How to make good characters? Well, I myself happen to have a PH.D in Character Creation and Development (CC&D) and can perhaps help you out on this issue.
The simplest piece of advice I can give you would be to look at the people around you, and THINK about them. What motivates the people around you? How do they get what they want? What in their past led them to that behavior pattern? What are some idiosyncratic behaviors they have? Imagine words that you could use to describe them. Read characters in good (and for that matter, bad, for a how-not-to-guide) literature. Observe the author's way of treating his characters. How is the character's past introduced? How does the character contrast with those around him/her? How does the character develop over the course of the story?
Also, there is a more personal route. What sorts of people interest you, and what is it about these people you find engaging? They don't have to be likable in the normal sense of the word. An example of an interesting, but not-so-nice character would be Dr. Gregory House. House is a jerk, genius, and at times, a genuine human being. Ask other people about what they see in others, and for that matter in you. Learning about people, and how people feel about people, is the first step to building characters. This is where your raw building materials are coming from.
Most of us already have something of a people-sense by the time we try to undertake character creation. However, this doesn't always translate into one's writing. One has to know how to apply one's knowledge for truly good characters to be created. The best place to start, in my opinion, is the character's history (although you can start from ANY point in the character's story, or for that matter, you can develop from a particular vision of the character in your mind, any trait, or quirk, can be a starting point). Whoever this character is, he or she has a past (although some characters benefit massively from not having one that the audience has any notion of, such as the Joker from The Dark Night. Characters like this are great symbols, since they lack the human element of history, seeming supernatural, and the idea they are supposed to embody can be more clearly seen.) and it's you're job as an author to bring that to life. Spend a great deal of time thinking about your character. If you draw, sketch your character, and see what expressions, clothing, and surroundings you imagine him/her/it in. You could also write some short pieces, experimenting with various areas of the character.
Of course, few stories have only ONE character (mostly post-apocalyptic). If you have started with only one character, and have fitted him/her in the world, obviously there needs to be another character. If you create a second character, special attention should be paid to the relationship between these two characters. The second should be an interesting coupling with the first, whether her role is that of a primary antagonist, mentor, student, or friend. Make sure that your character's stories reflect the totality of your world. People are strongly effected by their environment, and if characters are raised in a similar culture, their interactions may not be as interesting. Also, you rob the reader of seeing your whole world realized.
Generally, your story will have some themes. Either you will have planned these out beforehand, or your story will spontaneously develop them over time. Your characters are persons, yet at the same time, they are tools that can be used to illustrate a point. There must be a balance between the need for character consistency (that is, they behave like real persons) and integration with the rest of the story (the themes).
Many people warn against stereotypes, for good reason. The problem isn't the stereotypes themselves (as there is a reason they are popular and often-used) but that some authors do not characterize BEYOND the stereotype. The Wise Old Man/Wizard is an excellent character framework. However, if the only traits of your character are his age, and his "wisdom" (although there are so many different ways you could express wisdom, I believe that there is still a good deal of flexibility in even such a primitive outline) than you are obviously going to have a less than interesting character. Develop on this wizened old figure. Just HOW old is he? Where does he live? Why does he live there? What did he do to get himself there? Perhaps he was a scientist, who experimented with technologies that were forbidden by the Guild he became a member of. To reflect this history in the present, your character could be a bold, individualistic, rational minded introvert. He could be a visionary firebrand, a philosophical heretic. Perhaps he is a compassionate man who wishes to improve life for humankind. Perhaps he is a cruel sadist who takes pleasure in the destruction of life. He could also be a drunk as a result of the despair of his isolation. Paranoia, and bitterness could set in (each trait could be expressed in a variety of ways).
As your story goes along, especially if you have multiple protagonists, make sure you keep your characters interesting. Something must always be happening. That doesn't mean they need to be physically going somewhere, but something must always be happening with them. Perhaps the old man above has become more sympathetic toward the reasoning of his captors in his exile, and wishes to return to society to guide his students away from unethical practices. Imagine how he would appeal for release. Imagine the types of people who he would have to deal with getting out.
You must remember to be merciless to your characters. You are not a benevolent God, you are the God of the Old Testimate, cruel, jealous, harsh, and unflinching even as you order the evil orcs to torch the homes of the golden wood elves. It's good to have positive events in a story, but always remember that characters, unlike real people, are expendable. If the story, for the sake of believability, or making a point, or keeping things interesting, demands the sacrifice of a character, don't be afraid to do it. Also, killing a character can inspire strong feelings in your audience (so long as your character has had the time to gain the readers love) and make them more involved in the story. Bringing a character back to life should be FAR more rare than killings if they occur. Such acts are very powerful, and their misuse can be severely unbalancing to a story that needs to have a believable resolution.
So there you go, a crash course in character creation. Have fun!
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Keep it Interesting
Hey guys! Some of you might know me from IF and a few other sites. For those of you who don't--hello, I'm Ben, also known as Spinner. I hail from Vermont, where I attend college for Professional Writing. Aside from novice blogging, I'm also training myself to write novels professionally. But like most of y'all, I also do a lot of writing for fun--segueing into the point of this post.
Online writing's a slowly growing and potentially thriving world. Many of you aiming to be published will probably post work on forums like Be Creative to test yourself against an audience and improve your prose and storytelling. Forums are a great means for that, and you're going to find there's a wealth of them in every genre imaginable. There really is nothing like slaving over a piece of writing for hours, only to post it, sign off and get comments in the morning. For something that can be as arduous as writing, its a heavenly feeling.
