As I was fumbling about on the web the other day it occurred to me that Shakespeare was wrong.
Now, this isn't something I generally say about the Bard, but he said "The play's the thing." I think that, perhaps, the name may be the thing.
Eddie Izzard happens to be one of my favorite comedians. He has a bit on the album Dressed to Kill where he discusses the 1950's rocker Arnold George Dorsey, better known by the name of the German composer he adopted: Englebert Humperdinck. His bit includes a "discussion" between Dorsey and his manager:
"But I like being Gerry Dorsey. It's a good name!"
"But you need a better one. How about Hinkleburt Slapdiback?"
"What? NO!"
"Satliborg Fistibuns?"
"NOO!"
And so on. It's a remarkably funny bit that also, like much of Eddie's comedy, tends to have two levels, including a level where it's no longer a parody and is actually quite true.
As writers, we need to seek out names that have some kind of connection to us, and to our characters. Names can demonstrate ethnicity, such as Jaime Tavala, the unfortunate soldier in the prologue to Counterattack.
Names can indicate power and strength, or be a source of amusement. Depending on what you're writing, you can place emphasis on either aspect. Terry Pratchett is a master of this. His characters include:
Sergeant Colon
Samuel Vimes
Captain Carrot
(Of the Ankh-Morpork City Watch.)
Esmeralda "Grannie" Weatherwax
Gytha "Nanny" Ogg
(Of the Lancre Coven)
and of course:
Moist Von Lipwig. (Yes, his first name is "Moist." Is it there any doubt why he grew up to be a con man who changes names and identities like underwear?)
Names change based on time periods as well as ethnicity and location. Consider Larry Niven's excellent work, A World Out of Time. The basic premise is a man dying of cancer in 1970 has himself frozen until he can be safely revived and cured. Two hundred years later he is "revived" by the State and his personality is "injected" into the body of a mindwiped criminal. He is then sent on a lengthy star mission to expiate his debt to the State that brought him back to life.
The main representative of the State is a man who introduces himself to the main character as "Pierce, for the State." Later in the book, when the main character steals the spaceship and decides to chart his own course through the stars, we discover that over two hundred years the name "Pierce" has changed somewhat to "Peerssa."
I'm sure it takes only a few moments to consider which genres each of the following names should be placed into:
Tynust
Vace Berakon
Ted Philson
If I were writing a fantasy fiction story, Tynust would be a good name for an aging smith. It seems to have a gravitas associated with it, like that of a master craftsman, with scarred and strong hands that are curiously gentle.
Vace Berakon almost has to be a hotshot starfighter pilot, probably too young to really comprehend the dangers of ship to ship combat in a vacuum, and convinced that he's immortal.
Ted Philson would make a good detective. Slightly corrupt, but only because he needs to be to get the job done, Ted's not above using "dropsy evidence" to gain a conviction when he knows the perp is guilty and he just can't prove it.
Each of these names were generated randomly from the following sites:
Tynust - http://www.rinkworks.com/namegen/fnames.cgi?d=checked&f=3 (Reload the site to generate new names.)
Vace Berakon - http://donjon.bin.sh/scifi/name/ (This site also features a fantasy name generator, as well as some Star Wars and Star Trek name generation as well, if you're interested in writing fan fiction.)
Ted Philson - http://www.kleimo.com/random/name.cfm (This site uses census data to generate random names, and allows you to set an "obscurity level" to determine how uncommon the name you generate is. At last! A use for census data that doesn't involve seeking excuses to give our tax money away!)
I'd like you to take a moment and continue to work on your character development. Use the random name generators to generate one name from each genre: SciFi, Fantasy, and Modern, and write a brief description of the character you think the name describes.
I'll bet you end up using one or more of them down the road.
Write On!
*****
Christopher Rivan
Virgins Slain, Dragons Rescued.
Reasonable rates for all budgets!
http://chrisrivan.blogspot.com/
Chris.Rivan@Yahoo.com
Showing posts with label characters. Show all posts
Showing posts with label characters. Show all posts
Monday, July 19, 2010
Monday, July 5, 2010
Essay: Why You SHOULD Use Real People as Characters
Making believable characters is a difficult process for any writer. In previous essays I've discussed how important it is to know your characters, inside and out, but today I want to talk about something a little different.
I am of the mind that the most realistic characters come from life. The four tightly-knit characters of Crossed Swords are actually modeled on a semi-professional paintball team I played with from 1994 through 1999. Although it was actually a ten man team, there were four of us; Shawn and Mike (two brothers), my roommate Ted, and myself, who spent most of our off-the-field time together. In fact, in 1995 when my home was flooded thanks to a group of environmentalists whining so loudly that Pierce County decided not to dredge the river for gravel (causing a mere $122 million in property damage and rendering hundreds of families homeless-- but at least the Dolly Varden trout population had safe spawning grounds) I moved in with Shawn and Mike for three weeks, and then Ted and I got an apartment together.
