Leading character

LC2010HIS

hey
i cannot believe a place like creative writing exists on boards. THANK YOU!!:D
So, I was listening to a podcast earlier and they were discussing characters. And Im wondering, what do you guys think makes a good character? Im currently editing my novel atm. But from your POV's ,what does it for you?

EileenG

For me, it's someone I can relate to. Doesn't have to be nice, but there has to be a feeling that in those circumstances, I might react like that (or would like to react like that).

I don't like black and white characters. I'd much rather have people who were lazy, economical with the truth, wear too much make-up, make jokes at the wrong time, and still find themselves having rip-roaring adventures.

Oh, and I really hate the whole Chosen One thing.

LC2010HIS

EileenG wrote: »

For me, it's someone I can relate to. Doesn't have to be nice, but there has to be a feeling that in those circumstances, I might react like that (or would like to react like that).

I don't like black and white characters. I'd much rather have people who were lazy, economical with the truth, wear too much make-up, make jokes at the wrong time, and still find themselves having rip-roaring adventures.

Oh, and I really hate the whole Chosen One thing.

so just realistic characters basically?
I read so much and i find some characters hit the button and others miss. Im evaluating atm. Do you think drama can take away from the character? Im also worried about having too many characters in my story. Does that ruin stories or does it matter?

pickarooney

I like characters who make me feel ambivalent towards them. I don't much care for ones that are overly appealing or repulsive.

EileenG

LC2010HIS wrote: »

so just realistic characters basically?
I read so much and i find some characters hit the button and others miss. Im evaluating atm. Do you think drama can take away from the character? Im also worried about having too many characters in my story. Does that ruin stories or does it matter?

Not necessarily realistic, but believable. Probably a bit larger than life, or they can be swamped by the drama.

Too many characters is a killer. If the reader is going back to check who someone is, you've lost her. If you have a lot of characters, see if you can get rid of some, or combine a few.

af_thefragile

I say the character needs to be human.
You can't have black and white characters. Good vs. Bad doesn't do it for me. Neither can the characters be unipolar. They need to have more than one dimensions to them.
I like lead characters who are strong and deep. They're at times struggling with emotional challenges. They hold strong views about things. They're focused and have a purpose. And it is important that you could relate to them in ways.

Probably the only reason I like Shakespeare is the amount of depth, dimensions and complexity he gives to the characters in his plays. My all time favorite character so far is that of Hamlet. He's young, high spirited, he's struggling to come to terms with his father's death and mother's betrayal, he's fueled by revenge and that's all he cares about through the whole play. He starts off in the play as a bit cowardly and confused but as the play progresses, he gets braver and more focused.

It all depends on the story as well. I think how well the character's mind and personality is portrayed in the story is what determines a good character from a bad one. Also good when you slowly get to know a character's personality through his actions rather than his thoughts and emotions alone. The character needs to surprise the reader at times but it should never be too unexpected or incoherent. You can't have a character go from being a good person to an evil person in an instant. The character's personality needs to progress, build up and change though the events that take place in the story evenly.

Anyway, I'm just rambling at this point... I really need to write more and talk less. Just waiting for to get done with these exams...

Mardy Bum

The iceberg theory is my first go to when creating a character. You really need a massive amount of information about them before you start writing. Appearance, history, their speech etc. I like mine to be 100% themselves through the novel or whatever it is unless ofcourse its a bildingsroman, but even if it is all of their actions should lean towards their final character type.

pathway33

LC2010HIS wrote: »

Im also worried about having too many characters in my story. Does that ruin stories or does it matter?

I have no idea . I'm writing a novel (70,000 words done) with 12 characters. 2 parents, 3 sons and their wives, an ex-girlfriend, 1 daughter, 1 neighbour and the parish priest. I don't think there's even a lead character. Either of the parents or 3 sons could make a claim to be lead character. I'm new to this

pickarooney

I had over 90 at last count (I consider anyone who has a speaking role a character; there were at least as many 'extras') but then I began the great cull. Fifteen obliterated from the first 8 chapters

I don't have a leading character either.

