#Character-driven

[sol1056]

I've heard it being said the vld is a very plot-driven show as opposed to being character-driven. If we were to judge voltron for its plot and how well the plot was executed, would you say it is good? I ask this bec I got into the show for its characters and am frustrated at the lack of focus on the characters inner lives. Am I watching it with unrealistic expectations and that is why I fell out of love with it this season?

…I think it’s best if we stick to judging VLD on the basis of its characters. 

Even when something is plot-driven, it should still make some basic sense: in terms of continuity, world-building, core characterization, the universe’s rules (ie, gravity exists, ghosts can’t cross water, it’s a mystical bond that cannot be broken), etc.

Best example of plot-driven that springs to my mind is in early S5, when Lotor is determined to get to that Kral-whatever-thing. There’s a short conflict among the team, and the scene ends. Two parts don’t fit: the characterization during the scene, and especially what comes soon after.

First, the team’s thrown itself into action with a lot less to go on and a hell of a lot less of a plan (frex, rescuing Allura). So their point-blank refusal (and their insistence that they won’t act so rashly) doesn’t strike true. Second, almost right after, Shiro leaves, in Black, telling no one, explaining to no one, and showing no interest in turning back when Allura tracks him down. 

Right, Shiro. The one whose hallmark is insisting the team make its big decisions as a team? The one who’s always reaching out, being inclusive? And now he’s gone off on his own, with neither discussion nor inclusion? To do… idk, whatever he plans to do at this thing. 

The plot says, X must happen, and the writers decided for X to happen, they needed to have Y and Z in place. Ergo, if Shiro = Z, then Shiro must be there. Even if it makes absolutely no sense as to why he would be.  

A good plot-driven story would find a way to arrange or argue such that Shiro can fulfill the plot demands but also remain Shiro — that is, make a decision that feels ‘in character’ based on who he’s been, up to this point. A bad plot-driven story disregards even that much, and railroads right over any notion of characterization. Y’know, like, having the thoughtful and collaborative leader suddenly go all rogue and dash off on a solo adventure without a word.   

There are more plot-driven stories in genre than people realize. Murder mysteries, political thrillers, spy novels, and a lot of warfare SFF, are all often plot-driven. It takes a light touch to keep the plot from overriding the characters, and to provide the illusion of character agency if not the reality. 

[kimyoonmiauthor]

The terms Plot-driven v. Character-driven need to die the death they deserve.

As usual, rolling out the origin story for the many terms you use in writing without questioning or knowing where they came from, and maybe dumping on them a bit. OK, dumping on them a lot, and then giving you a better theory to work from. Introduction

Basics go like this, you can either have “Plot-driven” or “Character-driven” stories, thus cutting out the 98% of the other terms used around building stories. And if it’s so-called “character-driven” then the characters create the plot. If it’s so-called “Plot-driven” then it’s plot shaping the characters. But I can defeat this quickly by asing you: What plot doesn’t include characters? In what imagination do you have that a story is all verbs? falls, does, makes In what imagination you have that it’s only characters and no events? Is it all nouns? If a tree in a forest, it sound? If a square is a rectangle, and you say, but all rectangles are invalid, that means you’ve thrown out the square. If the plot includes character, and you’re saying character is part of plot, then saying plot is irrelevant to shaping story, then you’re telling me, flat out, characters don’t matter. You can’t have it both ways. The thing is that plot is the larger circle, but not the entirety of a story. https://www.kimyoonmiauthor.com/post/630079034534035456/definition-of-story There are more things to making a story than only the characters and events. Makes absolutely no sense, like much of the 1980′s writing advice which was poorly cited, but absolutely repeated wrongly. 

History So why and wherefore did this whole plot v. character thing come from? I present to you the “Great Man Theory” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_man_theory

This say great people, mostly men shaped history. That means schlubs and the rest of the people out there did nothing. This is the pro "character-driven” side. So, that person that threw the brick at Stonewall was secretly a “Great person” and that’s why the chain of events happened with pride (who was also later erased to be a white male.)

And the people we forget, say, Bass Reeves, who was whitewashed, was ranked lower than the people who created the Lone Ranger from his story, because, you know Bass Reeves deserves to be forgotten.

You can see about here what I think of this shit theory of time.

Of course people loved this theory. If you try hard enough, you can be great too, which is why you don’t remember who really created the Bamboo filament for the lightbulb. It was the height of imperialism, so of course people loved it.

There is an opposite time theory though, that goes, that events called someone to be great at the time, so with the people absent, it won’t change.