It was during this time that the inspiration for Crossed Swords came to me-- literally in a dream-- and there was never the slightest bit of question who would be the "stars." They were in the dream after all.
Unfortunately, there's a certain Mary Sue element to this. The arguably "main" character is David, who is, for all intents and purposes, me. There are certain notable differences. I've never in my life wanted to be a ranger. While I've done the Boy Scouts thing, the idea of running around in the woods getting rained on, far from a gaming rig, copy of Unreal Tournament, high speed internet connection, and a bunch of geeks to headshot just isn't my bag, baby. I'm also not particularly attracted to elves (nor is Michael).
These things aside, if you can honestly look at the people around you, I think you'll find some great examples of characters to include in your writing. The problem is, you have to look honestly. Stephen King is a master of this. His characters are generally lifelike and multi-dimensional. They have hidden flaws and quirks of personality. They get horny. They eat McDonald's. They drive 2003 Nissan Sentras with dented fenders from that time when they pulled into the Lowe's parking lot and there was a cart out there that they didn't see.
There are hundreds and hundreds of little details that real people have in their lives, from the clothes they wear to the schools they attended and the activities they choose for hobbies. More than that, real people are consistently inconsistent. We all have things we do that are the opposite from what we believe. (I'm not talking about flat out lying. After all, there's only one Barack Obama-- thank God.)
Here are a couple of cliche' examples you've probably seen in your life:
1) The athletic coach or PE teacher constantly admonishing you to push harder or eat healthier or work out more-- while he munches a doughnut or simply looks like an egg with feet.
2) The parent who smokes/drinks/does drugs but tries to convince his kids these are bad habits.
3) The boss who pretends to know what you do and therefore micromanage it, while complaining all the while that the echelons above him meddle in his sandbox too often.
4) The bleach-blond bimbo gossiping that her friend is "two-faced and shallow."
These are just a few quickies out of the pageant that is life. We all have inconsistencies and gaps in our logic that cause us to react in certain manners to certain stimuli. It's part of what makes us human. The trick, when developing believable characters, is to find those inconsistencies and use them as the foundation for your characters.
A few months ago I found a copy of Fantastic Realms: How to Draw Fantasy Characters, Creatures, and Settings in a local discount store for $2.00. I was about to put it back on the shelf when I knocked over a book across the aisle and a $1.50 sketch pad landed at my feet-- with a package of pencils on top of it. Not one to piss off the gods when I don't have to, I decided that $3.50 was worth it to try something new and interesting that I'd never done before.
As I've been learning to draw (which is precisely as difficult as I thought it was-- and I wish I'd picked this up years ago, along with music and programming, instead of concentrating quite so hard on theater and drama in high school) I've discovered what most artists and authors knew all along: it's a hell of a lot harder to draw (or create a character) from scratch than it is to create one from a model.
I can generally duplicate most of the pencil sketches in the book, and I have a number of saved panels from webcomics that I particularly love and work on duplicating, such as Oasis from Sluggy Freelance and backgrounds and some characters from Pawn (Warning! Adult themes and artwork. May be NSFW!) However, to just sit down and say, "I think I'll draw a goblin..."
...Let's just say I'm not that good and leave it at that.
So what I'm recommending is that you look around you at the people you interact with. Think about why they are where they are, doing what they do. Why is it that your waitress at the Waffle House spends her break reading String Theory and M Theory: a Modern Introduction? (No kidding. I actually saw this!) Why does the painted Barbie-Bimbo in the mall carry a camera with her wherever she goes?
In another essay I advised taking your notebook out and just sitting somewhere to watch life go by while you wrote and made notes. This is an amplification of that concept. Go sit on a bench at the mall and observe one person that walks past. (Try not to stalk them. I am not bailing your ass out of jail!) Try and find one or more things that are directly observable and contradictory about your model: A business suit and a belt buckle with Spider-Man on it. A $50 pedicure on dirty feet. A hat that says "Fuck You!" and a rosary.
After you've observed these visual inconsistencies and written them down, write a brief backstory to explain them. Think deep. For example:
The business suit/Spidey belt could be a salesman who just likes comics and has to dress professionally.
Or, it could be an act of quiet rebellion against the authority that forced him to grow up and assume adult responsibilities. It could be an overt act to connect with a younger generation-- as a classroom teacher I believe that my students deserve the respect of having someone in the front of the room that looks their best every day. When I taught 6th grade social studies and 7th grade computers I wore a tie every day. However, those ties ran a gamut from Marvin the Martian to Dilbert to Grover to The Cat in the Hat. The tie was there to demonstrate respect for my students. The silliness was there to connect with them.
Which of these two brief inconsistencies would make for a more rounded character in a story about a divorced dad trying to regain custody of his kids?
