn something new, or sets them back a bit on their mission, can move the plot along. Mistakes work the same way.
Let's use an example. I stole this one from a book, but to avoid spoilers, I've changed the names and situation. (Bonus points if you figure out what book I stole it from.)
Kat's assassin group is very low on morale. They have a very, very small chance of beating Lucy's assassin troop to killing the king and getting lots of money. So, Kat gives a grand speech, blowing things slightly out of proportion and exaggerating the greatness of her own group, boosting morale. They'll succeed in their plan to sabotage Lucy's group. Yay for them. Then, Kat has to go take care of something in another city, and she leaves Yolanda in charge of the group. Yolanda, greatly impressed by Kat's speech, takes the group on a practice run, with the thought of taking out one of Lucy's best, unbeatable assassins. But, it all goes wrong, and half of Kat's group dies, and now the police are after the half that is alive. BUT, the police are after Lucy's group too, and they have more leads on Lucy's group. When Kat gets back, the original plan is in shambles and she only has half as many assassins, but the commission for killing the king is all hers, as Lucy had to leave town on the run. She got what she wanted in a convoluted, twisted way that made her sick.
I love this example. Kat gave that speech to make things better, and it did, but in a way that didn't turn out very well. One could say that what she did was a stupid mistake in retrospect. What Yolanda did was outright foolishness. She left their group exposed, and got half of it killed. She shouldn't have let the speech go to her head.
Not only is that a great plot twist, but seeing how Kat and the others deal with it adds depth to their characters. Do they berate themselves for acting foolishly? Do they blame others? Etc.
Mistakes made out of ignorance work well too. Pollard wants to win Patricia's heart, so he gets her a silver bracelet. Problem? Patricia is a werewolf and allergic to silver. Pollard doesn't know that, and when Patricia puts on the bracelet she reacts violently and her secret is exposed, and she nearly dies.
Or Mary does the right thing saving a little girl from death. But the little girl is actually an evil shape-shifter, who turned into a little girl so Mary would save her. Now that the shape-shifter will live, she can begin her crusade to rule the world.
Mistakes made for the "greater good" that are actually just manipulations by the bad guys to get the heroes to act in their favor are awesome. Heart-wrenching, and potentially fling-the-book-across-the-room worthy, but fascinating.
Regrets:
How a character reacts to something they regret can move the plot along, and adds to character depth. Viola might have been headstrong and brave before, but after watching someone die because of something she indirectly did, she may see those traits as vices. However, Jenkins was counting on her headstrong-ness to get something done, and now she won't be a part of his plan. OR maybe she can't deal with the thought that she caused this person's death, so she tries to ignore that fact, and as a result becomes more reckless, trying to prove to herself that it wasn't her fault.
Losing control:
Sometimes when people are caught in a maelstrom of extreme emotion, they lose it. Words are flung like projectiles from a trebuchet, things smashed or blown up, alliances broken, plans changed. What happens when control is lost and how the characters deal with it can add to both character development and plot.
Failures:
Characters that always do everything right and whose plans always turn out better than planned are boring. But, a character whose plans always fail, and who gets constantly forced back and can't move forward is boring too. The plot must go on! If it's trying to go up a down-escalator, and continually gets knocked back down to the bottom, the reader starts to think "Is anything actually going to happen that actually makes a difference?".
I quite like the going up a down-escalator simile, actually. The characters and plot should travel upwards. It'll be tricky, and they'll slip and fall back sometimes, they may even fall back to the bottom (a black moment), but things must happen. There must be changes. They must get closer to the top, and, in the end, actually cross that threshold. Hard work lost can be very powerful, but that work must actually achieve something for that to be so.
Partial failures are good for this. Plans that go wrong half-way through. The end result is achieved, at least in part, but with unforeseen consequences. Example time. (This one also stolen and modified from something I read.)
The characters need to get over a rainforest. So, they steal an airplane. Half-way over the rainforest, however, thunder booms and lightning fractures the sky. Visibility is practically non-existent, and they go down. When they all gain consciousness again (maybe some of them don't), they're over the rainforest, so they are one step closer to their goal, but they're injured, without transportation, AND they are in enemy territory.
