Showing posts with label character. Show all posts
Monday, March 30, 2015
Getting Characters Out of Work Mode
Most characters have a profession�doctor, cop, assistant in a cupcake store�and in the course of doing their job they will slip into work mode. They will talk and act in the way you expect someone in that position to talk and act. The problem is that this can make them come across as stereotypical.
This is especially true for secondary characters who might not appear often other than to perform a job related task, but it can also be true for main characters where every time they have to do their job they start acting in a very specific manner�a politician uses a lot of meaningless double-speak, a doctor uses a lot of medical jargon, a cop becomes focused on factual questions and answers.
This makes it clear what they do for a living but little else.
What a character says and how they say it not only tells the reader what kind of a person they�re reading about, but also helps to set mood and tone for a scene. There�s a lot you can do through dialogue beyond asking and answering questions and imparting information.
If a character acts one way when in work mode, and then they behave another way once they�re off stage, it can make them seem like two separate people. Like a story about an actor and the role he�s playing, but in a story you want the reader to be able to connect fully with the character as a whole.
While a good professional should be able to divorce their feelings from the job they do, it doesn�t make for very good storytelling, nor does it add any depth to the portrayal of the character. In fact it can end up doing the opposite.
Often it isn�t obvious because there�s only one character of that sort in the scene. So one politician acting like a politician might seem reasonable.
�If elected, I promise I will do everything in my power to get that bridge built.�
Sounds like the sort of thing a politician would say. But if you imagine another politician in the same room, would they be two distinct personalities? Even if they held diametrically opposite views.
�If elected, I promise I will do everything in my power to stop that bridge being built.�
Despite the content of what they�re saying being different, the structure is the same. Both are making statement that sound like promises but are in face totally non-committal, which certainly tells you they are both politicians but not who they are beyond that.
Once they come off stage it�s a lot easier to have them express themselves as individuals, but it�s a wasted opportunity not to use all appearances to give a character depth.
The problem is that all politicians do tend to sound the same. They�re all trained in the same techniques to do the job effectively. The same with cops and teachers and librarians. This is doubly true if the only function of the character in your story is to come in, perform their job, and then leave. How can you avoid making them stereotypical when they only appear for a paragraph or two?
Using the technique of imagining if there was someone else of the same profession in the scene is a good place to start. Would it be easy to differentiate between them? This won�t fix the issue, but is a good way to spot the problem.
Also consider what happened to the character in the previous scene. A politician who�s just been told there�s been a death threat made against him will act differently to one who�s been told he�s ahead in the polls.
Having a character simply at work so the reader can see what they do has very little value, even if their job happens to be quite exciting.
If you want to establish a character�s job in an authentic manner, how many words do you need to do that? Is a politician who gives a long speech full of empty promises going to be more convincing than one who makes one campaign promise he obviously has no intention of keeping?
The more isolated a scene is from the rest of the narrative the easier it is to let the character switch to work mode, so making sure the character is in touch with previous events, mentally and emotionally, helps a lot.
For minor characters, consider what they were doing prior to their appearance, even if we never see it. You don�t have to give them a detailed backstory, but any residual emotion will help add nuance.
Having one character interrupt another is a good way of shifting the dialogue from formulaic to dramatic. If a cop is asking a witness questions in a standard cop-like manner, and the witness wants to know where he got that pen because she had one just like it which went missing and is he sure that�s not her pen, then that can throw the cop off his even keel. Characters act in a particular way because they are prepared. If you can throw things at them that they aren�t prepared for they will have to go off script. Using another character to provoke a response is one way, but any sort of unusual activity in a standard scene will give the characters a chance to act like themselves rather than the job.
Even though it�s important to have a character behave in a way befitting his job and status, it�s far more important to engage with the reader and have them connect with the character on a deeper level. The best way to do that is not to focus on what makes them a typical member of a community, but to find the traits that are unique to them and typify their personality, and then find ways to draw it out of them.
If you found this post interesting please give it a retweet. Cheers.
Monday, March 23, 2015
Tricks of the Trade 4: Hero Upgrade
Making sure readers actually care what happens to your main character is integral to any story. You can�t just take it for granted that just because your story has stuff happen to a guy that the reader will automatically be interested.
If your story happens to be about a noble main character who has exciting adventures this is less of a worry since this is the basic story archetype from fairy tales and myths, but not all stories follow this template.
