Disclaimer: No books have been harmed in the writing of this article. All characters have been provided with a safety briefing before participating in the experiment and have signed waivers to that effect.
“I write fiction not for my readers and not for myself. I write fiction for the sake of those odd heroic characters that are contained therein. They are counting on me as much as I am counting on them.”
― Nicholas Trandahl
I don’t know about you, but my life is a novel populated by troublesome characters.
If you don’t believe me, you need only peruse an account of my latest altercation with one particularly recalcitrant specimen of their number: Let me get into your head! screameth the author, pulling at her hair in desperation.
It is not unusual for writers to have a love-hate relationship with their characters. As authors we want to be fully in control of our story with all of its twists and turns; yet more often than not, we discover that once we have populated our manuscript with characters, the ungrateful residents will make a run for it and take a life of their own.
Characters can make or break a novel. It comes as no surprise that getting characterisation wrong will ensure our manuscripts a cosy trip to the publisher’s fireplace. And given that winters are getting longer and colder with each year, I fear that kindling is in high demand these days.
So far this series of writing tips focused on the Don’ts rather than the Dos of fiction writing, on avoiding mistakes that may deny our manuscripts the chance to see the light of print. We’ve prepared a well presented manuscript and followed all their rules so far. The prose sounds just right, not one jarring sentence in the mix. We even avoided writing in an unsuitable style or using excess adjectives and adverbs. Even that truculent comparison has been brought into play, not to mention the spades of great dialogue. However, I can’t help thinking of those overworked publishers freezing in their offices late into the night with no firewood at their disposal and an idea struck me:
How about a little character sabotage?
Even if we’ve mastered viewpoint, there are still some wonderful means of making our novel less compelling and thus ensure the publisher’s fire will be nicely stoked. Feeling charitable this eve? Let’s see what we can do.
Your first bet is to launch into the story without naming any characters at all. Write as many pages as you can: heated action, conflict galore, show it all unfold but do not reveal one single character name in the process and make sure there are no instances of characterisation at all. I know it’s tough, but hey! We want that fire going, don’t we?
If you’re not doing too well on that count, this second pointer is bound to help get that manuscript into the slush pile. Pick up an old sock and draw a face on it. If the characters have as many in-depth traits as that magic-marker-bejeweled sock, job done. Pin it above your writing desk as a reminder any time you’re tempted to write in a character that exceeds sock traits or actions.
Make them boring. Make them unbelievable. Make them as unpleasant as you possibly can. Here are some of my favourite character clichés for inspiration:
- The Mad Scientist: An inexorable thirst for knowledge and desire for progress have left him isolated from the world and functioning as a somewhat amoral character. Even if his intentions are noble ones – experiments undertaken for the sake of humanity or for the greater good of the world – it will all end very badly indeed. A big head of fluffy white hair and glasses hanging off the tip of his nose are a must.
- The Russian Spy: If the character is male they will be harsh, hardened by years of work in the field. He drinks a lot of vodka and, of course, speaks English with an accent. If they are a woman, she will be beautiful and usually blonde. Long legs are a prerequisite as well as being versed in the art of seduction.
- La Femme Fatale: She spells danger from the moment she first makes an appearance on the page. There is an air of mystery about her and she has all men at her fingertips. She is necessarily the ultimate seductress and will use her power to get whatever she wants.
- The Mary Sue: The ideal woman with a heart of gold. She is beautiful, although she does not know it and must overcome some terrible tragedy from her past when she meets the “right” man.
- That Brooding Rebel: There is no question about it: he must be both gorgeous and a taciturn. He eschews the society of men and women in equal measure. Broods a lot, usually because of his less than exquisite background, but will become the most sensitive and understanding of men when his fated love comes along.
- The Nice Guy: Everyone likes him. He is considerate and modest, has a good sense of humour but will always laugh at himself rather than others. His sole focus in life is to win the heart of the woman he loves, but since even fictional female characters prefer the “bad guy” he will not succeed in his quest try as much as he will.