The $50 pedicure on dirty feet could be a lady who was out working in her yard and had to run a quick errand before taking a shower.
Or, it could be a manifestation of a mild schizophrenic behavior because she was sexually abused as a child and therefore has a disjointed view of attraction and repulsion. On one level she wants to attract male attention, hence the desire to have pretty feet, and on the other she wants to drive them away so they don't further abuse her, hence the unconcern for keeping herself clean.
Which one makes a better character in a story about a group of students trying to survive life in a dysfunctional high school?
Where Stephen King is so great in his storytelling is that he could take either or both of those characters and stick them in an untenable situation. This is where the masterwork of narrative really shines. These little inconsistencies in our character may be considered flaws. Like any flaws-- such as the fault lines in the earth's crust-- enough pressure causes fractures along them.
Consider what might happen to our divorced dad if his children tell him they'd rather stay with mom because she let's them do whatever they want, while he is trying to teach them self-discipline and respect for authority. How might his character "fracture"? Would he devolve in a desperate attempt to reconnect to his children, abandoning the suits in favor of jeans and tee shirts? Would he ossify, moving further down the path to "adulthood"? Think about Tom Hanks's character in Big. If you watch carefully, you'll notice that he starts out as an adult child (which is what he is), dressing in tee shirts and jeans and not really knowing how to present a mature appearance. By the end of the movie, however, just before he returns to his childhood, he is wearing professional attire with the aplomb of an adult, even though he desperately longs to return to just being a kid.
What would happen to our young lady with the dirty toes if she were assaulted again? Would she continue to spiral into a hell of self-hatred? Begin drug abuse? Finally confide in her family what happened to her and seek help that would let her overcome what happened?
These inconsistencies in character that we have observed are purely physical and external in nature, but they give us insight into the internal workings of the characters we are creating. I can't tell you for certain whether the real Mona Lisa ever walked around with a smirk, but I can tell you that to Leonardo Da Vinci, there was a real and important reason to paint her with her famously enigmatic smile.
If you know someone well, you may be able to use aspects of their character in your writing with more success. Because I spent so much time with the other Three Horsemen, it becomes easy to write with their voices. Ted was a consummate smart ass who lived to play the guitar. Shawn is a bit of a clown and a relentless romantic as well as a computer whiz kid who now writes video games in Germany (and still can't grow a beard to save his life). Michael is a natural leader and takes responsibility very seriously. (He was a college graduate at age 21 with three majors, a business owner at age 24, and currently owns several mixed martial arts schools in Washington and Oregon.)
Mark and Steve are not just Michael and Shawn, they are different people in their own right, but as you read Crossed Swords I hope the realism of the characters will shine through.
I hope I'm slightly less of a screw up than Dave.
Next week we'll further examine the idea of characters from life, while we explore reasons to not use real people as character models.
Write On!
*****
Christopher Rivan
Virgins Slain, Dragons Rescued.
Reasonable rates for all budgets!
http://chrisrivan.blogspot.com/
Chris.Rivan@Yahoo.com
I am of the mind that the most realistic characters come from life. The four tightly-knit characters of Crossed Swords are actually modeled on a semi-professional paintball team I played with from 1994 through 1999. Although it was actually a ten man team, there were four of us; Shawn and Mike (two brothers), my roommate Ted, and myself, who spent most of our off-the-field time together. In fact, in 1995 when my home was flooded thanks to a group of environmentalists whining so loudly that Pierce County decided not to dredge the river for gravel (causing a mere $122 million in property damage and rendering hundreds of families homeless-- but at least the Dolly Varden trout population had safe spawning grounds) I moved in with Shawn and Mike for three weeks, and then Ted and I got an apartment together.
It was during this time that the inspiration for Crossed Swords came to me-- literally in a dream-- and there was never the slightest bit of question who would be the "stars." They were in the dream after all.
Unfortunately, there's a certain Mary Sue element to this. The arguably "main" character is David, who is, for all intents and purposes, me. There are certain notable differences. I've never in my life wanted to be a ranger. While I've done the Boy Scouts thing, the idea of running around in the woods getting rained on, far from a gaming rig, copy of Unreal Tournament, high speed internet connection, and a bunch of geeks to headshot just isn't my bag, baby. I'm also not particularly attracted to elves (nor is Michael).
These things aside, if you can honestly look at the people around you, I think you'll find some great examples of characters to include in your writing. The problem is, you have to look honestly. Stephen King is a master of this. His characters are generally lifelike and multi-dimensional. They have hidden flaws and quirks of personality. They get horny. They eat McDonald's. They drive 2003 Nissan Sentras with dented fenders from that time when they pulled into the Lowe's parking lot and there was a cart out there that they didn't see.
There are hundreds and hundreds of little details that real people have in their lives, from the clothes they wear to the schools they attended and the activities they choose for hobbies. More than that, real people are consistently inconsistent. We all have things we do that are the opposite from what we believe. (I'm not talking about flat out lying. After all, there's only one Barack Obama-- thank God.)