Both are shit theories, honestly, which was why by the 1980′s-1990s, they were abandoned, but writers latched onto them in the same time period, while the rest of the world, say philosophy, history theory, and physics lept forwards. Because people like buzzwords that make things feel simple. But it’s a shit theory.

So where is time theory now?

Time theory has jumped mostly towards string theory. Rather than a linear progression of events with either great people or people just filling in, that time, looks organized, while it’s truly chaos. So a more popular theory of time would be Butterfly effect, which says, the smallest of events and changes affect everything in the scene. This means there is equal weight to events and characters, as well as the other 98% of what makes a story a story. This means things like, oh, say setting, tone, theme, etc ALSO matter to making the story more complete. So if you change a hat, it has ripple effects on the rest of the story. (It’s the more annoying, but feels more realistic, and less flat.)

People would HATE this idea. You have to keep track of things like dialogue, setting, props, etc? And of course you do. You have to anyway. But that should also have equal weight and effect on the characters. Spies who need to meet secretly in a cafe, are not going to effing shout their plans at each other. WHERE IS THE SETTING? A public place. And you need time, weather, etc. It irks people when you’re setting it in the North Pole and it’s sunny and warm 100% of the time and there is no effect on how the characters act. So use the butterfly effect and get your head out of the imperialistic period of human thought.

[sabookey]

I have a thought, about character creation. I hesitate to claim this thought is some sort of advice, it's just a thought, though I think it merits further exploration and practice to see how it goes. The thought is this:

I think sometimes, when a writer struggles to actually sit down and write, but has a lot of OCs, it's because you think of your characters too much as people. I think some people struggle to tell stories because they are more interested in coming up with people.

Let me elaborate.

I've always been very focused on character creation as the foundation of good writing. When I was younger, and just starting to write, I remember someone proposing the question - which is more vital to creating a good story - a strong plot, or a strong character? At the time, I answered strong characters, hands down. My argument was that a strong character can still carry a weak plot, but a strong plot can still be boring af if the characters are weak. I do still see some merit to that line of thinking.

When it comes to actually writing down my stories, though, I've always really struggled with first drafts. I would fill notebook after notebook with detailed notes on plot points, worldbuilding, and most of all, on characters. Elaborate backstories, personality breakdowns, strengths and weaknesses, hopes and dreams and fears and every other thing that you've seen on a character profile template. I would take my time with things like choosing names, and I would flesh out their families and the people around them because to know their relationships is to know them. I've been protective of my characters, cherishing them, as many of us do, as if they were my children, as if they were dear friends of mine.

But I have yet to complete any long form projects. I have yet to complete any rough drafts for novels. When I was younger, it was because I was determined to do my stories justice. I was determined to do my beloved OCs justice. I didn't feel my writing was strong enough so I just... didn't write for my original works. I would play around with fanfiction, and I read a lot, and eventually I got into writing RP. But I didn't do anything concrete with my OCs beyond making plans for their stories.

Then I entered a short story contest — NYCMidnight's short story contest. They go in four rounds, and give you a prompt, a word limit, and a time limit in which to write your story. You get a week and 2500 words for round 1, three days and 2000 words for Round 2, two days and 1500 words for Round 3, and 24 hours and 1250 words for Round 4. The first year I participated, I went 3 rounds before being knocked out. Last year, I wrote for the first 2.

Which means I've produced five completely original short stories for the prompts given. I was absolutely shocked by how productive I was in such a short span of time. You are given your prompt the moment your clock starts ticking for each round, so you don't have time to prepare ahead. Which means that not only did I have to come up with a plot very quickly, I was also creating characters on the spot.

When you have three days to write a story, you can't spend months carefully crafting a character. So when it came to drafting, I just started slapping very quick characters together that could do what was needed for the plot. My prompt is genre: ghost story, character: a best man, and subject: temporary? Okay, then I need a bride, a groom, a best man, and a ghost. My bride is (picking a random name) Victoria, she's checking out venues with her fiance, and she realizes the place they're checking out is haunted. And off we go.

And you know what? I figured out who Victoria is as I wrote. She's conflicted, she's on the verge of breaking things off. The ghost is reaching out to her, helping her come to terms with the end of her relationship. I didn't need to know her favorite color or her childhood trauma or her blood type to write the story. Some of those things might come out in the writing. Many of them just never become relevant.

Now, I'm not saying that character profiles are trash. I don't hold with blanket advice, and this isn't advice, remember, this is just a thought. But for me, doing these fast exercises even though I always had thought of myself as a planner not a pantser, showed me that I can still write a damn good story even without writing a novel's worth of notes and plans alone.