Every writer strives toward writing something interesting--both enough for themselves and their readers. In online writing, this can be a tricky balance. You know your plot--or rather, you should to some degree--and sometimes there are going to be things you need so things can make sense. Many times, I've committed the crime of writing 20 pages of world building only to have people be all *...yawn*. Not a fun feeling. This is supposed to be interesting!
When building your online stories, you need to be mindful of a few vital facts: firstly, that reading on a computer screen is hard. Your updates should be short and to the point. This will become very helpful when you start writing longer pieces for publication (it teaches you pacing). Secondly, info dumps are even more wearing. Try to find a creative means of building your world. This can be done through overheard conversations, conversations characters take part in, or things on bulletins, computer screens, what have you. Information is all around you--it doesn't always have to be spoken. This can also be an imaginative vehicle for subplots.
Keeping your posts short and the content in abundance will keep readers flocking to your story. But just because its quick doesn't mean you need to spend any less time on it. In fact, you can use the extra time to add more content, giving the world a vitality. This was how Charles Dickens used to write, and while he was paid by the word-count, his stuff is extremely vibrant. Read Tale of Two Cities if you don't believe me!
What you should remember above all, is that writing is supposed to be fun. A lot of people post things about what you should or shouldn't do online. This isn't a formulaic process. Its easier to identify unoriginality and derivation than you think. In fact, if you find yourself thinking, "I wonder if people will notice if I borrowed from this," the answer is probably that someone will.
Good luck with your stuff. See you on the forums!
Ben
Online writing's a slowly growing and potentially thriving world. Many of you aiming to be published will probably post work on forums like Be Creative to test yourself against an audience and improve your prose and storytelling. Forums are a great means for that, and you're going to find there's a wealth of them in every genre imaginable. There really is nothing like slaving over a piece of writing for hours, only to post it, sign off and get comments in the morning. For something that can be as arduous as writing, its a heavenly feeling.
Every writer strives toward writing something interesting--both enough for themselves and their readers. In online writing, this can be a tricky balance. You know your plot--or rather, you should to some degree--and sometimes there are going to be things you need so things can make sense. Many times, I've committed the crime of writing 20 pages of world building only to have people be all *...yawn*. Not a fun feeling. This is supposed to be interesting!
When building your online stories, you need to be mindful of a few vital facts: firstly, that reading on a computer screen is hard. Your updates should be short and to the point. This will become very helpful when you start writing longer pieces for publication (it teaches you pacing). Secondly, info dumps are even more wearing. Try to find a creative means of building your world. This can be done through overheard conversations, conversations characters take part in, or things on bulletins, computer screens, what have you. Information is all around you--it doesn't always have to be spoken. This can also be an imaginative vehicle for subplots.
Keeping your posts short and the content in abundance will keep readers flocking to your story. But just because its quick doesn't mean you need to spend any less time on it. In fact, you can use the extra time to add more content, giving the world a vitality. This was how Charles Dickens used to write, and while he was paid by the word-count, his stuff is extremely vibrant. Read Tale of Two Cities if you don't believe me!
What you should remember above all, is that writing is supposed to be fun. A lot of people post things about what you should or shouldn't do online. This isn't a formulaic process. Its easier to identify unoriginality and derivation than you think. In fact, if you find yourself thinking, "I wonder if people will notice if I borrowed from this," the answer is probably that someone will.
Good luck with your stuff. See you on the forums!
Ben
Monday, August 3, 2009
Description
The WG Editors Thoughts: Description
So, every now and then, the WG editors will each collaboratively post their thoughts regarding an aspect of writing. We won't be giving any pointers or tutorials, but perhaps a paragraph or two regarding their thoughts on good ways to do it, or perhaps how they do it.
Isaiah
Description is the most descriptive part of writing, if it's done correctly. There are several things you can do that will help you describe things in your story. A common way is to talk about the way it interacts with your 5 senses (what does it sound like, feel like, look like, smell like, taste like?). Another way is to come up with as many adjectives as you can that describe what you're writing about. You should definitely incorporate colors as adjectives. It's also a huge help to visualize what you're describing. Let's use a tree as an example. Don't just think "trees are tall and green with brown bark", you have to really visualize the finer details. The way some of the bark is ripped up, how the veins on the leaves are slightly crooked, the way it bulges near the center, like a planet, etc.
Warden
Descriptions... Dangerous in wrong hands, disastrous when gotten wrong and just magical when used well. Some call it the butter of the story sandwich; with plot being the bread and emotions the topping. Without the butter it's not half as good, while without the topping it's still edible. But for whatever is said about that part of writing, it's indisputable that it's one of the most crucial parts of any story - for without description... What would you be writing?
Ever
Description. One of the most important things in writing a book. If you do not have description in your story then all you have is a buch of words that are nothing but blurs when you try to imagine the scene behind them.
There is one thing that I have been told by others, mostly PF, and learned to do and that is, when describing a place or person you must put yourself in the place of your character. Feel and see what your character feels. Imagine every detail of your characters surrounding, then put into words.
Example.
"Sam sat upon her homes roof, with her arms wrapped around her kness and her head resting on her shin. Her black hair swirled all around her peaceful looking face as the wind blew through the land. Her sea blue eyes looked around the vast green woodsy land around her and the endless blue sky above her."