Here are a couple of cliche' examples you've probably seen in your life:
1) The athletic coach or PE teacher constantly admonishing you to push harder or eat healthier or work out more-- while he munches a doughnut or simply looks like an egg with feet.
2) The parent who smokes/drinks/does drugs but tries to convince his kids these are bad habits.
3) The boss who pretends to know what you do and therefore micromanage it, while complaining all the while that the echelons above him meddle in his sandbox too often.
4) The bleach-blond bimbo gossiping that her friend is "two-faced and shallow."
These are just a few quickies out of the pageant that is life. We all have inconsistencies and gaps in our logic that cause us to react in certain manners to certain stimuli. It's part of what makes us human. The trick, when developing believable characters, is to find those inconsistencies and use them as the foundation for your characters.
A few months ago I found a copy of Fantastic Realms: How to Draw Fantasy Characters, Creatures, and Settings in a local discount store for $2.00. I was about to put it back on the shelf when I knocked over a book across the aisle and a $1.50 sketch pad landed at my feet-- with a package of pencils on top of it. Not one to piss off the gods when I don't have to, I decided that $3.50 was worth it to try something new and interesting that I'd never done before.
As I've been learning to draw (which is precisely as difficult as I thought it was-- and I wish I'd picked this up years ago, along with music and programming, instead of concentrating quite so hard on theater and drama in high school) I've discovered what most artists and authors knew all along: it's a hell of a lot harder to draw (or create a character) from scratch than it is to create one from a model.
I can generally duplicate most of the pencil sketches in the book, and I have a number of saved panels from webcomics that I particularly love and work on duplicating, such as Oasis from Sluggy Freelance and backgrounds and some characters from Pawn (Warning! Adult themes and artwork. May be NSFW!) However, to just sit down and say, "I think I'll draw a goblin..."
...Let's just say I'm not that good and leave it at that.
So what I'm recommending is that you look around you at the people you interact with. Think about why they are where they are, doing what they do. Why is it that your waitress at the Waffle House spends her break reading String Theory and M Theory: a Modern Introduction? (No kidding. I actually saw this!) Why does the painted Barbie-Bimbo in the mall carry a camera with her wherever she goes?
In another essay I advised taking your notebook out and just sitting somewhere to watch life go by while you wrote and made notes. This is an amplification of that concept. Go sit on a bench at the mall and observe one person that walks past. (Try not to stalk them. I am not bailing your ass out of jail!) Try and find one or more things that are directly observable and contradictory about your model: A business suit and a belt buckle with Spider-Man on it. A $50 pedicure on dirty feet. A hat that says "Fuck You!" and a rosary.
After you've observed these visual inconsistencies and written them down, write a brief backstory to explain them. Think deep. For example:
The business suit/Spidey belt could be a salesman who just likes comics and has to dress professionally.
Or, it could be an act of quiet rebellion against the authority that forced him to grow up and assume adult responsibilities. It could be an overt act to connect with a younger generation-- as a classroom teacher I believe that my students deserve the respect of having someone in the front of the room that looks their best every day. When I taught 6th grade social studies and 7th grade computers I wore a tie every day. However, those ties ran a gamut from Marvin the Martian to Dilbert to Grover to The Cat in the Hat. The tie was there to demonstrate respect for my students. The silliness was there to connect with them.
Which of these two brief inconsistencies would make for a more rounded character in a story about a divorced dad trying to regain custody of his kids?
The $50 pedicure on dirty feet could be a lady who was out working in her yard and had to run a quick errand before taking a shower.
Or, it could be a manifestation of a mild schizophrenic behavior because she was sexually abused as a child and therefore has a disjointed view of attraction and repulsion. On one level she wants to attract male attention, hence the desire to have pretty feet, and on the other she wants to drive them away so they don't further abuse her, hence the unconcern for keeping herself clean.
Which one makes a better character in a story about a group of students trying to survive life in a dysfunctional high school?
Where Stephen King is so great in his storytelling is that he could take either or both of those characters and stick them in an untenable situation. This is where the masterwork of narrative really shines. These little inconsistencies in our character may be considered flaws. Like any flaws-- such as the fault lines in the earth's crust-- enough pressure causes fractures along them.
Consider what might happen to our divorced dad if his children tell him they'd rather stay with mom because she let's them do whatever they want, while he is trying to teach them self-discipline and respect for authority. How might his character "fracture"? Would he devolve in a desperate attempt to reconnect to his children, abandoning the suits in favor of jeans and tee shirts? Would he ossify, moving further down the path to "adulthood"? Think about Tom Hanks's character in Big. If you watch carefully, you'll notice that he starts out as an adult child (which is what he is), dressing in tee shirts and jeans and not really knowing how to present a mature appearance. By the end of the movie, however, just before he returns to his childhood, he is wearing professional attire with the aplomb of an adult, even though he desperately longs to return to just being a kid.