Much more fun than if they all die or make it over the rainforest in one piece.
Disagreement/conflict with other characters:
Characters that always get along are boring. *Glares at her own characters.* People disagree. Another fact of life. They disagree about ice cream, philosophy, politics, what colors are in this season, whose dragon is cooler.
You've probably heard this before, and if you're a writer and you haven't, write it down in big red letters and tape it somewhere where you'll see it all the time: In story writing, conflict is everything. Characters who have conflicting personality traits, conflicting life philosophies, or conflicting ideas about how to take the city are far more fun to read and write about than ones that get along about everything. They can openly disagree, secretly disagree, whatever.
Now, of course the villain will disagree and conflict with the hero. But, even close friends and family disagree about things. The heroes companions will disagree with the hero and each other about something. Maybe some of the companions don't even get along with each other. Adding this kind of conflict adds to the story. Example time again!
Joy needs Horace to hack into a website to get a piece of information. But, Fred overhears, and he doesn't want them to hack that particular website. They can hack any other website, just not that one. Joy and Horace protest that this site is the only one with the piece of information they need. Fred can't abide that, and they argue. Joy doesn't give in, and Horace listens to Joy. Fred loses it, and walks out. He quits. He's not going to be part of their plan anymore.
This adds good character development, and adds a plot twist.
EDITED TO ADD: Be sure to read the comments on this post, as there are more interesting thoughts on character development down there.
Well, that turned out to be longer than I expected. I think that's all I have to say for now. What do you think? Have anything to add, or that you disagree with? Have you made other observations? Let me know in a comment!
And a good day/evening/afternoon/whatever to you.
Friday, April 26, 2013
Character Question: What is Love?
Yeah, I know that's a weird title. Allow me to explain.
Last night, I was watching Lark Rise to Candleford (a really great period drama TV show that any Austen/Gaskell fans should check out) and the conflict for one of the characters was the question above. What is love? She was kinda freaking out about it. Anyway, when she asked that question the first time, one of my characters answered her in my head. "Love is giving your life for someone else's." Now, this doesn't fit the Lark Rise episode in any way, shape, or form, but I was intrigued. Viola, my character, answered what love is to her. So, I decided to see what some of my other characters had to say.
Marius: Love is accepting/loving someone despite their past.
Bev: Love is being accepted for who you are.
Joy: .... Is this a trick question?
Silla: Love is being accepted, even when you're not what was wanted.
Gwen: Love is working hard for the good of others.
Chad: See Shakespeare's sonnet 116. I painted it on the side of the abandoned crematorium.
Farold: Love is protecting your loved ones from the past.
Henley Sayer: Love is avenging your family.
Lizzie: Ooh, I should ask my characters that....
I'm not sure some of these even make sense, but I thought it was interesting to see how differently the characters reacted. And thank heaven they reacted differently, or I would have some serious character development to do for everybody.
As you may or may not be able to see, some of these characters have insecurities that affect their view of this subject (Marius, Bev, Silla...). Hopefully, that makes them more like chocolate lava cakes and less like cardboard.
If you're a writer (and I assume most of my few readers are), how did your characters react to this question? And I'd love to hear input from all the non-writers too.
A good evening/morning/day/whatever to you.
Last night, I was watching Lark Rise to Candleford (a really great period drama TV show that any Austen/Gaskell fans should check out) and the conflict for one of the characters was the question above. What is love? She was kinda freaking out about it. Anyway, when she asked that question the first time, one of my characters answered her in my head. "Love is giving your life for someone else's." Now, this doesn't fit the Lark Rise episode in any way, shape, or form, but I was intrigued. Viola, my character, answered what love is to her. So, I decided to see what some of my other characters had to say.
Marius: Love is accepting/loving someone despite their past.
Bev: Love is being accepted for who you are.
Joy: .... Is this a trick question?
Silla: Love is being accepted, even when you're not what was wanted.
Gwen: Love is working hard for the good of others.
Chad: See Shakespeare's sonnet 116. I painted it on the side of the abandoned crematorium.