Getting back to the original thought... I guess what I'm trying to get at here is, sometimes I think authors can get so tangled up in the create-a-character stage, or the world-building stage, that we forget that we aren't meant to be writing a travel guide, or designing a fully-realized person.

At some point, you have to say okay, now lets put that person in some situations and see what they do. You gotta stick them in a scenario where they are not just spouting backstory at another character, but are making a choice. Okay, they have trauma. They have complex personalities. But what are they doing? What choices are they making and what waves are they making? That's where the plot comes from, and how you make it go. That's plot. And the plot is where the story happens. And you're just writing it all down as it goes, and that's your rough draft.

Every time i get stuck on a story, I instinctively reach for the background notes. I just need to know what makes them tick, I think, and that's how I'll fix it. But nine times out of ten, I don't, actually. That way leads to Not Writing (tm). And I still struggle with that more than I'd like for my bigger projects.

Trying (again) to bring it back to the initial thought... I just think it's interesting that the stories that were easiest to complete were ones where the characters were made up as I went along. I just wrote. Added new characters when needed. Oh, protag needs a friend to carry out a conversation? Guess we have a new character. They continue on their merry way, surprise, someone's stalking them, new character! Meanwhile the stories where I've outlined every character and know who each of them are, still sit unwritten.

That's not the sole factor in why a story has or hasn't been written out, mind you. It's more a comment on, if your OCs are too dear and you're taking too much time with designing them, you are losing valuable time that you could figure out who they are as you write their story. By you I really mean me. Or whoever might find this useful, I suppose.

Anyways. That's my thought. If anyone has any thoughts of their own about this, I'd love to hear them!

[aasekhon]

Hello

This is the first post on my new tumblr, dedicated to Assumptions (my upcoming book) and anything Victorian-related.

[girl4music]

TV Creators - I’m begging you. Please please please wrap the narratives and themes around the characters that you already have. Your leads, sides and seasonal recurrings. Don’t do it the other way around. Don’t force your characters to be a specific way because you want to tell a specific story. Let them come into their own through the actual storytelling of your narrative/plot. Wrap the entire story around them. Who they are, what they care about, how it makes them act or react, the relationships they get into because of it, the conflicts and challenges and issues.

You’re giving us all this character representation but you’re not doing anything significant or substantial with that representation. You’re instead trying to force and contrive narratives and themes that don’t make sense for them and it feels empty and lifeless. It falls flat. It doesn’t work. It doesn’t hit. You can’t relate to it or resonate with it because it feels so inauthentic.

Try doing the opposite instead and watch the magic that comes from it. And it will happen so effortlessly with the right cast. The right setup of people writing and portraying these characters. The immediate dynamite chemistry between them and the organic camaraderie can only surface if you let things happen naturally as opposed to forced. And a way of avoiding this issue in TV showmaking is by putting the characterization first and making that the focus. Character-driven art/entertainment becomes both pop culture and timeless cult classics for a reason. Telling the stories you want to tell that way rather than force-feeding dialogue that would never ever come out of that specific character’s mouth whatsoever or contriving actions and choices and motivations that just don’t feel right for that specific character. You know well that the audience can’t get into it if they can’t feel the authenticity in it. I know I can’t. That’s why I tend to stick with the cult classics over the new. It’s because creators aren’t getting the assignment.

But if they tried to do the opposite of what’s usually done in this TV landscape every now and again… and take the risk… I think they’ll be well rewarded for it. They’ll have the likes of mine and many others undying passion, loyalty and gratitude for doing it.

It’s been proven over and over again that this is true.

There’s no point providing representation if you’re not going to do anything substantial with it and then just cut it because it isn’t doing the numbers you expect.

It won’t if you’re not actually fucking trying will it?

[krennthief]

KyoAni is so good with character-driven slice-of-the-life, I'd say

[words-pics-flicks]

The fact is that all character-driven films with plots have got to square the circle of character and plot. And what happens has to be feasible for character and feasible for plot and serve the needs of the story.

Mike Leigh

(quoted in 'Mike Leigh' by Sean O' Sullivan)

[thecharactercomma]

Hi! I was wondering if you could help me out. The story I'm working on is about a boy who has some emotional issues, problems with alcoholism and is very careless about school. He's known as the school's slut (but everyone is chill about that). He goes on dates w a boy he falls in love with and everything is perfect. At some point the alcoholism (and other stuff) becomes a problem for them and that's when the REAL plot starts, but in the mean time I'm afraid the plot is just dull. Help, pls. xx

I’m sorry about being so incredibly late in answering this.Hopefully what I have to say is still relevant, or can at least still help youin some way.