What would happen to our young lady with the dirty toes if she were assaulted again? Would she continue to spiral into a hell of self-hatred? Begin drug abuse? Finally confide in her family what happened to her and seek help that would let her overcome what happened?
These inconsistencies in character that we have observed are purely physical and external in nature, but they give us insight into the internal workings of the characters we are creating. I can't tell you for certain whether the real Mona Lisa ever walked around with a smirk, but I can tell you that to Leonardo Da Vinci, there was a real and important reason to paint her with her famously enigmatic smile.
If you know someone well, you may be able to use aspects of their character in your writing with more success. Because I spent so much time with the other Three Horsemen, it becomes easy to write with their voices. Ted was a consummate smart ass who lived to play the guitar. Shawn is a bit of a clown and a relentless romantic as well as a computer whiz kid who now writes video games in Germany (and still can't grow a beard to save his life). Michael is a natural leader and takes responsibility very seriously. (He was a college graduate at age 21 with three majors, a business owner at age 24, and currently owns several mixed martial arts schools in Washington and Oregon.)
Mark and Steve are not just Michael and Shawn, they are different people in their own right, but as you read Crossed Swords I hope the realism of the characters will shine through.
I hope I'm slightly less of a screw up than Dave.
Next week we'll further examine the idea of characters from life, while we explore reasons to not use real people as character models.
Write On!
*****
Christopher Rivan
Virgins Slain, Dragons Rescued.
Reasonable rates for all budgets!
http://chrisrivan.blogspot.com/
Chris.Rivan@Yahoo.com
Friday, March 19, 2010
Link: Basic Plots
Sorry the blog is so late today, gentles. My middle school girls won a soccer game 5-1 and then I was a chaperon for their dance this evening. Interestingly enough, my responsibility as a chaperon is to prevent the identical behavior that I myself was desperately trying to engage in when I was their age.
I'm also still trying to balance out the blog here on some kind of regular schedule. My plan is to provide fiction examples on at least two days a week, Tuesdays will be a response to whatever the twittered writing prompt was on Monday, and later in the week will be an excerpt from Crossed Swords.
Fridays I think I'm going to link to other writing information I've discovered throughout the week.
Over at the IPL (Internet Public Library) there's a list of basic plots at which you might want to take a look. The link is HERE.
What I like the most about this particular link is that, with a little thought, we can use the plots in all manner of ways. Consider Simon Green's epic space opera Deathstalker. At least six of the "20 Plots" list are used in that book. (With 1.5 million words in the series, I'm surprised he didn't hit all of them!)
What if you took three basic plots and wove them together? Would that enrich your current project?
To me, the question then becomes, "Can I pull this off without making it so complex that the reader needs a Valium and an aspirin to get through?" If the answer is yes, then there's a good chance it might add a nifty little twist in there.
Another idea, from the character development standpoint, is to use two different plots for two different characters at the same time. Consider the Harry Potter series. While Harry had a specific plotline in each book, as well as an overarching plot that encompassed the series, Snape had another plot that he was following. If we were to use the examples from the list, Harry would be following the "Quest" or "Crime Pursued by Vengeance," but Snape (without giving it away if you haven't read the final book) may be considered as following the "Self-sacrificing for an ideal (love)" or "All Sacrificed for Passion" or even "Obstacles to Love."
To further understand character motivations I have sometimes written the same scene from the point of view of two or even more characters. The easiest way to do this is in first person, but third person works just as well if you're more comfortable with that. By doing this scene rewrite and explicitly following a different plot line with the second character, some surprising developments come to light.
This was supposed to be a simple link and somehow turned into a mini-essay, so I'll break it off here, but take a moment and see if some of your secondary characters (and the antagonist is usually one of them) could benefit with the addition of a plot line that specifically provides them a focus and raison d'etre.
Write on!
*****
Christopher Rivan
Virgins Slain, Dragons Rescued.
Reasonable rates for all budgets!
http://chrisrivan.blogspot.com/
Chris.Rivan@Yahoo.com
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Essay: On the Importance of Character
I'd like to take a moment and write today about something that I feel makes a good character. If you were to take the time to get your hands on copies of David Edding's opus The Belgariad you'll see some good characters and some great ones. The Belgariad is also continued in his sequel series, The Malloreon, and most of the characters continue, with a few dying off, and a few more being moved aside to make way for new ones.
One character who happens to be my favorite starts as a minor one in the first series, mentioned in several books, but only appearing near the end of book five. He's much more active in the second series and he moves from being a bad guy to being not only a major supporting protagonist, but actually the focus of the falling action.
This character is 'Zakath, Emperor of Boundless Mallorea. The Man of Ice, who finally melts.