Farold: Love is protecting your loved ones from the past.
Henley Sayer: Love is avenging your family.
Lizzie: Ooh, I should ask my characters that....
I'm not sure some of these even make sense, but I thought it was interesting to see how differently the characters reacted. And thank heaven they reacted differently, or I would have some serious character development to do for everybody.
As you may or may not be able to see, some of these characters have insecurities that affect their view of this subject (Marius, Bev, Silla...). Hopefully, that makes them more like chocolate lava cakes and less like cardboard.
If you're a writer (and I assume most of my few readers are), how did your characters react to this question? And I'd love to hear input from all the non-writers too.
A good evening/morning/day/whatever to you.
Monday, April 8, 2013
Of Character Correctness
One of the things I did wrong in my first novel was that Lizzie, my MC, was always right. She found the true meaning of every clue right away. This does not make for a good story. It makes for an okay story, but it would have been better (and will be, when I pull that manuscript from the dungeon again) if she'd misinterpreted a clue or two, or only realized half of what it meant.
Why? you ask? Because my friends, that makes for plot twists of awesome.
Think about it. You're reading along, what the MC says makes sense, and then KABLOOIE, the condemning footprint couldn't have belonged to the postman, or the dead guys isn't really dead, or that chandlery isn't just a cover for a bad guy on the run - it's a smuggling ring too, or the man who everyone thought was the father of the illegitimate son is actually covering for the real father, or the MC has two potential villains to follow, and she picks the wrong one.
Or, you're reading along, what the MC makes sense, and what do you know? She's right. She's so clever. She followed the right guy, and fit every clue together perfectly, and thanks to her, the bad guys will rot in jail for eternity.
Which is more fun to read? The first.
Readers like being proved wrong (as long as the new explanation makes sense). Or they like figuring out the true meaning of the clues before the MC, and being proved right. Either way, proving the MC wrong will throw him/her for a loop, and make the story that much more interesting.
As a side note, characters with secrets are an excellent way to prove the MC wrong. Henry lied, and the MC believed him, or Agnes told the MC the truth, and he/she didn't believe her. The MC builds an idea around what s/he believes, and then POP goes that idea, and in the soap suds of its death, a new idea is born, and this one is one step closer to the truth.
What do you think? Feel free to debate and expound upon this idea. I'd love to hear your input.
And a good night/day/afternoon/morning/whatever to you.
Why? you ask? Because my friends, that makes for plot twists of awesome.
Think about it. You're reading along, what the MC says makes sense, and then KABLOOIE, the condemning footprint couldn't have belonged to the postman, or the dead guys isn't really dead, or that chandlery isn't just a cover for a bad guy on the run - it's a smuggling ring too, or the man who everyone thought was the father of the illegitimate son is actually covering for the real father, or the MC has two potential villains to follow, and she picks the wrong one.
Or, you're reading along, what the MC makes sense, and what do you know? She's right. She's so clever. She followed the right guy, and fit every clue together perfectly, and thanks to her, the bad guys will rot in jail for eternity.
Which is more fun to read? The first.
Readers like being proved wrong (as long as the new explanation makes sense). Or they like figuring out the true meaning of the clues before the MC, and being proved right. Either way, proving the MC wrong will throw him/her for a loop, and make the story that much more interesting.
As a side note, characters with secrets are an excellent way to prove the MC wrong. Henry lied, and the MC believed him, or Agnes told the MC the truth, and he/she didn't believe her. The MC builds an idea around what s/he believes, and then POP goes that idea, and in the soap suds of its death, a new idea is born, and this one is one step closer to the truth.
What do you think? Feel free to debate and expound upon this idea. I'd love to hear your input.
And a good night/day/afternoon/morning/whatever to you.
Monday, October 29, 2012
The Development of Characters is a Difficult Matter...
Over the last few weeks, I've been working on prep work for my NaNo novel. One thing that I severely stunk at last year was character development, so I've been working more on characters than plot lately. I saw somewhere that someone said that strong characters can carry a weak plot, but weak characters will wreck a strong plot. I don't know if the former is true, but I had a decent plot for NaNo last year, and my shallow, cardboard-cut-out characters made it seem shallow and cardboard-like.