While the simplest way to endear your MC to the reader is to demonstrate their general decency, what�s sometimes referred to as a pat the dog or save the cat moment�the MC goes out of their way to be helpful to some innocent in trouble and their good guy credentials are confirmed�not all main characters are straight out of a Disney family movie.
Fortunately there are a number of other ways to boost your hero�s general appeal.
The Superhero
Some characters are just good at everything. They have exactly the right set of skills for the problems they face and are able to overcome obstacles with ease.
The most common way to counteract any resentment of a know-it-all clever clogs is to make the stakes incredibly high. James Bond is saving the world, he needs to be expert at everything.
You can also use details. If our hero takes down twelve ninjas single-handed, how did he do it? The more unexpected his moves, the less focus on his ridiculous abilities. So grabbing an iron poker from the fireplace is perfectly plausible; using a pencil from his kid�s schoolbag is more interesting.
Unnecessary but cool details can also add something, like Indiana Jones taking an extra risk to grab his hat. Our hero using a pencil sharpener before stabbing his attacker is unlikely but more entertaining.
The Downtrodden
In many cases a hero will start out in difficult circumstances. No money, horrible family, never lucky. It�s more than likely someone with this kind of background would be angry, bitter and self-pitying. Realistic as it may be, these kinds of emotions don�t translate well.
They are far more engrossing for the person feeling them than the ones hearing about them and it would be a mistake to think it�s okay because later on things turn around. Readers who get irritated by a character now don�t generally hang around to see if the misery continues or not.
You can get round this by making the character upbeat rather than defeated. Cinderella, Harry Potter, Charlie (of Chocolate Factory fame) all had plenty to be mad about, but handled their troubles with good grace, and then took their opportunities when they could.
The Lovely and the Beautiful
The pretty girl who gets all the boys is not going to impress much if your target audience is mostly female. Even if she�s really nice and helps old people across the street, she�s already won the lottery, now she wants to be the centre of attention too?
There are two popular ways to approach this. Either she�s in a world of other gorgeous people who are horrible to her because of something that�s not her fault (e.g. she�s poor and they�re all blinged up), which makes her more likeable by default.
Or, alternatively, she (somehow) gets all the advantages of being super-hot while only being slightly above average in the looks department. Simply downgrading her attractiveness not only doesn�t stop the two hottest guys in town fighting over her, it actually fits very well into most women�s insecurities about their own looks.
Both of the above approaches are horribly overused and yet perfectly viable. There is an appetite for stories about moderately attractive women who find love with hot and/or rich guys, and for stories about hot girls who are treated unfairly by even hotter girls.
Another approach, though, is to give the girl something she cares about more than finding Mr Right. So prosecuting a murderer, finding a lost artefact, solving the Middle East crisis�anything that isn�t based on her looks will help.
She can still have relationship issues, but if that�s her priority her physical appearance will have more influence than you might want.
The Blowhard
Characters who have lots of opinions and observations about life�usually a way for the writer to express their own insights�can become overbearing and preachy, even when it�s meant to be humorous.
The obvious way to prevent this is to have a lot going on in the character�s life. If they�re busy doing stuff, then their views can add to the story, providing voice, tone, mood, etc. Balance is important though.
Something else you can do to make it feel integral to the story, rather than tacked on, is to have the story directly challenge the character�s viewpoint. This requires the character to have a somewhat focused set of ideas (i.e. they're obsessed with one thing in particular).
So, a character who thinks women are just interested in guys with money meets a woman who makes him rethink his beliefs. Or a guy who believes aliens control the government finds himself embroiled in a plot to stop a galactic war.
The sooner you can establish his worldview, the sooner you can make life dismantle them, which is when the fun starts.
The Scaredy Cat
Some characters are defined by a fear they have. This fear will play a major role in the story ahead, but at the start of the story it can just be about showing the fear an d they're inability to overcome it.
Establishing this fear is necessary, but if you show this through inaction (they�re so scared they can�t act) it isn�t particularly interesting an d the character can come across as weak and feeble.
For example, if our main character is deathly scared of heights and later in the story she has to climb up a cliff face to save her child, then earlier in the story you might have a scene where the same character has to climb a ladder to get a toy stuck in a tree and just can�t do it.
