Forum: Author Hangout

The advice seems similar to what Larry Niven has gone on record as doing - write out a scene in full, then put it aside and not using it except as background advising the actions of characters.

I agree, the advice is sensible, though her takeaway from it seems a bit extreme. While I agree that character plays a bigger role than plot, it doesn't mean that the overall plot is immaterial.

Anne Lamott is famous for writing unstructured literary fiction, full of little homilies and reminiscences.

I'm not sure her advice has much relevance to a site like SOL, where writing about characters for the sake of the characters (the 'C' in Orson Scott Card's MICE quotient) falls a long way behind considerations like plot, world-building and lashings of gratuitous, unrealistic sex ;-)

AJ

I'm not sure her advice has much relevance to a site like SOL, where writing about characters for the sake of the characters (the 'C' in Orson Scott Card's MICE quotient) falls a long way behind considerations like plot, world-building and lashings of gratuitous, unrealistic sex ;-)

That's sorta what I thought, though I was contrasting her work with the massive world-building in science-fiction and fantasy novels, as opposed to her 'personal reflective' stories about people coping with issues like death, illness, families and other basic family crises.

Does not make sense to me.

My characters grow as the story progresses. I sometimes have to go back and change something that is now out of character. I'm not that detailed of a planner.

Again, the basic advice seems spot on. By doing an initial 'get to know your character' exercise makes sense—though few of us seem to actually do that. Then again, if it makes sense for the main character, then shouldn't you also do it for the secondary or even tertiary characters?

Again, the basic advice seems spot on. By doing an initial 'get to know your character' exercise makes sense

I read several "build your character" articles that said you should create a profile of your character. What they looked like. Their education. Their family, friends, relations. What they liked and disliked. Favorite color, food, hobbies, etc. And so on. They said you would hardly use any of it in your story, but it's for you, the author, to really know your character. I never thought much of that advice.

It's called inflation. :)

Correct. 2 pounds or 27 yen is different than the value in dollars, but increasing a figure is the very definition of inflation.

By simply 'filling in the list' you are creating an artificial construct, a collection of traits, what your character really needs is a soul, a chance to live on the page, act and react to the situations they encounter.

Agreed. The key to character creation, is putting them into unexpected (not planned) situations, and watching how they respond, and watching as they grow, independent of your story, breathing new life into it. No list will give you those sorts of insights.

As always, the problem with backstory is that it's both dry and dead, containing nothing of the actual character himself, just your list of his/her history. Making backstory come alive takes a lot of work, spreading it out. But recounting dry details in the first chapter is almost guaranteed to kill, or at least seriously wound, a story.

They said you would hardly use any of it in your story, but it's for you, the author, to really know your character. I never thought much of that advice.

I agree, while exploring how a character would react in a specific circumstance would help, knowing vague, immaterial background details wouldn't.

I let the characters speak to me for while, getting to know who he or she is.

I've always—at least, until recently—done things a bit differently. Rather than start writing immediately, I'll figure out the basic plot, establish who the various characters are and their relationship to each other, then I'll put the story aside, letting the plot (and characters) develop without my stressing over it, letting my subconscious take over.

Typically, my characters' personality rarely surprise me, but when their values affect the story, I'm after surprised where they take the story. But those are examples of the actual characters acting independently of any preordained author schedule of events—which the author was warning about.

But, when I get into trouble, is when there's something about a particular character (typically, where certain readers interpret the characters' action in a way I never anticipated. So that's less 'the character is wrong for the story' as it is 'heading off trouble' before it begins and readers quit the story mid-way in, giving me time to take in those particular views into consideration. I don't actually change those problematic characters, instead I address the readers' perceptions, casting the characters' actions in a new light by exploring other aspects of their existing personality.

But again, those are unexpected character issues which are difficult to anticipate. :(

That said: my last two books seem especially problematic, as the MC in one seemed to be tired of his role as the central leader of the main characters, and kept demurring, or the newest book's two lead characters just never seemed to capture readers' attention—largely because of the MC's doubts about those surrounding her, and of reality at large. But … that seems to be mainly the result to changes to my writing style, resulting from 'concentration' issues on my part.