It’s hard to say without knowing more, but just based onthis ask it sounds like your story actuallystarts somewhere between his happy relationship and the alcoholism. The rest isbackstory.

Meaning that this backstory should probably not be in yourfirst few chapters. You’ll have to hint at it every now and then to givereaders tidbits of what this backstory is, but you shouldn’t actually havechapters 1-5 filled with scenes showing him careless about school and hisadventures as the “school slut.”

For example, maybe your opening scene is him on a date withthis other boy, who he’s been with for a month or so by now. He’s feelinghopeful and optimistic about this new relationship, and still very much in thehoneymoon period of love. During this date, though, something happens (ourinciting incident) that starts soon-to-come problems and escalating drama. 

Perhapsyou already have an idea for that already, but if not, an example might besomething like this: someone from school approaches him and tries to prompt himfor sex (perhaps thinking that this boy is still “school slut” and would be upfor it), and your main character starts to worry about how this reputation willaffect this new relationship. Keep in mind this inciting incident will dependon what your main character wants. Is he ashamed of his past or afraid that itmight “haunt” his new relationship? Or maybe during this inciting incident, hisboyfriend gets super offended by the random person’s propositioning. Anythingthat might spark some trouble in paradise for these two and begin the downward spiral.

Don’t worry so much about the plot being “boring.” If you’re passionate about this story and if it interests you, that interest will show in your writing once you have a few drafts to hone it.

Thisdoesn’t sound like a fantasy or action genre story where there will be explosionsand dragons and battles and whatnot, but that’s okay. That’s not automatically “boring.” You don’t need thosethings to have an interesting plot. Just keep in mind that this story is likelycharacter-driven. A lot of reader interest will come in emotion investment and wonderingwhat will happen to these characters. You can still have “action” to keepthings tense, like arguments, misunderstandings, characters saying things thatthey can never take back, and much more.

For more information about character-driven versusplot-driven stories, I dug up thisold article which might help you out.

Hope that helps!

–E

[whyareader]

         Squaresville on Youtube

"“It’s like we’re on the launch pad for the rocket ship to the rest of our lives but mission control is counting down at half speed.” ―Squaresville. 

Squaresville follows best friends Esther and Zelda as they try to create their own adventures in there sleepy suburb and average high school. But when Zelda gets involved with a sweet but unmotivated boy, Esther begins to feel left out. Esther has always followed Zelda's lead (if sometimes begrudgingly), but now that she's been sidelined by her best friend with who will she share her confusing new self-realisation. 

Rating: 4/5

I chose to review Squaresville for a couple reasons: the webseries has been getting some serious attention lately, its second season kicked off strong earlier this year, and the actress Mary Kate Wiles is also on the incredibly popular Lizzie Bennet Diaries which only just ended.  

Squaresville packs an incredible amount of content into its 2-6 minute long episodes. It manages to cover teenage rebellion, love, friendship, sexuailty and poularity with room left over for jokes and sarcasm. The production values are also incredibly high for a web series and the acting is of television quality.

Teens will see themselves reflected in the characters and situations depicted and laugh and cringe along with Esther and Zelda.

Appeal-Factors: Sarcastic, Character-driven, Angst-filled, Funny, Conversational, and Dialogue-rich

Awards:

2013 IAWTV Best Comedy Web Series,

2013 IAWTV Best Ensemble Performance,  

2013 IAWTV Best Writing (Comedy)

Suggested for: grades 8 and up.

Suggested Book-talking Hook: Do you like Freaks & Geeks, Daria, and Ghost World? Give Squaresville a try!

Read-alikes: School of Thrones, Lizzie Bennet Diaries, and Lonelygirl15

Weatherup, C. (2012). Squaresville[Web series]. San Bruno: Youtube.com.

[cinephilesadeqi]

Movie Analysis and Review: "Dog Day Afternoon" (1975)

Introduction:“Dog Day Afternoon” presents a gripping narrative of a botched bank robbery that escalates into a day-long hostage situation, unveiling the complexities of its characters amidst a media frenzy and FBI intervention. Synopsis:In the sweltering summer of 1972, inexperienced criminal Sonny Wortzik (Al Pacino) orchestrates a bank heist in Brooklyn with his accomplice Sal Naturile (John…

[inmydreamimthestar]

The Avengers and Fandom

I have yet to see any of the Avengers movies, or any of the Marvel movies about the Avengers. I also haven't seen the SHIELD television show. But according to a cursory look at the internet, especially tumblr, the Avengers are pretty big.