By showing how extreme her fear is, her eventual overcoming it to save her daughter becomes that much more tense and engaging.
But a woman stuck on the first rung of a ladder unable to move isn�t the most dynamic of scenes.
Rather than have a character paralysed by an irrational fear, you can actually have them show a little bravery in that first scene and for it to go horribly wrong. This failure will not only reinforce their fear, making it even harder for them to accomplish their eventual goal, but it also gives the reader pause for thought when they realise the fear isn�t quite so irrational.
You like someone more if they at least try, and you have more concern for them when the fear is real and they�ve already failed once, especially if it cost them something.
Monday, November 3, 2014
What Is Your Story Missing?
Let�s say you�re familiar with most of the basic guidelines when it comes to writing fiction. You know none of these suggestions guarantees a good story, but you try to apply them as much as possible. Can�t hurt right?
So you have a sympathetic main character with a clear goal, obstacles in the way, high stakes, an action-packed opening, a minimum of adverbs, active characters and you keep it all moving at a breakneck pace.
But when you show this tightly constructed thrill-ride to people whose judgement you trust, you don�t get the reaction you were hoping for. They don�t hate it, in fact they have lots of nice things to say about it, but it just doesn�t grab them.
They like the genre, have no problem understanding what happens and why, and certainly there are bestselling books out there with similar premises and characters so this sort of story definitely can work, and yet... it just doesn�t.
What is the missing ingredient? And what�s the best way to make sure it isn�t missing from your story?
Of course there are many reasons why a story might not be working, but most of these are easily spotted by critique partners. While it can be tricky seeing weaknesses in our own writing, a fresh pair of eyes (and a healthy lack of tact) usually put us back on the straight and narrow.
The problem comes though when your writing gets to the level where the obvious mistakes have been weeded out and whatever�s preventing the reader from fully engaging isn�t easy to spot. You know from the many �damning with faint praise� reactions that something�s not quite right, but they can�t put their finger on it and neither can you.
What is often missing is a level of complication from the main character that colours the whole story, or in some cases it is present but in the wrong place.
Here�s an example of the kind of thing I mean: Our hero discovers that a great and revered writer didn�t write his greatest work and further investigations uncover a web of lies and deceits.
Now, could that story turn out to be interesting? Sure, it has the potential to be an entertaining read. So then, when do you think you would you feel like you knew that it was going to live up to that potential? When the plagiarism is discovered? When the reasons behind the lie are revealed? When life threatening consequences are encountered? When the investigation uncovers an even greater lie?
It�s hard to tell isn�t it? A lot depends on the specifics of the story and how events unfold. And if it takes a hundred pages to get to that point, the reader might give up before they get there or lose interest in the character even after things pick up.
There are ways around this, just fill those hundred pages with excitement to keep the reader distracted until the main plot kicks in. If the story has graphic violence, wacky characters, zombies, serial killers or whatever�s in the news (ebola strikes!) then you can get away with a main character who runs around doing enough stuff to keep the reader turning pages. Cheap tricks and a sense of urgency sell a lot of books.
But alternatively what if the story was changed to: Our hero discovers that his father, a great and revered writer, didn�t write his greatest work and further investigations uncover a web of lies and deceits.
All I�ve changed is the character�s relationship to his goal. Instead of pursuing an interesting puzzle, he�s now deeply invested in finding the truth. And this complication will affect how he deals with every single situation and person he encounters.
When should we learn that the great writer is our hero�s father? As early as possible, since this gives you the most bang for your buck. The greater investment for the character relates directly into greater investment for the reader.
If, though, you were convinced that you wanted to hold back the information and reveal it as a surprise later, then you would have to either resort to cheap tricks as before (and remember, cheap tricks work) or you have to come up with another, earlier complication.
Here�s another example: A woman at a big company is going for a promotion but her main rival is the boss�s son. As they try to one-up each other an attraction forms and they fall in love.
When do things get complicated? Probably not until she realises she�s falling for him. How long do we have to wait for that to happen? Probably quite a long time. First we have to set up the job, the promotion, the rival, and then show the attraction develop. That�s a lot of stuff that won�t be coloured by the complication (because the complication doesn�t exist yet).
It would be pretty jarring to have her fall in love at first sight in chapter one. Although not impossible to do�start off with a passionate one night stand (our girl has no time for love or a relationship), then head off to work to find the boss�s son has just transferred to her office, guess who? A cheap trick, certainly, but also a very workable one.