For character development advice and ideas, I went to Go Teen Writers, a seriously awesome writing site that you should check out as soon as you're done reading this post.
One thing I did was label my characters (as a hunter, giver, monster, ect.) , as Jill Williamson suggests in this post, using her list of archetypes in this post. Once I had labels, I started asking the question "why?", like Susie May Warren said in this post. Why is this character a giver? What made her think that way? Why did that occurrence happen? And so on.
This really helped me to begin fleshing out some of my characters and their backstories. Take, for instance, my character the late Lord Wycliff Copperstone (Gwen's uncle). Once I found a label for him, (actually, it was three) and started asking why, I got some tidbits for potential backstory. Here's what I have for him in my character development Word doc:
The latest thing I've done was answer the questions from Susie May Warren in this post:
I finished doing this for most of my characters this evening, and the results were so interesting. For instance, both Yoreth, one of the villains, and Bevanne, one of Gwen's friends, have a love of reading/learning, but for different reasons. Yoreth wanted to learn because he used to get teased for being dumb. Bevanne just loved learning. There were other interesting things, but that's the one I can remember right now.
I finally understand what I've heard about character backstory making all the difference. It made sense before, but now I get it.
One semi-good, semi-bad thing I discovered is that I'm really good at creating "broken" characters. By broken, I mean psychologically messed up in a big way (like my character who can't get over his brother's death). I almost titled this post, "Help! Get the duct tape! My characters are broken!" Being good at creating such characters is good because "broken" characters are interesting to write about. The bad side is I don't necessarily like "broken" characters. They can get morose really fast (like the guy who can't get over his brother's death), which is really annoying. This is not post-Donna Doctor Who. Though come to think about it, I can fix my "broken" characters in the story, and that will lead to a happy ending, plus be relatively interesting story content. That was really obvious, wasn't it? *Shakes her head at herself*
The other thing I did for some character development was take some Jung/Meyers-Briggs personality tests as my main character. That was interesting, but I liked the above methods better. If you want to know more about those personality tests and how they relate to character development, read this post on Go Teen Writers.
How do you develop you characters? What helps you find your characters hidden depths?
For character development advice and ideas, I went to Go Teen Writers, a seriously awesome writing site that you should check out as soon as you're done reading this post.
One thing I did was label my characters (as a hunter, giver, monster, ect.) , as Jill Williamson suggests in this post, using her list of archetypes in this post. Once I had labels, I started asking the question "why?", like Susie May Warren said in this post. Why is this character a giver? What made her think that way? Why did that occurrence happen? And so on.
This really helped me to begin fleshing out some of my characters and their backstories. Take, for instance, my character the late Lord Wycliff Copperstone (Gwen's uncle). Once I found a label for him, (actually, it was three) and started asking why, I got some tidbits for potential backstory. Here's what I have for him in my character development Word doc:
I don't have a lot yet, but labeling and asking why helped to get ideas flowing.
Uncle Wycliff was a tyrant, bully, manipulator. [He liked to be in control, had no tolerance for weakness (especially in himself), he played with situations and people to get what he wanted.] He didn’t tolerate weakness because someone he looked up to did something he considered “weak” and it crushed him. He wanted to be in control because he felt like he didn’t have control of his life, so he controlled everything else (and thus his life, kinda). He manipulated people and situations because it was a way for him to control things, and he felt manipulated, possibly by the person that let him down by showing “weakness”, or, someone he looked up to later was a manipulator, so Wycliff copied him/her.
The latest thing I've done was answer the questions from Susie May Warren in this post:
What was the darkest moment of your childhood that shaped
your past?
What kind of a person are you today
because of that?
What lie do you believe?
What emotional wound do you carry?
What's your greatest fear?
What are your motivations and values?
What would you die for?
What are you good at?
When the going gets tough, what do you do?
What was the happiest moment of his past?
What's your character's greatest dream?
What truth will set you free?
What was a black moment in
your past/childhood? (The black moment has to do with romance. If you're not
writing a romance or at least including it in your book, you don't need
this question.)