Spiritoftheseventies

Interesting thread. I think a good character has to be believable and has to evoke a bit of sympathy from the reader regardless of his morals.
A character without any motive has no merit IMO.
Take Ned Kelly in the True story of the Kelly Gang. Carey went about the process of going through his private letters from the archives and then used those letters to slowly chronicle the Kelly character.
Most people would have this idea that Kelly was just an out and out bandit but Carey did a terrific job delving into his background re his family and then the subsequent events that led to him becoming a fugitive.

davyjose

A character needs motive and conflict. Sometimes that motive can only become apparent as we learn more about the character (backstory, etc.); I think this goes for all characters in a novel too, however minor.

When we introduce conflict to the character, then we can make them unique, and human. This is where you can make your goody two shoes character and send them off the rails (for an extreme, obvious example).

The plot will react to the lead character's motive/conflict rather than the other way round, if they are drawn properly. The plot is created through them, what they want, and how they react to conflict. In a nutshell, the best characters are varied in their type, but are the ones who make you sympathise with their motives/ reaction to conflict.

Spiritoftheseventies

davyjose wrote: »

A character needs motive and conflict. Sometimes that motive can only become apparent as we learn more about the character (backstory, etc.); I think this goes for all characters in a novel too, however minor.

When we introduce conflict to the character, then we can make them unique, and human. This is where you can make your goody two shoes character and send them off the rails (for an extreme, obvious example).

The plot will react to the lead character's motive/conflict rather than the other way round, if they are drawn properly. The plot is created through them, what they want, and how they react to conflict. In a nutshell, the best characters are varied in their type, but are the ones who make you sympathise with their motives/ reaction to conflict.

Of course it also depends on the book. Some authors use different devices. Wilbur Smith having read a lot of his books was very much about making his characters very masculine and heroic while also revealing the scenery.
Then you had Thomas Wolfe who liked to expose the flaws in his characters which he did brilliantly in Bonfire of the Vanities.
For me though i think Ulysses is the best case of how characters are portrayed and that is through their thoughts.
Stephen Dedalus was very much introverted while the main character was Bloom who was very much a day dreamer.

LC2010HIS

Redemption also makes a good character as Shakespeare and others have shown us
One of the themes in my story

Spiritoftheseventies

Yes Shakespeare being a prime example. All the main charachtors Iike Iago (Othello), Brutus and Cassius (Julius Caesar) and Lady MacBeth (MacBeth) were all flawed but they all had their motives. If the leading character has no motive he is made redundant as such.

davyjose

LC2010HIS wrote: »

Redemption also makes a good character as Shakespeare and others have shown us
One of the themes in my story

Redemption is a perfect example of motive/conflict. In this case the character has a negative motive (although we should still sympathise somewhat), and some kind of conflict occurs, which causes the character to change. think darth Vader.

Spiritoftheseventies

davyjose wrote: »

Redemption is a perfect example of motive/conflict. In this case the character has a negative motive (although we should still sympathise somewhat), and some kind of conflict occurs, which causes the character to change. think darth Vader.

Shakespeare didnt write Star wars. Just kidding. Yes that is a good example but I dont necessarily think every character finds redemption.

davyjose

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

but I dont necessarily think every character finds redemption.

Of course not. but redemption is just one aspect of how a character can change, or deal with conflict. Usually if the protagonist is nasty, he finds redemption, but not always: I'm thinking of Patrick Bateman in American Psycho. The guy remains completely dislikeable throughout. but these situations are rare enough, and there are other ways in which he changes (if not redeems himself).

LC2010HIS

To avoid making another thread, anyone want to discuss redemption on this thread ? And how it ties in with the character..
I also do not believe in black and white aka - hero and villian - I believe in the grey. I think this is why redemption is great.
We relate to characters who are redeemed. As, everyone makes a mistake at some stage and to be redeemed at the end, helps character change and develop

pickarooney

If a character is consistently entertaining, I see no need for him to be in conflict or in search of redemption or any of that buzz.

davyjose

pickarooney wrote: »

If a character is consistently entertaining, I see no need for him to be in conflict or in search of redemption or any of that buzz.

have you any examples? i can't think of one.

Spiritoftheseventies

davyjose wrote: »

have you any examples? i can't think of one.

There were a few of them in Bonfire of the Vanities.