Throughout the years I have given David Eddings a great deal of grief in blogs, writing forums, and Amazon.com reviews for his complete inability to develop more than five characters. Lady Polgara, of the Belgariad and Malloreon is repeated in Lady Poledra, her mother, in the same works, and also in Sephrenia in the Elenium and Tamuli, and the goddess Dweia in The Redemption of Althalus, which I think is just a bad, bad book.
Silk, the artful thief, is repeated both as Talen in the Elenium/Tamuli, but also in Althalus as Gher, the ten year old whiz kid who has the bright idea of going back in time and fighting the damn war a second time after the heroes had already won because it's more clever. (Privately, I think the publisher gave Eddings a word count that he hadn't hit, so he was forced to repeat his plot... three damn times.)
But 'Zakath? 'Zakath is the only major Eddings character to never be repeated anywhere in his writing. (By the way, the apostrophe is supposed to be in his name. I'll let you read Guardians of the West, the first book of The Malloreon to discover why.) In fact, the two series are named after their most important characters. The Belgariad is named after Garion, who earns the appellation "Bel" ("beloved") when he performs his first overt act of sorcery.
But who is the Malloreon? The title could refer to the fact that the main characters spend the last four books of five wandering around in Mallorea, the eastern continent, but I think it refers to a specific person: THE Malloreon, 'Zakath.
'Zakath is not only the only character Eddings never repeated, he's also Eddings strongest character after Belgarion himself. Much of the two series is written from Garion's point of view, so it's much easier to understand his motivations, but 'Zakath is a wholly different animal.
I'll not destroy the secret for you. I'll say only that, when he was young, 'Zakath was betrayed by someone he loved. After dreadful retribution was vested upon them, he discovered to his horror that the entire plot had been a complete fabrication of his deadliest enemy.
This is the kind of back story almost every character needs to have. In Crossed Swords, my characters pass through inns and beat hell out of bandits and other bad guys. I refer to these blokes as "third spear bearer on the left." They aren't terribly important to the story. The only thing we need to know about the innkeeper in Pelar is that he's slovenly, keeps a rancid tavern, and has no idea what customer service is until Dave physically threatens him. He's literally on two pages of the book. There's no real need to write his backstory. Now, if the plot of XS brings our happy adventurers back to his inn and he gets further involved in the story, then it might be necessary to flesh him out. Right now, though, he's just a woodcut.
On the other hand, General Gmorkyn is a lot more than a revisit of Lord Soth from Weis and Hickman's Dragonlance. Yes, he's dead. Yes, he's my version of a Death Knight.
However, General Gmorkyn is a battlefield leader, while Soth prefers to play politics and engage only major players directly in combat (Which is not to say that he doesn't lead troops or engage in battles when he needs to do so.). Gmorkyn delights in slaughtering the weak and helpless because it increases his personal power through his ability to create the Zime from the corpses of people he kills with his own hand. Soth prefers not to waste his time fighting those he considers animals.
Soth fell from grace because of his lust for an elven maid. He is redeemed by his love for her. Gmorkyn, without giving away his backstory... didn't.
For any character that is going to spend more than five pages in my writing, or is going to appear in a short story, I want to know the answers to at least four of the following six questions:
1) What is this character's greatest wish? (This may change throughout the story-- in fact, for a character to grow it probably should.)
2) What is this character's greatest fear? (This may also change throughout the story-- in fact, for a character to grow it probably should.)
3) What is the most recent highly positive thing to happen to this character (from his or her point of view.)? This alone can tell you a lot about the character. For a high school boy, it might be that he just got laid. For a sinister mage, it might be that his greatest enemy just suffered a dark defeat.
4) What is the most recent highly negative thing to happen to this character (from his or her point of view.)? Perhaps a courtier lost face before the king, or a samurai discovered that his son fled from battle.
5) What is the best thing to ever happen to this person?
6) What is the worst thing to ever happen to this person?
Take a look at my most recent short fiction, Awakening. Caleb Watkins, the young man in the story, is the only character. Before I wrote the actual story, I answered the first four questions:
1) Caleb Watkins's greatest wish is to become a professional baseball player. Deep inside, he knows that this probably won't happen because he doesn't have the arm to compete above the college level.
2) Caleb's greatest fear is that he will sustain an injury that will cost him his ability to play baseball.
3) The most recent positive thing that happened to Caleb was getting the cast removed from his left arm. Not only does it make it easier to sleep, but the arm seems to have healed properly and once he gets his strength back he should still be able to hit for the fence.
4) The most recent negative thing that Caleb experienced was breaking the radius of his left arm when he forward slid into second at an off season camp and came down with his wrist under him. The twelve weeks in the cast and two weeks of physical therapy cost him the rest of the camp, but thankfully have not interfered with his sophomore season.