I finally understand what I've heard about character backstory making all the difference. It made sense before, but now I get it.
One semi-good, semi-bad thing I discovered is that I'm really good at creating "broken" characters. By broken, I mean psychologically messed up in a big way (like my character who can't get over his brother's death). I almost titled this post, "Help! Get the duct tape! My characters are broken!" Being good at creating such characters is good because "broken" characters are interesting to write about. The bad side is I don't necessarily like "broken" characters. They can get morose really fast (like the guy who can't get over his brother's death), which is really annoying. This is not post-Donna Doctor Who. Though come to think about it, I can fix my "broken" characters in the story, and that will lead to a happy ending, plus be relatively interesting story content. That was really obvious, wasn't it? *Shakes her head at herself*
The other thing I did for some character development was take some Jung/Meyers-Briggs personality tests as my main character. That was interesting, but I liked the above methods better. If you want to know more about those personality tests and how they relate to character development, read this post on Go Teen Writers.
How do you develop you characters? What helps you find your characters hidden depths?
Wednesday, July 18, 2012
Character Texting
A couple weeks ago, while I was reinventing Lizzie's parents, I discovered a new method of brainstorming. Okay, so maybe someone else thought of it before I did, but it was new to me. This method is what I like to call "Character Texting". You essentially have a texting conversation with your character. I do this through a Word doc. The way I started Character Texting was I randomly typed the sentence "Okay, Mrs. Evans, what will you be?" into the Word doc I was putting all her character info in. Then she responded. And we got a little conversation going. I find this method to be much more productive than staring at the computer and thinking. "Do I want her to be a realtor? A interior designer? A jelly maker?" and only typing it down once I've decided. Through Character Texting I can ask her what she wants to be, and get her opinion. Also, it kills two nargles with one stone, since I also get insight as to how she would say things. Sure, I'm texting someone who doesn't exist and asking them what they want to be and looking at how they see the world, but it works. And instead of thinking of her as part of me (she's MY character), I think about her as her own person, and she becomes more of herself. Yeah, it's crazy and a bit schizophrenic, but I'm beginning to think that no really good fiction can come from someone entirely sane.
To give you an example of how I Character Text, I shall hold a brief conversation with Lizzie (a teen sleuth and main character in my WIP).
Me: Lizzie. You need a motive.
Liz: Yes, I know. I'm kinda pathetic in my story at the moment. What happened to the subplot you had going with Joe? I was looking forward to meeting a character who carved coffins for a living. Especially since he was dating my sister, and I could tease her about it.
Me: I decided not to do it. But I am saving it for a later story. Besides, it didn't really give you a motive anyway. It could have worked for Lainie, but not for you.
Liz: True. I think I cooperate with the police too much.
Me: Agreed. Maybe I ought to give you your own lead to follow.
Liz: That could work. Which lead? One that's in the story already, or a new one? And am I right or wrong?
Me: I don't know. I think having you be partially right would be fun.
Liz: Yeah, for you.
Me: And the readers.
Liz: Sigh.
Me: Sigh... ya know, if I spelled that Sygh, it'd be a good name. Or maybe Syghe....
Liz: Solston to Lily! Can we please stay in my story world?
Me: Yeah, sorry. I like having you be partially right. Maybe you misinterpret a piece of evidence.
Liz: That could work. But the question still remains: New lead, or old lead?
Me: Hmm. I never piled any good evidence against the actual bad guys, and the police certainly don't have enough reason to follow them....
Liz: But you could fix that. I'm not sure I want to follow the real bad guys. I don't like them.
Me: Do you like any of the bad guys?
Liz: Well, no. But I really don't like them. They're kinda...scary. You don't show that in the story, but I've been in your head long enough to know what they're like. You had talked about my motive being a combination of hyper curiosity and a strong sense of justice, and if you stick with that, I need to follow a lead that is more puzzling and intriguing than scary. You have to make me want to solve the mystery. I like solving puzzles, so give me a puzzle to solve.
Me: The whole story is a puzzle.