Antilles

pickarooney wrote: »

If a character is consistently entertaining, I see no need for him to be in conflict or in search of redemption or any of that buzz.

I've found that most humour comes from conflict of some sort.

Arfan

How about character development? I've always had trouble with that. My leading characters always seem to come out much the same as they went in. A little older and a little wiser perhaps. What is character development even? Is it as simple as the protagonist learning that picking fights with seven foot Russians is a bad idea?

damselnat

Sort of along the same lines, what about liking your "main" character? I've just finished a novel I've been writing for the last 2 years, and even though I started off myself feeling a little sympathetic towards him, even though he was not a particularly pleasant character, but as it went on he becomes more dislikable, there is redemption (seeing as we're on that topic), but I never got to warm to the character myself, I enjoyed writing from his POV, and having him as a character, but I didn't even like him, anyone else found this? I mean on the other hand, another character I had I loved, and loved writing, but the lead character was more complex, and I could never find my own sympathy for him again, what does anyone else think about this, what your own feelings should be towards your own main characters that are meant to be sympathetic or empathetic in some way, even if not necessarily actually likeable?

Irishbodhi

Arfan wrote: »

How about character development? I've always had trouble with that. My leading characters always seem to come out much the same as they went in. A little older and a little wiser perhaps. What is character development even? Is it as simple as the protagonist learning that picking fights with seven foot Russians is a bad idea?

Personaly I think of character development as a change in the characters outlook or mentality, manifested through different actions than those he would have performed at the beginning of your story. This could be both in a good and bad sense. Am I making any sense?

pickarooney

damselnat wrote: »

Sort of along the same lines, what about liking your "main" character? I've just finished a novel I've been writing for the last 2 years, and even though I started off myself feeling a little sympathetic towards him, even though he was not a particularly pleasant character, but as it went on he becomes more dislikable, there is redemption (seeing as we're on that topic), but I never got to warm to the character myself, I enjoyed writing from his POV, and having him as a character, but I didn't even like him, anyone else found this? I mean on the other hand, another character I had I loved, and loved writing, but the lead character was more complex, and I could never find my own sympathy for him again, what does anyone else think about this, what your own feelings should be towards your own main characters that are meant to be sympathetic or empathetic in some way, even if not necessarily actually likeable?

I had a lot of that with the various characters in my book. I actively hated a few of them, and not in the good way, as though they had invented themselves. Others I loved for no particular reason. What's interesting is how other people perceive the same characters in totally different ways. There's no doubt some psychological explanation for it, but in general it's hard to write a character that everyone will love or hate.

dawvee

damselnat wrote: »

Sort of along the same lines, what about liking your "main" character? I've just finished a novel I've been writing for the last 2 years, and even though I started off myself feeling a little sympathetic towards him, even though he was not a particularly pleasant character, but as it went on he becomes more dislikable, there is redemption (seeing as we're on that topic), but I never got to warm to the character myself, I enjoyed writing from his POV, and having him as a character, but I didn't even like him, anyone else found this? I mean on the other hand, another character I had I loved, and loved writing, but the lead character was more complex, and I could never find my own sympathy for him again, what does anyone else think about this, what your own feelings should be towards your own main characters that are meant to be sympathetic or empathetic in some way, even if not necessarily actually likeable?

I don't think you have to like any of your characters, but the key is having characters that are compelling to read about in some way. Making the character likeable is just one possible strategy. Look at American Psycho, for example - no one is meant to like or sympathise with the protagonist, he's just a train wreck that's fascinating to watch.

Gibson101

LC2010HIS wrote: »

hey
i cannot believe a place like creative writing exists on boards. THANK YOU!!:D
So, I was listening to a podcast earlier and they were discussing characters. And Im wondering, what do you guys think makes a good character? Im currently editing my novel atm. But from your POV's ,what does it for you?

I like characters that are soaked in conflict & realism. Sometimes you always have the one character in a book or novel that's just there to make up the numbers, However they are often there to lend support to lead characters. What I'm trying to say is, I want something to jump up out of the page at me and feel I could possibly resonate with this person or at best, know this person.

LC2010HIS

my main character takes on a life of her own :rolleyes:
Im always like "what are you doing?"
And the fact i talk about my characters like their real - i think thats a good sign.