On the other hand, you can look at reworking the story. Maybe she�s the boss�s daughter but she wants to make it on her own so she gets a job as an intern in dad�s company.
Only one person will get the job after the trail period, so it�s dog eat dog, but her main rival is also devilishly handsome... Here the attraction to a rival is still gradually developed, but it�s in addition to the first complication. Does the spoilt rich girl have what it takes? Will she succeed without daddy�s help? Will she get discovered? It colours every action she takes.
When do we find out what she�s doing? Again, as early as possible is best. That doesn�t mean you have to reveal it completely. Her getting ready for work and pulling a cheap business suit out of wardrobe full of expensive designer gear can be enough to catch the reader�s interest and get them looking for clues.
Alternatively, you could start with her going: My name is Jenny Sinclair and my father is the eleventh richest man in America. He started out without a penny to his name, and that�s exactly what I plan to do.
As on-the-nose and telling as something like that is, it would still work. This isn�t about making the opening as engaging or gripping as possible. You can do that or not as you wish. What this is about is establishing a character-based complication as early as possible. One that affects every choice and decision the character makes.
Once you have this kind of a wrinkle established it can lift what may have been a mundane moment and add an extra level of tension to dramatic moments we�ve all seen before.
If you found this post useful please give it a retweet. Cheers.
Monday, August 25, 2014
Dramatic Action Is More Than Doing Stuff
Often the reason a scene doesn�t work, or doesn�t seem to have any life to it, is because what�s happening in the scene isn�t very interesting.
People may be doing things, moving around, attempting to reach their goals, but how they�re going about is too straightforward or too easy.
There are various ways to achieve things in life that are reasonable and sensible. You want to be a doctor, you go to medical school and study hard. If you portray that within a story it may feel realistic and true, but it won�t be very gripping.
There is more to a good story than holding a mirror up to life.
This is true of both big events and small. If I owe money to a loan shark who�s threatened to break my legs, and I go to my friend and borrow a grand and pay of the loan, that isn�t much of a story.
Equally, if I wake up late for work and I have an important meeting so instead of taking the train I call a taxi and pay a little extra to get to work on time, that isn�t interesting either.
The fact a character has a problem they need to deal with isn�t the part that makes a story engaging. It�s how the character goes about solving that problem. Doesn�t matter how high the stakes are, if the solution is just a matter of doing something obvious, what you end up with is a boring story.
It can be easy to fool yourself into thinking the more worked up or concerned a character is the more the reader will feel the same, and to some degree that is true. There are certain emotional triggers that will always get a response. A scene of a child being abused in some way will make most people react on a emotional level. But if you coast on that initial surge of emotion you will find it peters out pretty quickly.
Dramatic action requires the following:
1. The easy, obvious answers are unavailable. This should be for legitimate reason, not just because the character doesn�t feel like it.
2. The way forward should be unsmooth. Obstacles, unforeseen circumstances, foreseen but unavoidable circumstances, opponents, mistakes, lies, tricks, misunderstandings... all these can be used to make life difficult.
3. Consequences help raise tension. If what a character does is going to result in unpleasant after-effects, that helps make it more dramatically interesting. If every option has some unpleasantness associated with it, a dilemma, that will engage a reader strongly.
Effort does not count as action, dramatically speaking. If the path is straightforward but uphill, that doesn�t make it interesting. Doesn�t matter how much sweat and toil is involved, putting one step in front of the other is boring no matter how physically demanding.
Physical action on its own is not guarantee of dramatic action. If two people go to dinner in a nice restaurant and have a pleasant time, that may reflect a realistic first date, with some funny banter and romantic looks (and some beautifully described food), but there�s no action in the narrative.
When you have physical action without any dramatic element you are basically providing description not action. At the same time, you can have dramatic action with very little actual physical movement.
If a neighbour knocks on the door and asks for a cup of sugar and our character and the neighbour chat while he gets it for her, even though that introduces two characters to each other in a way that is both clear and pertinent, the writing of them in the kitchen, moving around, making gestures and looks, is me describing a scene. There is no dramatic action.
If I take the same scenario, but I add an escaped convict in the house holding a knife to the main character�s daughter�s throat, telling him to get rid of the neighbour or the kid gets it, then the MC and the neighbour at the door takes on a whole new complexion.