Liz: Yeah, but all I do, especially in the latter half of the story is say "Oh, look, this evidence goes here. I better call the police! I overheard something that might solve the mystery, I better call the police!" Over, and over, and over again. I hate to say it, Lil, but story-me is BORING! She's a good citizen, sure, but she's boring.
Me: I hadn't looked at it like that. But I want you to be an admirable character.
Liz: There are ways of making me admirable the way you want me to be without making me boring....
There's more to this conversation, but it got kinda long. I started typing and Lizzie got vocal. It really helped with my story.
What do you think of Character Texting? Give it a try and let me know how it works out!
To give you an example of how I Character Text, I shall hold a brief conversation with Lizzie (a teen sleuth and main character in my WIP).
Me: Lizzie. You need a motive.
Liz: Yes, I know. I'm kinda pathetic in my story at the moment. What happened to the subplot you had going with Joe? I was looking forward to meeting a character who carved coffins for a living. Especially since he was dating my sister, and I could tease her about it.
Me: I decided not to do it. But I am saving it for a later story. Besides, it didn't really give you a motive anyway. It could have worked for Lainie, but not for you.
Liz: True. I think I cooperate with the police too much.
Me: Agreed. Maybe I ought to give you your own lead to follow.
Liz: That could work. Which lead? One that's in the story already, or a new one? And am I right or wrong?
Me: I don't know. I think having you be partially right would be fun.
Liz: Yeah, for you.
Me: And the readers.
Liz: Sigh.
Me: Sigh... ya know, if I spelled that Sygh, it'd be a good name. Or maybe Syghe....
Liz: Solston to Lily! Can we please stay in my story world?
Me: Yeah, sorry. I like having you be partially right. Maybe you misinterpret a piece of evidence.
Liz: That could work. But the question still remains: New lead, or old lead?
Me: Hmm. I never piled any good evidence against the actual bad guys, and the police certainly don't have enough reason to follow them....
Liz: But you could fix that. I'm not sure I want to follow the real bad guys. I don't like them.
Me: Do you like any of the bad guys?
Liz: Well, no. But I really don't like them. They're kinda...scary. You don't show that in the story, but I've been in your head long enough to know what they're like. You had talked about my motive being a combination of hyper curiosity and a strong sense of justice, and if you stick with that, I need to follow a lead that is more puzzling and intriguing than scary. You have to make me want to solve the mystery. I like solving puzzles, so give me a puzzle to solve.
Me: The whole story is a puzzle.
Liz: Yeah, but all I do, especially in the latter half of the story is say "Oh, look, this evidence goes here. I better call the police! I overheard something that might solve the mystery, I better call the police!" Over, and over, and over again. I hate to say it, Lil, but story-me is BORING! She's a good citizen, sure, but she's boring.
Me: I hadn't looked at it like that. But I want you to be an admirable character.
Liz: There are ways of making me admirable the way you want me to be without making me boring....
There's more to this conversation, but it got kinda long. I started typing and Lizzie got vocal. It really helped with my story.
What do you think of Character Texting? Give it a try and let me know how it works out!
Friday, May 11, 2012
An Important Announcement (Updated!)
*Edited to add: DLYCW has officially started! You have until the 14th to post. My post is below. Here's Sarah's Host Post, and Pheris's Host Post.
G'day chaps! Sorry I dropped off the face of the blogosphere for the last few days. You can blame redox reactions and electrochemistry (which is so a word. Stupid SpellCheck.)
To get on to the purpose of this post, Sarah (author of Comfy Sweaters, Writing, and Fish), Pheris (author of The Word Asylum), and I have teamed up and created Dress Like Your Character Week (DLYCW for short). What is this, you ask? To put it succinctly, DLYCW is a week in which participants dress up like one (or more) of their characters and post pictures of themselves. Pretty cool, huh? Sarah's blog will be hosting, and she will have a host post where participants can comment to leave a link to their DLYCW post. Not only will this event be full of fun and creativity, but the sharing of links has the potential to increase participants' blogs' readership. DLYCW starts on May 7th and ends on May 14th. Participants can post anytime during that week.