Now, before anyone gets offended and thinks I am dissing the Avengers, I have been reading the Avengers for over 25 years. I have many single issue and TPBs.

What I am curious about the current Avengers fandom is how much they seem to like The Avengers as a character-driven franchise. For the most part, The Avengers were always Marvel's plot-driven franchise. There was some good writing, and some long-range character arcs, but the Avengers often had a shifting roster (pretty much every Marvel super-hero has been in the team at some point) and they weren't the involved angst-fest the X-Men were. The typical reason an Avengers comic existed was to have some Superheroes fight cosmic level-villains, in new and exciting ways, with some snappy patter and plot-twists, and then to change the line-up and fight a new menace. We didn't usually spend a lot of time wondering what the character's motivations were. So I am curious how the latest incarnation of The Avengers has turned from plot to character.

[firstoccupier]

Why 'House' Remains a Fan Favorite: A Review

Series Review: House “House” is a captivating medical drama that stands out with its sharp humor, witty dialogue, and the sarcastic brilliance of Dr. Gregory House, brilliantly portrayed by Hugh Laurie. The series explores complex medical cases, often blending dark comedy with intense drama. While the show’s portrayal of hospital life is often unrealistic and the cases may stretch plausibility,…

[missalwayswriting]

Is Your Plot Irrelevant?

There’s lots of talk about so-called plot-driven vs. character-driven stories, and the different ways to write each. You may be wondering which category your story fits into. STOP THAT! Don’t let someone waste anymore of your valuable time. All great fiction is character-driven. Take out the compelling characters and the plot is irrelevant. No one cares what happens to fictional stick figures. But a unique take on a character can only enhance your writing. Get to know your characters, fall in love with them, then screw them over and see what they do. That’s what I call a good plot-and you didn’t have to spend hours agonizing over a blank screen, because the characters did the hard part for you.

[la-knight]

you don't care about Maia getting back with her abusive ex?

From what I remember (I read City of Lost Souls when it came out and have read ten million other things since), they don’t get together until he’s had some therapy and reformed and become an upstanding citizen? As someone who’s had abusive boyfriends, I like that.

Because he didn’t even realize what a douche he was being. Now, Cassandra Clare blames this on him being a werewolf, and I don’t like that because it’s lazy and most of the werewolf novels I’ve read - and that she’s probably getting this from - have really rambunctious, rude, obnoxious teenage werewolf boys who are abusive, obnoxious little douches and have to literally be beaten by their fathers/older brothers/uncles/whatever in order to shape up, and I hate that. So the abusive teen werewolf thing? This I care about. Abusive boyfriend in YA novel (or ex-boyfriend in this case)? I care about that.

But I like that for once a YA novel showed a person who was being abusive, didn’t realize it (as is often the real-world case), reformed through official means such as therapy, and apologized and became a better person; the only other books I know of that did that were the Shatter Me series. 

I think it might’ve been better to give Maia and her guy their own book in which they handle this and do therapy together and come to grips with werewolf-ness instead of just throwing them together in a subplot, but that sort of book wouldn’t have occurred to someone like Cassandra Clare, I don’t think. That would be more a book focused on a relationship, like Twilight, versus one focused on “the end is nigh, we’re all doomed,” like Shadowhunters. And she doesn’t seem capable of doing the character-driven type stuff.

[eloreenmoon]

'Darker Space' by Lisa Henry #LGBT #Book #Review

‘Darker Space’ by Lisa Henry #LGBT #Book #Review

Marc reviews ‘Darker Space’ (Dark Space 2) by Lisa Henry (Published by Loose Id on October 13th 2015, 210 Pages long) RGR received a free copy of this book in exchange for an honest review. If you read my review of ‘Dark Space‘, the first book in this series, you might realize that I am a huge fan of Brady and Cameron. Especially Brady stole my heart and when I had the chance to meet Lisa Henry…

[bookwyrmshoard]

A character-driven novel doesn’t mean there’s no plot, or that the plot is unimportant. It means that the plot – the action – arises out of who the main character is (or are, if there are more than one.) Everything the main character does, every reaction, comes from his/her personality and motivation, and by the end, the character has grown or changed in some significant way.

Genre is pretty irrelevant: a book in almost any genre can be character-driven, if it’s well-written. I gravitate toward character-driven books, so most of my favorite books fall in that category.

(Click through to see the full list)