Even though the whole scene may now occur in the doorway with neither character showing any physical movement, there�s a lot of dramatic action going on. The MC has to get rid of the neighbour without making either the neighbour or the convict suspicious�even the most mundane conversation could be filled with landmines.
Of course, our MC could just say he has also run out of sugar and the neighbour could just leave, but you can feel the tension deflate out of what could be a marvellously fraught scene. So maybe I�ll change it to the neighbour coming round to invite our MC to a meeting of the neighbourhood watch, and while she�s here she could do a check of locks and security, she�s been on a training course and it would be no bother...
The more difficult you make the MC�s predicament, the more entertaining the scene will become, both for the writer and the reader.
People may be doing things, moving around, attempting to reach their goals, but how they�re going about is too straightforward or too easy.
There are various ways to achieve things in life that are reasonable and sensible. You want to be a doctor, you go to medical school and study hard. If you portray that within a story it may feel realistic and true, but it won�t be very gripping.
There is more to a good story than holding a mirror up to life.
This is true of both big events and small. If I owe money to a loan shark who�s threatened to break my legs, and I go to my friend and borrow a grand and pay of the loan, that isn�t much of a story.
Equally, if I wake up late for work and I have an important meeting so instead of taking the train I call a taxi and pay a little extra to get to work on time, that isn�t interesting either.
The fact a character has a problem they need to deal with isn�t the part that makes a story engaging. It�s how the character goes about solving that problem. Doesn�t matter how high the stakes are, if the solution is just a matter of doing something obvious, what you end up with is a boring story.
It can be easy to fool yourself into thinking the more worked up or concerned a character is the more the reader will feel the same, and to some degree that is true. There are certain emotional triggers that will always get a response. A scene of a child being abused in some way will make most people react on a emotional level. But if you coast on that initial surge of emotion you will find it peters out pretty quickly.
Dramatic action requires the following:
1. The easy, obvious answers are unavailable. This should be for legitimate reason, not just because the character doesn�t feel like it.
2. The way forward should be unsmooth. Obstacles, unforeseen circumstances, foreseen but unavoidable circumstances, opponents, mistakes, lies, tricks, misunderstandings... all these can be used to make life difficult.
3. Consequences help raise tension. If what a character does is going to result in unpleasant after-effects, that helps make it more dramatically interesting. If every option has some unpleasantness associated with it, a dilemma, that will engage a reader strongly.
Effort does not count as action, dramatically speaking. If the path is straightforward but uphill, that doesn�t make it interesting. Doesn�t matter how much sweat and toil is involved, putting one step in front of the other is boring no matter how physically demanding.
Physical action on its own is not guarantee of dramatic action. If two people go to dinner in a nice restaurant and have a pleasant time, that may reflect a realistic first date, with some funny banter and romantic looks (and some beautifully described food), but there�s no action in the narrative.
When you have physical action without any dramatic element you are basically providing description not action. At the same time, you can have dramatic action with very little actual physical movement.
If a neighbour knocks on the door and asks for a cup of sugar and our character and the neighbour chat while he gets it for her, even though that introduces two characters to each other in a way that is both clear and pertinent, the writing of them in the kitchen, moving around, making gestures and looks, is me describing a scene. There is no dramatic action.
If I take the same scenario, but I add an escaped convict in the house holding a knife to the main character�s daughter�s throat, telling him to get rid of the neighbour or the kid gets it, then the MC and the neighbour at the door takes on a whole new complexion.
Even though the whole scene may now occur in the doorway with neither character showing any physical movement, there�s a lot of dramatic action going on. The MC has to get rid of the neighbour without making either the neighbour or the convict suspicious�even the most mundane conversation could be filled with landmines.
Of course, our MC could just say he has also run out of sugar and the neighbour could just leave, but you can feel the tension deflate out of what could be a marvellously fraught scene. So maybe I�ll change it to the neighbour coming round to invite our MC to a meeting of the neighbourhood watch, and while she�s here she could do a check of locks and security, she�s been on a training course and it would be no bother...
The more difficult you make the MC�s predicament, the more entertaining the scene will become, both for the writer and the reader.
If you found this post of use, please give it a retweet. Cheers.
*
This post first appeared in December 2012.
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)