Also, you can use other objects to describ something, such as what I did above ^ with the color of Sam's
eyes. (Her sea blue eyes looked around).
Jsquared
Description is a really tricky subject. If you're too superfluous, then you bore your reader. If you lack in it, than either your reader does not know what is going on, must picture what is going on using their own imagination, and/or your flow will be hindered. In addition, the work will feel rushed. When you are explaining something, do not say what it is. Describe its characteristics until the reader knows what it is, who it is, what they look like or what was done.
Think of it like this. In a fight scene, writers do not go into grotesque details of what the fighters see as they hack and slash through. Why? Because then the reader is going to be grossed out and not want to read. We do not want to know about the entrails that began to fall out of a dude that just had his stomach slashed open. You will alienate some of your readers as well. The same thing goes for all description, just replaced grossed out, with perhaps bored to death in some cases.
______________________________________________________
The WG editor's thoughts will be in sync with the articles of the blog, whichever topic they decide to post, the WG editors will add in their thoughts to. Though, if we see something in WD that a lot of people want to see, then we will look at that as well. One of the editors, Angelic Ninja, could not be reached for comment.
So, every now and then, the WG editors will each collaboratively post their thoughts regarding an aspect of writing. We won't be giving any pointers or tutorials, but perhaps a paragraph or two regarding their thoughts on good ways to do it, or perhaps how they do it.
Isaiah
Description is the most descriptive part of writing, if it's done correctly. There are several things you can do that will help you describe things in your story. A common way is to talk about the way it interacts with your 5 senses (what does it sound like, feel like, look like, smell like, taste like?). Another way is to come up with as many adjectives as you can that describe what you're writing about. You should definitely incorporate colors as adjectives. It's also a huge help to visualize what you're describing. Let's use a tree as an example. Don't just think "trees are tall and green with brown bark", you have to really visualize the finer details. The way some of the bark is ripped up, how the veins on the leaves are slightly crooked, the way it bulges near the center, like a planet, etc.
Warden
Descriptions... Dangerous in wrong hands, disastrous when gotten wrong and just magical when used well. Some call it the butter of the story sandwich; with plot being the bread and emotions the topping. Without the butter it's not half as good, while without the topping it's still edible. But for whatever is said about that part of writing, it's indisputable that it's one of the most crucial parts of any story - for without description... What would you be writing?
Ever
Description. One of the most important things in writing a book. If you do not have description in your story then all you have is a buch of words that are nothing but blurs when you try to imagine the scene behind them.
There is one thing that I have been told by others, mostly PF, and learned to do and that is, when describing a place or person you must put yourself in the place of your character. Feel and see what your character feels. Imagine every detail of your characters surrounding, then put into words.
Example.
"Sam sat upon her homes roof, with her arms wrapped around her kness and her head resting on her shin. Her black hair swirled all around her peaceful looking face as the wind blew through the land. Her sea blue eyes looked around the vast green woodsy land around her and the endless blue sky above her."
Also, you can use other objects to describ something, such as what I did above ^ with the color of Sam's
eyes. (Her sea blue eyes looked around).
Jsquared
Description is a really tricky subject. If you're too superfluous, then you bore your reader. If you lack in it, than either your reader does not know what is going on, must picture what is going on using their own imagination, and/or your flow will be hindered. In addition, the work will feel rushed. When you are explaining something, do not say what it is. Describe its characteristics until the reader knows what it is, who it is, what they look like or what was done.
Think of it like this. In a fight scene, writers do not go into grotesque details of what the fighters see as they hack and slash through. Why? Because then the reader is going to be grossed out and not want to read. We do not want to know about the entrails that began to fall out of a dude that just had his stomach slashed open. You will alienate some of your readers as well. The same thing goes for all description, just replaced grossed out, with perhaps bored to death in some cases.
______________________________________________________
The WG editor's thoughts will be in sync with the articles of the blog, whichever topic they decide to post, the WG editors will add in their thoughts to. Though, if we see something in WD that a lot of people want to see, then we will look at that as well. One of the editors, Angelic Ninja, could not be reached for comment.
Writing: What Not To Do (Part 2)
As you studious younglings last remember, I promised to bring you an examination of the Draconic Ponies and their Land Before Time. Well, first off, there was no Land Before Time scenario. Character's in that beloved animation had a quality known as personality, which was skillfully separated from their abilities. Such is not the case here. Unlike the former critique, mostly for the stake of fairness and credibility, I'm going to do something more akin to a line-by-line critique. This will offer the reader a much clearer picture of why this is an example of bad writing. In fact, the first sentence is a good start.
"In a place unimaginably far from the Abyssal (capitalization error) ((At least I think it is)) home of the Dark Queen's brood, a different world took shape, gradually emerging from the chaos of Godly dreams."
This sentence is confusing. The beginning isn't problematic, but it isn't clear in the final parts of this sentence whether the dreams in question are the dreams of the Gods (Giving us the impression that this novel is going to take a philosophical turn, giving us the impression that reality is just a dream of some God or Gods). Of course, one could infer that the author was trying to go subjective experience on us, being that our subjects are the cutest little firebreathing monsters on the planet. Now, give me a moment to browse over the text...