If you would like to participate, here are the rules:
Here I am dressed up as my character Tori Ingles, from my current work in progress, The Black Cat Diamond: A Lizzie Evans Mystery. Tori is a guitarist in Lizzie's brother, Tyler's band. Originally she was a plain Goth, but then she evolved, and now she dresses herself in Goth versions of what the typical country star would wear.
This outfit consists of: the plaid shirt (which is actually the wrong color. It's a bit too pink for Tori), the jeans, the boots (Remember when I said I had a pair of boots I could channel 3ish characters from? Those would be they), a chain necklace, and ear-threads with danglies at the end.
Seeing myself in Goth makeup freaks me out. I don't wear any makeup, except on special occasions. Though I do admit I rather like the purple highlights. Very Sadie Kane.
The one thing I wish I had was this dragon earring, but alas, it was more than outside my budget. The person that made it has a bunch of dragons, and this cool spiderweb (my second choice for Tori). Oh well, maybe someday.
My writing didn't really change or anything when I dressed up. I did walk a bit differently, but I always do when I wear those boots. When the pictures were being taken, I didn't allow myself to smile, 'cause Tori wouldn't, which was surprisingly weird. Lily, the queen of smiling, not smile? Very odd.
This was lots of fun! Be sure to check out the other DLYCW posts!
G'day chaps! Sorry I dropped off the face of the blogosphere for the last few days. You can blame redox reactions and electrochemistry (which is so a word. Stupid SpellCheck.)
To get on to the purpose of this post, Sarah (author of Comfy Sweaters, Writing, and Fish), Pheris (author of The Word Asylum), and I have teamed up and created Dress Like Your Character Week (DLYCW for short). What is this, you ask? To put it succinctly, DLYCW is a week in which participants dress up like one (or more) of their characters and post pictures of themselves. Pretty cool, huh? Sarah's blog will be hosting, and she will have a host post where participants can comment to leave a link to their DLYCW post. Not only will this event be full of fun and creativity, but the sharing of links has the potential to increase participants' blogs' readership. DLYCW starts on May 7th and ends on May 14th. Participants can post anytime during that week.
If you would like to participate, here are the rules:
- Please refrain from nudity, inappropriate captions and poses in your photos
- In your post, please link to the host's post (and don't forget to leave a link to your post/blog on it)
- You do not have to show your face if you don't want to (Sarah's host post has a link to a website where you can pixelate or blur out your face)
- Feel free to invite other participants privately to ensure they are comfortable with participation
- In your post, tell us how your writing changed when you dressed up, or did something else daring (did you use an accent? We'd love to know!)
- Spread the word! Tell other people about DLYCW.
Here I am dressed up as my character Tori Ingles, from my current work in progress, The Black Cat Diamond: A Lizzie Evans Mystery. Tori is a guitarist in Lizzie's brother, Tyler's band. Originally she was a plain Goth, but then she evolved, and now she dresses herself in Goth versions of what the typical country star would wear.
This outfit consists of: the plaid shirt (which is actually the wrong color. It's a bit too pink for Tori), the jeans, the boots (Remember when I said I had a pair of boots I could channel 3ish characters from? Those would be they), a chain necklace, and ear-threads with danglies at the end.
Seeing myself in Goth makeup freaks me out. I don't wear any makeup, except on special occasions. Though I do admit I rather like the purple highlights. Very Sadie Kane.
My writing didn't really change or anything when I dressed up. I did walk a bit differently, but I always do when I wear those boots. When the pictures were being taken, I didn't allow myself to smile, 'cause Tori wouldn't, which was surprisingly weird. Lily, the queen of smiling, not smile? Very odd.
This was lots of fun! Be sure to check out the other DLYCW posts!
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
Character Channeling...
...is something I've found myself doing quite a bit recently. Somewhat annoying, since I do it without realizing it, but useful. The way I character channel is hard to explain. It's kinda like I become the character, only not. To put it less confusingly, I pick up the character's physical behavior (walk, gestures, etc.), their way of speech, and their most prevalent emotion (which can be a problem if the character is depressed), but I still think as me.
For me there are three stimuli for character channeling:
Do you character channel, or some variation thereof? How do you do it?
