Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Veyrael A lot of the time when I'm writing my fanfic, I go at it with a simple basic idea of how I want a scene to go. Beyond that, I pretty much just let the story write itself. What you also want to avoid is stereotyping; a shy character usually doesn't stay shy the entire story. It also helps to come up with a reason why they feel or act the way they do. |
normally I would tend to disagree with that- I like to do a lot of planning in my head and often find that unless I've done a sort of psychological profile of a character, their actions and words are inconsistent- but I do agree to a certain point that it is sometimes good to, as they say, "hit the ground running." Although I would disagree on the point of stereotyping: sometimes stereotypes are a great way to start. Beginning with a basic stereotype, a basic archetype for a character, make initial planning easier and smoother. Using your example of shy: if you want to have a shy character, it is often good to start writing a character who is shy with the schema of things associated commonly associated with "shy" in mind. If I'm going to just pick up a pen and go and "let the character write itself," stereotypes are a good place to start (thought not to finish, of course. developed characters shouldn't be stereotypes. but we're all professionals, so I don't think I need to insult you all by telling you that)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Navi007 I entirely disagree. It is extoordinarly difficult to write a story in which the character is unfamilliar to you. If they have no history, no likes, no dislikes, nothing deep at all, then your story will be just as shallow. All those little details that go into a character are the major deciding factors into how they act and think. Without a map to guide their actions, their actions become entirely contrived. |
I think, though, that although a physically written character profile is important for beginning writers or those among us who are especially organized, sometimes mental mapping is just as effective. Characters, like people, make unprecedented decisions, do unpredictable things outside the parameters of their usual range of action. Characters are also constantly changing, both throughout the story and throughout the process of editing.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Navi007 If you go through half of a story not knowing the depth of your character, you're missing out on a large variety of things that could have developed them better had you known them so. |
again, a fair point, but that's where editing comes in.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Safer In the same respect, a writer can come up with the basic personality of his character, then write with that character in a couple of scenarios, each varying in degrees of stress and emotion, and find out that the character deals with certain problems differently than expected. |
I'm not really sure I agree with this part, though. The parallel can not really be drawn between meeting a guy at a party and then getting to know him, if only because the guy you meet is a real person. He has a wealth of past experiences, triumphs and tragedies, etc. His personality is a product of his own biology and the world that exists around him. You invented nothing of this guy: you simply observed him. Characters, however, are not things to be observed. I think that while it's sometimes good to start writing a character with just a few personality traits in mind, it's extremely important to keep in mind the questions of "why?" and "how?" I could write a million scenes with a character in a multitude of situations. I could come up with a mental map of how they react in such and such kind of situation and surprise myself. But unless there were some kind of link, some kind of consistency, the character isn't layered: just scattered.
As Freudian a concept as it sounds, sometimes I think that the best way to write a character is to come up with a life story for them before writing, down to all the gritty details, all the flashbulb memories, all the moments that the character himself may have forgotten but you, the writer, remember. If we consider all of the elements which affected the shaping of this character, it makes the character easier to write.
I find it easy to take the following approach if I want to write by using just a few qualities I have in mind: write the character into a couple of situations. Reread them, and consider what kind of childhood and history would create this kind of character. Then consider what kind of interests and other traits this kind of character would have based on this past. Then write some more scenes in some more situations using these qualities. Then think about what other sort of past experiences and situations would be the cause of or caused by these qualities. Consider these situations and what would come of them, how they would affect the personality traits of this person. Use these newly considered personality traits to write more. Repeat. Etc. It's gradual, but it's an attempt at layering and realism and consistency.
But I guess in the end writing a character is about using what works the best for you as a writer. potayto, potahto I suppose.