If you go on to read the story, you'll see elements from this characterization used to round out what would otherwise be a very flat character. In less than 700 words, from the story alone, you can see that Caleb is a teenager who loves baseball so much that a school administrator uses it as a threat to enforce the tardy rules of the school-- and it even works because it alters where he keeps his alarm clock.
You also know that Caleb sleeps on his right side because of a habit that formed from having his arm in a cast. This not only helps round him out and make him human, it also gives me a place to put the monster-- most teenagers put one side of their bed against the wall to open up floor space in their room. If Caleb's left side of the bed is against the wall, then he has to be lying on his right in order to see the eyes open.
Little details like this are part of the reason why Stephen King's work is so powerful. King creates characters with real life flaws and motivations. We really, really care when Pennywise tears off Eddie's arm in It because we've grown to see Eds as a real person, flawed like us and perfect like us.
Where Eddings is so great in his early work is that even his flat characters have some of those flaws. Silk is a sarcastic thief who is in love with his uncle's wife, and who lies, cheats, steals, and murders, but won't deal in drugs with Sadi. Belgarath is a single-minded force for the Prophecy of Light who spends literally generations in the grossest kind of drunken debauchery. Furthermore, Belgarath thinks nothing of waylaying complete strangers and clubbing them unconscious or even murdering them just to get regional dress to move around in without being discovered.
Where Eddings fumbles from 2002 onward is in his inability to work beyond those roles. His dialogue through most of his works after that date is stilted and cliche, and his characters are boring rehashes of the same archtypes.
I was greatly saddened to hear that David Eddings passed away last year, and that his wife, Leigh, whom he loved to distraction, had preceded him in 2007. For all that I think his later work is horrible, I can't deny that I was very fortunate. You see, I was growing up at the same time that Belgarion was. When he stood on Greldik's ship and screamed at his Aunt Pol "You're not even human any more!" I was embroiled in my own adolescent arguments with my parents, who just didn't understand me, either. As each new book came out and chronicled Garion's exploits and growth, I tried to take to heart the lessons he learned as well.
In a very real way, I owe much of who I am today to Belgarion's example and the lessons Eddings presented in his books.
*****
Christopher Rivan
Virgins Slain, Dragons Rescued.
Reasonable rates for all budgets!
http://chrisrivan.blogspot.com/
Chris.Rivan@Yahoo.com
One character who happens to be my favorite starts as a minor one in the first series, mentioned in several books, but only appearing near the end of book five. He's much more active in the second series and he moves from being a bad guy to being not only a major supporting protagonist, but actually the focus of the falling action.
This character is 'Zakath, Emperor of Boundless Mallorea. The Man of Ice, who finally melts.
Throughout the years I have given David Eddings a great deal of grief in blogs, writing forums, and Amazon.com reviews for his complete inability to develop more than five characters. Lady Polgara, of the Belgariad and Malloreon is repeated in Lady Poledra, her mother, in the same works, and also in Sephrenia in the Elenium and Tamuli, and the goddess Dweia in The Redemption of Althalus, which I think is just a bad, bad book.
Silk, the artful thief, is repeated both as Talen in the Elenium/Tamuli, but also in Althalus as Gher, the ten year old whiz kid who has the bright idea of going back in time and fighting the damn war a second time after the heroes had already won because it's more clever. (Privately, I think the publisher gave Eddings a word count that he hadn't hit, so he was forced to repeat his plot... three damn times.)
But 'Zakath? 'Zakath is the only major Eddings character to never be repeated anywhere in his writing. (By the way, the apostrophe is supposed to be in his name. I'll let you read Guardians of the West, the first book of The Malloreon to discover why.) In fact, the two series are named after their most important characters. The Belgariad is named after Garion, who earns the appellation "Bel" ("beloved") when he performs his first overt act of sorcery.
But who is the Malloreon? The title could refer to the fact that the main characters spend the last four books of five wandering around in Mallorea, the eastern continent, but I think it refers to a specific person: THE Malloreon, 'Zakath.
'Zakath is not only the only character Eddings never repeated, he's also Eddings strongest character after Belgarion himself. Much of the two series is written from Garion's point of view, so it's much easier to understand his motivations, but 'Zakath is a wholly different animal.
I'll not destroy the secret for you. I'll say only that, when he was young, 'Zakath was betrayed by someone he loved. After dreadful retribution was vested upon them, he discovered to his horror that the entire plot had been a complete fabrication of his deadliest enemy.
This is the kind of back story almost every character needs to have. In Crossed Swords, my characters pass through inns and beat hell out of bandits and other bad guys. I refer to these blokes as "third spear bearer on the left." They aren't terribly important to the story. The only thing we need to know about the innkeeper in Pelar is that he's slovenly, keeps a rancid tavern, and has no idea what customer service is until Dave physically threatens him. He's literally on two pages of the book. There's no real need to write his backstory. Now, if the plot of XS brings our happy adventurers back to his inn and he gets further involved in the story, then it might be necessary to flesh him out. Right now, though, he's just a woodcut.