If a character doesn't work out, feed them steroids so they get their reality-TV physique the modern way.

AJ

If a character doesn't work out, feed them steroids so they get their reality-TV physique the modern way.

More likely I'd Clint Eastwood their ass, shooting them in the face just to shut them the hell up! That way, hopefully the best character will rise out of the crisis that results. Hopefully!

Ok, so some I put on retainer for future stories, but mostly if the character ain't working, fire 'em.

That was my other thought, as I hear of tertiary characters' taking over the story much more often than I do authors changing the entire plot mid story. Though they typically stick to their original story outline (refuting her assertion entirely), it seemed changing to those more dynamic characters for the exiting story seemed more logical than trashing the entire story premise.

There are times that a minor character and the scenes where they play a major part does not fit in with the tone of the rest of the story. In that case those characters and the scenes where they play a major part would be destined to the cutting room floor.

Now, if the story takes a turn that the MC starts to not work out, then I would ask a few questions.

Is there a reason for the change in character of the main character?
If the person described as the MC actually the MC?
Is the turn in the story important enough for the overall story that the MC would need to adapt to the new reality?

Now, if the story takes a turn that the MC starts to not work out, then I would ask a few questions.

Is there a reason for the change in character of the main character?

An excellent question, though in most cases, the characters (in most instances of Writer's Block) refuse to act out the role you've predefined for them, as they feel it conflicts with their basic nature. Thus, sometimes, you need to step back and ask why the character wouldn't act as you want them too.

Is the person described as the MC actually the MC?

That's the reason for these exercises, so you'll know, ahead of time, whether the character fits the role or not. Though again, when they don't, it's typically for utterly unanticipated reasons.

But, as I'd mentioned earlier, many authors specific characters trying to 'take over' a story, which often indicates a weak MC, though their solution is usually to create a separate story for the problematic character, while leaving the weak MC as he is. :(

Is the turn in the story important enough for the overall story that the MC would need to adapt to the new reality?

Each time I've encountered these situations—despite how long it typically takes to realize there is an issue, when I let them do what they want, the story is much better as a result. Since the characters actually live in the story, while the author merely visits every few days, they know it better than you do, while also realizing how they respond to the other characters, something the author might never have stopped to consider.

I can't imagine my MC not working out, to me they are the story.

Agreed. The only thing is, the ONLY time a character becomes a problem, the author is typically the very last to know, as it's all in readers' individual interpretations of them. However, if a large segment takes exception to a given character, it helps knowing upfront, so you can adjust and counter it. Which is why Content/Structural Editors charge top dollar!

I've had a few crop up over my relatively short (8 year) history.

my editors never see any of my stories until I have finished* and self edited the story at least twice. in seperate months.

I havent had an issue with any character, just their wording of things which needed to be realigned. little tidbits, and not character altering.

In my case, aside from issues my Content editor raises early on, I'm usually alerted when readers either criticize a particular person (typically, they dislike my strong female secondary characters, but used to aggressive women, apparently never having had sisters. But, it's a frequent motif of mine, so I'm surprised when it keeps coming up.

Otherwise, in my more recent stories, some stories are met with utter silence, at which point I'm forced to do a deep dive, to discover the underlying interest in the lack of response, which typically requires physically watching a beta-reader (usually someone in the family) and whenever the put the story aside, I check the passage, as if they break in the middle of a passage, if often reflects when something troubles them, breaking their concentration. Often, they just have to pee, but you also learn things on the few times it's not.

I dislike calmly accepting silence. I prefer direct arguments, as then I know what the issues are.

But often I fall in love with another character and it plays hell with my original plot line. But it also refreshes the narrative, like a new love affair, it complicates the MC's life, which makes for a more complex story.

That's what I was, somewhat obliquely, referring to about other characters hijacking the story, though that seems to be a separate issue.

But, in the end, I suspect that Anne was simply never much into plots, instead largely writing about characters, frequently non-fiction biographical pieces too, in which plot play NO role whatsoever.

a story about overweight, unkempt pigeon detectives strains credibility. Slightly. Speaking of #2 and pigeons...

He could be a detective working for the Racing Pigeon Association who is investigating allegations of cheating and betting fraud in official races.