The author pretty much throws more "GOOD V.S EVIL" crapola in my face for a good few sentances, assuming that I am five years old, and have difficulty distinguishing between a hellish underworld (our first setting) and what seems like a Garden of Eden, or to be more accurate, a Grotto of Eden. (Why do I keep on thinking Ghetto, these dragons are many things, Gangsta is NOT one of them)
Do any of you know what it means for something to have "Gleamed in the colors of precious metals"? I don't think it's an explicit grammar violation (You should have an easy time locating the text I'm referencing in the excerpt) but it doesn't sound right.
Do any of you know what it means for movement to stir? (I'm detecting a pattern)
"metallic shells rupturing to allow scaly wyrmlings to emerge" Now here's the problem, eggs aren't metallic. They may have a metallic sheen, but to BE metallic would make hatching impossible, and we wouldn't have any characters, as they would have died. Also, the shells do not rupture under their own power, as the author seems to suggest, the hatchlings rupture them.
Next we get a description of these cute bundles of flaming joy (or in this case flaming, shocking, freezing and other such elemental joys) have an aura of peace sheltering them (at this point, I vomited on the keyboard, so do forgive me. This took several minutes to clean up, and delayed my lesson). The description surrounding isn't actually that problematic, yet. It's very romantic, which was the intention of the author. I had no problems with this.
"All were vigorus, active, and strong." This is all redundant, these words are very close synonyms, and when used together in this context, are nearly the same thing.
"Still there was never any question but that Darlantan and Aurican would vie for mastery within their nest." Now this is interesting. There is a non "Good v.s Evil" difference between Crematorium's upbringing and our goody four claw's, other than being ruled by an evil matriarch and all. Here we have some conflict, whereas Crematorium dominates everyone. Fairly soon, we see two distinct behavioral patters, although rather cliche, emerge. (THere is nothing wrong with cliche in and of itself, so long as you don't depend on it.) We have our strong skilled type, and our quick, clever type. These two, through their constant competition, developed games, and were the intrepid explorers of the nest.
I will take a moment to give my views on Cliche. The general trend in modern literature is to avoid any cliche like the plague. This is because they view cliche as a plague anyway. It is not merely an adjective that can be applied to an element of a story, but it is an infectious quality, it spreads and destroy's everything around it, eating away at the very fabric of not just the individual story, but the entire literary world. Quarantine is needed, vaccination must be mandatory, young authors must have protection against cliche, they cannot write without protection, the risk of cliche is too great.
However, I take a much more liberal view of cliche. Personally, I like stories of knights going off to slay the dragon (Which is so cliche it might actually be original now) I like the nostalgic affect of a well done cliche, the feeling of familiarity it brings to a story. Intrepid youngsters, specifically a competing pair of such individuals, is very common in stories. Yet I still enjoy it. And I am sure that a majority of the audience can too.
Now... back to the chapter. One problem this story has a priori is the fact that it covers VAST spans of time. Hundreds of years pass between chapters, sometimes thousands (When we get into generations shifts). This makes writing difficult. Epic time spans have to be done very well to work (much like playing the queen's pawn first in chess), it requires skill and experience to learn how to display such a vast change in time. However, when it is achieved, the result is very powerful (at least to me). The author has put himself in a corner here, the manner in which he writes makes it impossible for him to show the evidence of any meaningful passage of time (an isolated nest) and he has to resort to telling us, and telling us alone (which is the problem).
Also, other "personalities" begin to emerge. Smelt is said to be an inquisitive chatterbox, although this is told to us through the narrator (this is a character type I sympathize with for obvious reasons) and not shown or proven (the latter assuming he already told us) by any latter encounters. It is a fact mentioned, by the narrator, and then regurgitated by the characters. (The personalities are predictable by a chart such as this
Although the author fails to create highly expressive personalities, which is a problem. He bases characters on stereotypes (fine) but doesn't even develop the characters TO the stereotype, much less characterize beyond (which is optimal).
Actually, the author does some implied characterization with Darlantan and Aurican, so these character's aren't complete cutouts. Although they derive most persona from they're "subspecies".
Our two friends, Darl and Auri go into the darkness, dun dun dun.
"In a place unimaginably far from the Abyssal (capitalization error) ((At least I think it is)) home of the Dark Queen's brood, a different world took shape, gradually emerging from the chaos of Godly dreams."
This sentence is confusing. The beginning isn't problematic, but it isn't clear in the final parts of this sentence whether the dreams in question are the dreams of the Gods (Giving us the impression that this novel is going to take a philosophical turn, giving us the impression that reality is just a dream of some God or Gods). Of course, one could infer that the author was trying to go subjective experience on us, being that our subjects are the cutest little firebreathing monsters on the planet. Now, give me a moment to browse over the text...
The author pretty much throws more "GOOD V.S EVIL" crapola in my face for a good few sentances, assuming that I am five years old, and have difficulty distinguishing between a hellish underworld (our first setting) and what seems like a Garden of Eden, or to be more accurate, a Grotto of Eden. (Why do I keep on thinking Ghetto, these dragons are many things, Gangsta is NOT one of them)
Do any of you know what it means for something to have "Gleamed in the colors of precious metals"? I don't think it's an explicit grammar violation (You should have an easy time locating the text I'm referencing in the excerpt) but it doesn't sound right.
Do any of you know what it means for movement to stir? (I'm detecting a pattern)
"metallic shells rupturing to allow scaly wyrmlings to emerge" Now here's the problem, eggs aren't metallic. They may have a metallic sheen, but to BE metallic would make hatching impossible, and we wouldn't have any characters, as they would have died. Also, the shells do not rupture under their own power, as the author seems to suggest, the hatchlings rupture them.