On the other hand, General Gmorkyn is a lot more than a revisit of Lord Soth from Weis and Hickman's Dragonlance. Yes, he's dead. Yes, he's my version of a Death Knight.
However, General Gmorkyn is a battlefield leader, while Soth prefers to play politics and engage only major players directly in combat (Which is not to say that he doesn't lead troops or engage in battles when he needs to do so.). Gmorkyn delights in slaughtering the weak and helpless because it increases his personal power through his ability to create the Zime from the corpses of people he kills with his own hand. Soth prefers not to waste his time fighting those he considers animals.
Soth fell from grace because of his lust for an elven maid. He is redeemed by his love for her. Gmorkyn, without giving away his backstory... didn't.
For any character that is going to spend more than five pages in my writing, or is going to appear in a short story, I want to know the answers to at least four of the following six questions:
1) What is this character's greatest wish? (This may change throughout the story-- in fact, for a character to grow it probably should.)
2) What is this character's greatest fear? (This may also change throughout the story-- in fact, for a character to grow it probably should.)
3) What is the most recent highly positive thing to happen to this character (from his or her point of view.)? This alone can tell you a lot about the character. For a high school boy, it might be that he just got laid. For a sinister mage, it might be that his greatest enemy just suffered a dark defeat.
4) What is the most recent highly negative thing to happen to this character (from his or her point of view.)? Perhaps a courtier lost face before the king, or a samurai discovered that his son fled from battle.
5) What is the best thing to ever happen to this person?
6) What is the worst thing to ever happen to this person?
Take a look at my most recent short fiction, Awakening. Caleb Watkins, the young man in the story, is the only character. Before I wrote the actual story, I answered the first four questions:
1) Caleb Watkins's greatest wish is to become a professional baseball player. Deep inside, he knows that this probably won't happen because he doesn't have the arm to compete above the college level.
2) Caleb's greatest fear is that he will sustain an injury that will cost him his ability to play baseball.
3) The most recent positive thing that happened to Caleb was getting the cast removed from his left arm. Not only does it make it easier to sleep, but the arm seems to have healed properly and once he gets his strength back he should still be able to hit for the fence.
4) The most recent negative thing that Caleb experienced was breaking the radius of his left arm when he forward slid into second at an off season camp and came down with his wrist under him. The twelve weeks in the cast and two weeks of physical therapy cost him the rest of the camp, but thankfully have not interfered with his sophomore season.
If you go on to read the story, you'll see elements from this characterization used to round out what would otherwise be a very flat character. In less than 700 words, from the story alone, you can see that Caleb is a teenager who loves baseball so much that a school administrator uses it as a threat to enforce the tardy rules of the school-- and it even works because it alters where he keeps his alarm clock.
You also know that Caleb sleeps on his right side because of a habit that formed from having his arm in a cast. This not only helps round him out and make him human, it also gives me a place to put the monster-- most teenagers put one side of their bed against the wall to open up floor space in their room. If Caleb's left side of the bed is against the wall, then he has to be lying on his right in order to see the eyes open.
Little details like this are part of the reason why Stephen King's work is so powerful. King creates characters with real life flaws and motivations. We really, really care when Pennywise tears off Eddie's arm in It because we've grown to see Eds as a real person, flawed like us and perfect like us.
Where Eddings is so great in his early work is that even his flat characters have some of those flaws. Silk is a sarcastic thief who is in love with his uncle's wife, and who lies, cheats, steals, and murders, but won't deal in drugs with Sadi. Belgarath is a single-minded force for the Prophecy of Light who spends literally generations in the grossest kind of drunken debauchery. Furthermore, Belgarath thinks nothing of waylaying complete strangers and clubbing them unconscious or even murdering them just to get regional dress to move around in without being discovered.
Where Eddings fumbles from 2002 onward is in his inability to work beyond those roles. His dialogue through most of his works after that date is stilted and cliche, and his characters are boring rehashes of the same archtypes.
I was greatly saddened to hear that David Eddings passed away last year, and that his wife, Leigh, whom he loved to distraction, had preceded him in 2007. For all that I think his later work is horrible, I can't deny that I was very fortunate. You see, I was growing up at the same time that Belgarion was. When he stood on Greldik's ship and screamed at his Aunt Pol "You're not even human any more!" I was embroiled in my own adolescent arguments with my parents, who just didn't understand me, either. As each new book came out and chronicled Garion's exploits and growth, I tried to take to heart the lessons he learned as well.
In a very real way, I owe much of who I am today to Belgarion's example and the lessons Eddings presented in his books.
David Eddings (July 7, 1931 – June 2, 2009)
Write on!*****
Christopher Rivan
Virgins Slain, Dragons Rescued.
Reasonable rates for all budgets!
http://chrisrivan.blogspot.com/
Chris.Rivan@Yahoo.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