For me there are three stimuli for character channeling:
- Wearing an outfit s/he would. I put purple highlights in my hair when I got home this evening, and I noticed myself dancing to the music on Pandora more like my character Tori would (she has purple highlights too. She's the reason I put the highlights on in the first place.) I have this one pair of leather boots that I can channel three characters from. Yeah, they're that cool.
- Thinking excessively about the character. This is when I don't notice channeling. I'll unconsciously pick up on one of their traits, and start walking around the house like them.
- Listening to music that reminds me of the character. This one is mostly conscious, since I can feel my imagination slip from me to them. Kinda like a car changes gears.
Do you character channel, or some variation thereof? How do you do it?
Saturday, April 7, 2012
An Introduction to My Writing Insanity
A good prompt indeed!
Well, during NaNoWriMo I always wore a pair of greyish wool fingerless gloves that my mom made. They're cool because they have cables on them. Cables are cool. I wore them 'cause they kept my hands warm and kept tendonitis at bay (mostly), but they looked good too.
Something I do on a regular basis is talk to myself. Or, rather, my characters talk to me through me. That sounds a bit bonkers, but 'tis none the less true. Letting them borrow my voice gives me insight as to how they would say something. It may be something as simple as "My name is Viola" (that one's been going through my head A LOT lately) or an entire monologue. It's like I can hear them say it. The tone they use, the voice inflections, the sarcasm, the smile that comes from their words as well as their facial muscles, the disgust, etc. It makes me look crazy, but the strange looks are worth the payoff. Of course sometimes I start talking to myself without realizing it or using the hand motions my character is using, which can get a bit awkward.
Sometimes I act out the scene that's going through my head. This can be weird, since about half the time I do it without realizing it. I'll be plunging a dagger at a bad guy when I realize that my fist kinda hurts from hitting the sheet cabinet (the "bad guy") a little too hard. Or swinging a cheese grater around like a sword only to turn and see my sister giving me a weird look. Yes, I turn cheese graters into swords. I've turned just about every kitchen utensil my family has into a weapon of some kind. It's quite fun.
A habit I just recently discovered I had is to open a story with a bit of back story. This one can be a bit problematic, since the current trend is to start in the middle of the action. We'll see how that turns out. I may just have to find clever ways of employing the use of a prologue.
Something else I just noticed is that lately I have a thing for redheaded warrior princess type characters. Weird huh?
Another thing I like to do is to mash two things that don't usually go together together and give them to a character as a quirk. Like Shakespeare and spray paint. Or wearing purple Goth style clothes and playing lead guitar in a country band. Yes, I've done both of those, and they're some of my favorite characters.
Well, I think that's enough of my brain for you today. Be sure to visit the gift shop and come back soon!
Here's a map of the blog chain, day by day:
(Sorry about the white background. The BFDs [Blogger Formatting Demons] have done something weird)
April 5– http://correctingpenswelcome.wordpress.com–Comfy
Sweaters, Writing, and Fish
April 6– http://towerofplot.blogspot.com —
The Leaning Tower of Plot
April 7–http://lilyjenness.blogspot.com–Lily’s
Notes in the Margins. YOU ARE HERE!
April 8–http://weirdalocity.wordpress.com–
From My Head
April 9–http://insideliamsbrain.wordpress.com–This
Page Intentionally Left Blank
April 10–http://thewordasylum.wordpress.com–The
Word Asylum
April 11–http://rachelsbookreviews.com–Rachel’s
Book Reviews
April 12–http://noveljourneys.wordpress.com–Novel
Journeys
April 13–http://delorfinde.wordpress.com–A
Farewell to Sanity
April 14–http://swordofink.com–Sword of Ink
April 15–http://thedreamersadventures.blogspot.com–The
Dreamers Adventures
April 16–http://incessantdroningofaboredwriter.wordpress.com–The
Incessant Droning of a Bored Writer
April 17–http://herestous.wordpress.com–Here’s
To Us
April 18–http://teenscanwritetoo.wordpress.com–Teens
Can Write Too! (We will be announcing the topic for next month’s chain)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)