Next we get a description of these cute bundles of flaming joy (or in this case flaming, shocking, freezing and other such elemental joys) have an aura of peace sheltering them (at this point, I vomited on the keyboard, so do forgive me. This took several minutes to clean up, and delayed my lesson). The description surrounding isn't actually that problematic, yet. It's very romantic, which was the intention of the author. I had no problems with this.
"All were vigorus, active, and strong." This is all redundant, these words are very close synonyms, and when used together in this context, are nearly the same thing.
"Still there was never any question but that Darlantan and Aurican would vie for mastery within their nest." Now this is interesting. There is a non "Good v.s Evil" difference between Crematorium's upbringing and our goody four claw's, other than being ruled by an evil matriarch and all. Here we have some conflict, whereas Crematorium dominates everyone. Fairly soon, we see two distinct behavioral patters, although rather cliche, emerge. (THere is nothing wrong with cliche in and of itself, so long as you don't depend on it.) We have our strong skilled type, and our quick, clever type. These two, through their constant competition, developed games, and were the intrepid explorers of the nest.
I will take a moment to give my views on Cliche. The general trend in modern literature is to avoid any cliche like the plague. This is because they view cliche as a plague anyway. It is not merely an adjective that can be applied to an element of a story, but it is an infectious quality, it spreads and destroy's everything around it, eating away at the very fabric of not just the individual story, but the entire literary world. Quarantine is needed, vaccination must be mandatory, young authors must have protection against cliche, they cannot write without protection, the risk of cliche is too great.
However, I take a much more liberal view of cliche. Personally, I like stories of knights going off to slay the dragon (Which is so cliche it might actually be original now) I like the nostalgic affect of a well done cliche, the feeling of familiarity it brings to a story. Intrepid youngsters, specifically a competing pair of such individuals, is very common in stories. Yet I still enjoy it. And I am sure that a majority of the audience can too.
Now... back to the chapter. One problem this story has a priori is the fact that it covers VAST spans of time. Hundreds of years pass between chapters, sometimes thousands (When we get into generations shifts). This makes writing difficult. Epic time spans have to be done very well to work (much like playing the queen's pawn first in chess), it requires skill and experience to learn how to display such a vast change in time. However, when it is achieved, the result is very powerful (at least to me). The author has put himself in a corner here, the manner in which he writes makes it impossible for him to show the evidence of any meaningful passage of time (an isolated nest) and he has to resort to telling us, and telling us alone (which is the problem).
Also, other "personalities" begin to emerge. Smelt is said to be an inquisitive chatterbox, although this is told to us through the narrator (this is a character type I sympathize with for obvious reasons) and not shown or proven (the latter assuming he already told us) by any latter encounters. It is a fact mentioned, by the narrator, and then regurgitated by the characters. (The personalities are predictable by a chart such as this
Although the author fails to create highly expressive personalities, which is a problem. He bases characters on stereotypes (fine) but doesn't even develop the characters TO the stereotype, much less characterize beyond (which is optimal).
Actually, the author does some implied characterization with Darlantan and Aurican, so these character's aren't complete cutouts. Although they derive most persona from they're "subspecies".
Our two friends, Darl and Auri go into the darkness, dun dun dun.
Sunday, August 2, 2009
Writing: What Not To Do
Generally, one common tactic writers use to instruct others aspiring to their noble profession is to dispense sage-like advice upon us mortals, to give us guide lines such as "Provide depth in your worlds, give a meaningful history to your characters..." This is all well and good. However, there is yet another teaching tool at the dispense of the instructor, that is, to provide neophytes with what cannot be called anything other than the most abysmal writing ever. Invision provided us with a basic idea as to what makes good writing, I will elaborate, while discussing our negative examples, including epic failures such as "DragonLance: The Lost Histories: Volume VI 'The Dragons' and any other abomination that happens to fall in my path of puritanical purging.
Let's begin with some basics, my pupils.
1. Good and Evil: In the real world (That means where people aren't either Sith or Jedi for you Star Wars fans out there) there is something known as Moral Ambiguity. This quite magical quality is a result of the fundamental truth that no single individual on this planet (except for Jesus Christ for you Christians out there) was ever completely good, or completely evil. Also, since this applies to individuals, this applies to various groups in conflict. The idea that people are either good or evil is fundementally infantile. (If you want proof, just google "Object-relations theory") Note that in fairy tales (That is, children's stories) characters are generally all good or evil. This isn't a bad thing in and of itself, since children reading George R. R. Martin (A writer who can show you the meaning of Moral Ambiguity) wouldn't be able to understand such a world. Children see the world often as either good or evil, it is part of being a child. But also, as children, we learn that people all have faults. When an author makes "perfect" characters, either perfectly evil, or perfectly good, this pulls us back to the days when we decided that mommy's breasts were good because we could get milk from them, and consequently mommy was good. We are taken back to a state of childishness, and not in a good way. While some level of Moral ambiguity is good, it is certainly just as bad to try and completely neutralize your characters. What this does is destroy sympathetic characterization, and it means that no reader will give a rat's rear what happens to your character, because he's a jerk anyway.
2. Characterization: People are part of the world, they have good and evil traits. They have histories, they have personalities, they have goals, and preferred means to achieve them. They have hopes, dreams, and fears. Forget this, and you can flush your aspirations of writing something even remotely respectable down the toilet. Writing is fundementally a deception, a clever puppet show on a handmade stage, where the author tries is best to make us forget we are reading words on a page. When your characters are essentially cardboard cutouts mounted on Popsicle sticks, YOU WILL FAIL!!! This isn't merely something that MAY happen, it is something that WILL happen. If you poke a sleeping dragon, you will die in some painful form or fashion (Unless you are Bilbo Baggins with a magic ring, in which case you will die of old age like the rest of us). While you can use cardboard characters with a child audience, as your readership matures, such parlor tricks will illicit vollies of tomatoes. (Or more accurately swarms of negative reviews) Characters are people. (whether they are Dragons, Aliens ((Or both at the same time) Elves, Dwarves, Men, Hobbits, or Amoebas) If you want an analogy that will be more fitting with the times, you can imagine a "Character Wal-Mart" with endless shelves of stock characters that can be bought cheaply (No effort put into it), yet are of extremely low quality. Example: Wise Magician Dude, $1.00 per unit, useful for infodumps, dying pointlessly, killing large numbers of enemies with deus ex machina, and anything your pathetic excuse for an imagination can think of. Now, of course, just because a character is wise, and happens to be wise in the ways of magic and such, doesn't imply that they are a bad character. The distinction between a GOOD WMD (lol) and a BAD WMD is that a bad one has no other significant aspects besides its being a WMD. Of course, for every rule, there are exceptions. Sometimes, a character can be used as a symbol of the author's idea of good and evil, an example being Jesus of Nazareth (or Howard Roark, or John Galt). However, none of these characters are without limitations, or struggles (Jesus had to die on a cross, suffer temptations like the rest of humanity, Roark was merely a great architect, and lacked super powers of any sort etc.)
With these ideas in mind, let's explore some tomato worthy literature.
My first exhibit for you students is the one mentioned in the beginning of the article. Dragon Lance: The Lost Histories: Volume VI (If you want to read the book for yourself, you can buy it here ((Or read an excerpt and get a taste) http://www.amazon.com/Dragons-Dragonlance-Lost-Histories-Vol/dp/0786905131 )
This story is from the "Dragon Lance" universe, a fantasy world with which I am not acquainted. Most of my criticism is through the fields above, I do not hold any failures in worldbuilding against the author, the world was there for him, pre fabricated. (Although some of my criticism WILL be world building related since it will come through the other fields)
From page one, the author burns a path of destruction through Fantasy literature, leaving rich forests of character potential and ethical reflection in smoldering ruin. Let's begin with our main evil character: Crematia. We can already tell that she is evil, if not from her name (Which sounds like crematorium) from the fact that within the first few pages, she slaughters a bunch of furry innocent creatures. Not only that, but she decides to mix in infant sadism with hatchling hunger, and proceeds to commit acts that would make Voldemort and Galbatorix blush, if the former had the anatomical ability to do so. Crematia is evil. This is abundantly obvious, the author doesn't state it flatly, or imply it, he flings it in the reader's faces like a rabid monkey who had just downed a chili dog, adding an acidic sting to the warm, sickening sensation of scat on our faces. After this torture porno of a hatching, our mistress of death meets her maker, who happens to be teh ebul dark lord. (Note: Readers, the name of said dark lord is the Dark Queen. Why are all of the beginning evil characters female? I sense subtle sexism.) The Evil Dark Lord talks of Crematorium's Evil Dark Destiny to do Dark Evil Deeds for Dark Evil reasons (meaning pure sadism and the logic that "Mercy is Weakness" ((Yes, it is THAT corny). Pretty much, our cute cruel dragoness has a divine mission, which pretty much amounts to destroying everything good and pretty and naturey in the world. By this, I mean
that she is commissioned to destroy all that is "My Little Pony w/ Dragons" in the world. We will meet our draconic ponies later, for now, let us dwell on the fact that Crematorium has a few siblings, all apparently evil. Of course, to add to this fact, they are all one particular CLASS of evil beings who are ALL evil. If your intellects are worth respecting, you see the problems here.
Now of course, there must be an eternal balance of Good and Evil, so... in our next installment, we shall explorez teh Draconic Ponies and their adventures in what can only be termed as what happens when a 5 year old finds his mother's cocaine.
Let's begin with some basics, my pupils.
1. Good and Evil: In the real world (That means where people aren't either Sith or Jedi for you Star Wars fans out there) there is something known as Moral Ambiguity. This quite magical quality is a result of the fundamental truth that no single individual on this planet (except for Jesus Christ for you Christians out there) was ever completely good, or completely evil. Also, since this applies to individuals, this applies to various groups in conflict. The idea that people are either good or evil is fundementally infantile. (If you want proof, just google "Object-relations theory") Note that in fairy tales (That is, children's stories) characters are generally all good or evil. This isn't a bad thing in and of itself, since children reading George R. R. Martin (A writer who can show you the meaning of Moral Ambiguity) wouldn't be able to understand such a world. Children see the world often as either good or evil, it is part of being a child. But also, as children, we learn that people all have faults. When an author makes "perfect" characters, either perfectly evil, or perfectly good, this pulls us back to the days when we decided that mommy's breasts were good because we could get milk from them, and consequently mommy was good. We are taken back to a state of childishness, and not in a good way. While some level of Moral ambiguity is good, it is certainly just as bad to try and completely neutralize your characters. What this does is destroy sympathetic characterization, and it means that no reader will give a rat's rear what happens to your character, because he's a jerk anyway.
2. Characterization: People are part of the world, they have good and evil traits. They have histories, they have personalities, they have goals, and preferred means to achieve them. They have hopes, dreams, and fears. Forget this, and you can flush your aspirations of writing something even remotely respectable down the toilet. Writing is fundementally a deception, a clever puppet show on a handmade stage, where the author tries is best to make us forget we are reading words on a page. When your characters are essentially cardboard cutouts mounted on Popsicle sticks, YOU WILL FAIL!!! This isn't merely something that MAY happen, it is something that WILL happen. If you poke a sleeping dragon, you will die in some painful form or fashion (Unless you are Bilbo Baggins with a magic ring, in which case you will die of old age like the rest of us). While you can use cardboard characters with a child audience, as your readership matures, such parlor tricks will illicit vollies of tomatoes. (Or more accurately swarms of negative reviews) Characters are people. (whether they are Dragons, Aliens ((Or both at the same time) Elves, Dwarves, Men, Hobbits, or Amoebas) If you want an analogy that will be more fitting with the times, you can imagine a "Character Wal-Mart" with endless shelves of stock characters that can be bought cheaply (No effort put into it), yet are of extremely low quality. Example: Wise Magician Dude, $1.00 per unit, useful for infodumps, dying pointlessly, killing large numbers of enemies with deus ex machina, and anything your pathetic excuse for an imagination can think of. Now, of course, just because a character is wise, and happens to be wise in the ways of magic and such, doesn't imply that they are a bad character. The distinction between a GOOD WMD (lol) and a BAD WMD is that a bad one has no other significant aspects besides its being a WMD. Of course, for every rule, there are exceptions. Sometimes, a character can be used as a symbol of the author's idea of good and evil, an example being Jesus of Nazareth (or Howard Roark, or John Galt). However, none of these characters are without limitations, or struggles (Jesus had to die on a cross, suffer temptations like the rest of humanity, Roark was merely a great architect, and lacked super powers of any sort etc.)
With these ideas in mind, let's explore some tomato worthy literature.
My first exhibit for you students is the one mentioned in the beginning of the article. Dragon Lance: The Lost Histories: Volume VI (If you want to read the book for yourself, you can buy it here ((Or read an excerpt and get a taste) http://www.amazon.com/Dragons-Dragonlance-Lost-Histories-Vol/dp/0786905131 )
This story is from the "Dragon Lance" universe, a fantasy world with which I am not acquainted. Most of my criticism is through the fields above, I do not hold any failures in worldbuilding against the author, the world was there for him, pre fabricated. (Although some of my criticism WILL be world building related since it will come through the other fields)
From page one, the author burns a path of destruction through Fantasy literature, leaving rich forests of character potential and ethical reflection in smoldering ruin. Let's begin with our main evil character: Crematia. We can already tell that she is evil, if not from her name (Which sounds like crematorium) from the fact that within the first few pages, she slaughters a bunch of furry innocent creatures. Not only that, but she decides to mix in infant sadism with hatchling hunger, and proceeds to commit acts that would make Voldemort and Galbatorix blush, if the former had the anatomical ability to do so. Crematia is evil. This is abundantly obvious, the author doesn't state it flatly, or imply it, he flings it in the reader's faces like a rabid monkey who had just downed a chili dog, adding an acidic sting to the warm, sickening sensation of scat on our faces. After this torture porno of a hatching, our mistress of death meets her maker, who happens to be teh ebul dark lord. (Note: Readers, the name of said dark lord is the Dark Queen. Why are all of the beginning evil characters female? I sense subtle sexism.) The Evil Dark Lord talks of Crematorium's Evil Dark Destiny to do Dark Evil Deeds for Dark Evil reasons (meaning pure sadism and the logic that "Mercy is Weakness" ((Yes, it is THAT corny). Pretty much, our cute cruel dragoness has a divine mission, which pretty much amounts to destroying everything good and pretty and naturey in the world. By this, I mean
that she is commissioned to destroy all that is "My Little Pony w/ Dragons" in the world. We will meet our draconic ponies later, for now, let us dwell on the fact that Crematorium has a few siblings, all apparently evil. Of course, to add to this fact, they are all one particular CLASS of evil beings who are ALL evil. If your intellects are worth respecting, you see the problems here.
Now of course, there must be an eternal balance of Good and Evil, so... in our next installment, we shall explorez teh Draconic Ponies and their adventures in what can only be termed as what happens when a 5 year old finds his mother's cocaine.
Copyright (C) Matty Lee, 2009.
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
World Creation
Creating a world is always fun, but it is also hard. And sometimes, you can really screw up, if you don't know how to do it.
There are dozens of fantastic examples for perfectly created worlds, and millions of examples for badly-created ones. In this article, I will talk about creating a world to be the best it can be.
First off, you need an overall concept. It should definitely be something you want to write. As an fellow peer of mine has once said, "Writing is like marriage. Never commit until you can't believe your luck." You're going to be spending thousands of hours writing in this potential world, and it should have just that: Potential.
Now, if you're sticking to this universe or making a different one, you have to start with the basics of your idea. Say you're writing a fantasy, and you want to create a magic system. Think of magic like a science - there have to be laws, they have to be followed, and nothing can contradict. You can't just throw science out the window because you have magic - it all has to have a process. It's like taking away gravity and going "Wee! Everybody can fly!" I'm not saying that you should be piling on infodumps about how your magic system works - you shouldn't. It's usually best to show it in action. If you can't show it in action, maybe add a teacher or mentor to your book - or maybe just someone who knows more about magic than your main character.
Now that you have your basics worked out - the laws of physics, magic, whatever else is in your story - you should work on the aspects of making sure it all matches up. The cardinal law of creating a world is that nothing can contradict. This cannot be stressed enough.
After you work out your basic laws of physics, you should be looking at character creation. Most writers will already have a main character and immediate setting in mind. Ask around, tell a few people about your world and your characters, and make sure that your creations aren't too perfect. (This is called having a "mary sue"). Your character should not be a mesiah, or be more powerful than gods, etc. (Unless, of course, your character is a mesiah, or a god. Then it's suggested that you give them some kind of drawback.)
For an in-depth world, history is a must. Timelines can be a fantastic advantage to this. Set a time for the 'present' of your world, and add a past to it. An example is like this:
2001: Present.
1999: Slightly in the past. x event happened here.
1009: Far in the past. Something amazingly important must have happened for this to be remembered in history.
Next, you should add to the conflict of your world. (Since what is worth writing about if there is no conflict? There isn't anything to say.) As an example, my story Revelations was originally a religious war between two groups with superpowers. I added a third group, gave it a past, and let it fly. Then I added a time traveler to tie up more in the plot and to improve the overall readability of the book. The second cardinal rule in world creation is that every little thing is big. Even if it doesn't seem big to you, your reader will definitely notice everything. This conflict can vary, from the lives of individuals to something that might need an entire army. If it does involve an army, it's usually better to make it an individual conflict somehow - give your character a better reason to be in the army rather than 'I felt like it'. Adding individual conflicts are a great way to make the reader connect with your main character.
After that, it's pretty much your own decision on what to do; a creative license is a very good thing for a writer to keep on him at all times, since writing is all about being creative and making the old things seem new, and the unreal seem real. When you've finished all of these steps, your plot should be ready to be written - that is, if you haven't begun already from excitement.
"World Creation" Article Copyright (C) James Cohen, 2009.
Starting Your Novel
Before you write anything, poetry, a novel, a song, etc., pick a theme or point you want to get across. Maybe you want to praise or criticize a philosophy (example: place the greater good over your own interests). Maybe you want to inspire people just in general life. Maybe you want to persuade them to follow their hearts over their minds. When you do this, show the reality of it. Show the sacrifice it takes to work for the greater good, but also show the rewards. If you do it right, then the readers will agree with you. Perhaps you want to simply share an experience with us. The point is, everybody's got something to tell the world, and it's a sure thing that many people will care. A story about nothing is a nothing of a story.
Plan out what's going to happen before you start to write. Many people like to just jump into writing, and after a couple chapters they discover they have no plot or aren't skilled enough to write the path the story has taken. Plan the main plot, come up with your main characters, and make an antagonist at the very least. I would highly recommend planning a few subplots as well, because if they are well done then the story boost tremendously in interest value. Having numerous subplots and characters tend to make the reader's "lost" in the book. JK Rowling does this expertly in Harry Potter. She gives readers many characters, and most people love all of them, felt connected to them.
So now you've got your plot down, and you know what your story is about. Do you want to use Earth as the setting, or do you want to create your own world? New worlds can be very interesting if they're original (like Tolkein's was). A great way to get readers hooked is to show some differences between your world and the one readers are familiar with, though not fully explain them right away. Phillip Pullman does this rather well in His Dark Materials with daemons. We get to see how they behave and see how important they are, but we don't really know what they are. It gives the readers something else to keep them thinking about.
If you are using Earth, then what time does your story take place? Present day? Thousands of years ago? The future? There are many tools that can get readers interested in your story before they even know the plot. Planning out the basic structure of these will help you add more depth to them once you start writing. Knowing the time it takes place is especially crucial on Earth, because you must know the speech patterns in use then, the culture, etc.
So after you've picked out something you want to tell us and planned everything out, your story should be ready to roll.
Plan out what's going to happen before you start to write. Many people like to just jump into writing, and after a couple chapters they discover they have no plot or aren't skilled enough to write the path the story has taken. Plan the main plot, come up with your main characters, and make an antagonist at the very least. I would highly recommend planning a few subplots as well, because if they are well done then the story boost tremendously in interest value. Having numerous subplots and characters tend to make the reader's "lost" in the book. JK Rowling does this expertly in Harry Potter. She gives readers many characters, and most people love all of them, felt connected to them.
So now you've got your plot down, and you know what your story is about. Do you want to use Earth as the setting, or do you want to create your own world? New worlds can be very interesting if they're original (like Tolkein's was). A great way to get readers hooked is to show some differences between your world and the one readers are familiar with, though not fully explain them right away. Phillip Pullman does this rather well in His Dark Materials with daemons. We get to see how they behave and see how important they are, but we don't really know what they are. It gives the readers something else to keep them thinking about.
If you are using Earth, then what time does your story take place? Present day? Thousands of years ago? The future? There are many tools that can get readers interested in your story before they even know the plot. Planning out the basic structure of these will help you add more depth to them once you start writing. Knowing the time it takes place is especially crucial on Earth, because you must know the speech patterns in use then, the culture, etc.
So after you've picked out something you want to tell us and planned everything out, your story should be ready to roll.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