- The Average Joe / Jill: Medium-sized, brown hair, brown eyes and with no distinctive characteristics whatsoever – average Jill and Joe read like police-report descriptions. Everything about them is generic. They lead boring lives where nothing happens and die much the same – of old age usually. Unusual choice for a protagonist, but often found populating the supporting cast.
- Mirror Mirror: Whether a plain Jane or a rich b*tch, a reluctant hero or a b*st*rd of a libertine, this character finds it impossible to know what they look like unless they look in a mirror. When they do take a peek, their features are usually flawless and in many cases will remind the reader of a specific actor or actress who will be named in order to facilitate their imagination and spare the author the trouble of actually describing them.
- The Heartless Villain: The bad guy who is so bad that he is simply unbelievable. His sole motivation for all despicable actions is nothing more than a desire to do evil. To make up for all this villainy, he has an equally “touching” good side: he either loves his mother or remembers fondly the girl he fell in love with as a young boy, or perhaps he is a vegetarian who loves his cat. When he confronts the hero, he will always give an account of his plans and offer less than plausible explanations for his actions. If inconvenient for the author to keep him meddling in the protagonist’s business, the villain will conveniently give up on his evil plotting for no reason whatsoever.
- The Fashion-Savvy Gay Friend: Always at the ready with a witty line and some fashion advice, especially when his broken-hearted heroine is in need of shopping therapy. He refers to men as “she” and to women as “girlfriend.” The master of taste when it comes to labels and interior design, he is a shoulder to cry on and can always be trusted to critique other characters’ tastes, whether in clothes or men.
Feel free to add to the list. I’m sure you’ve come across a stock character or two in your day.
Archetypes exist for a reason, so it is possible to use one as a guide and then add some twists to make them our own. Beware: if you want to make your novel unpublishable, steer away from the cliché at your own peril.
The above ought to have done it: we are well on our way into unpublished oblivion. But if you’re afraid that the novel might still sneak through, perhaps the third solution will come to the rescue: introduce all characters at once so that the reader can have no chance to wrap their head around who’s who. Do you have ten or perhaps a dozen characters in your novel? Bring them all to the same table as near the start of the novel as you can and let the chaos begin!
It’s also a good idea to introduce a few extras here and there. Let them show up only once and then disappear from the plot never to be heard of again. Walk-on characters are fun and they are also bound to irritate a publisher, which is exactly what we’re attempting to accomplish here.
Another good way of getting the publisher confused is by allowing several characters to dominate the narrative, so that it is impossible to determine who the protagonist is. The easiest way to accomplish this is by using multiple viewpoints with as little skill as we can possibly muster. And if we can also make sure that they are characters we don’t care about, all the better.
If all else fails, here is the masterstroke: create an unsympathetic protagonist. Of course, even such protagonists can be compelling if we dedicate a lot of time and care to make them likeable. Do not fear. Get them to kill their wife after abusing her for years or molest a child and show no remorse for it whatsoever, and chances are no one will read beyond the first few pages.
You know what. I’ve changed my mind. The whole book-burning idea just doesn’t sit well with me somehow. I’d much rather my manuscript was allowed to live another day. With that in mind, I’ll have to think of a different way to keep the publishers warm. Cup of tea springs to mind. Unless of course everyone else decides to go along with the original plan, in which case I’m off the hook. 😉
You just defined a whole lot of my webisode characters! 😉
There is value in using archetypes for humorous ends 🙂 That works every time. Thank you for your comment, Kavalkade.
Very clever, very witty – I LOL’d all through this post! (and smarting as I recognise an archetype or two from your list in my own ‘tome’). Oh well, I’m all in favour of raging fires and cups of tea. 🙂
I’m glad you had fun reading it, Lee-Anne. Of course I hoped it would bring a smile or two, but one can never be sure. Once it’s out there, it is for the reader to decide 🙂
I think all writers are drawn to archetypes. They may be cliches, but there is a reason why they appear so often in literature. Whenever I get a sense that one of my characters falls too neatly into one of those categories, I go back to the drawing room and try to work against stereotype. It can be fun, even if it does mean more work.
LOL!!! Another great post!
Thank you, Luanna. Pleased you enjoyed it 🙂
You´re a walking literary encyclopedia. Great tips, and yes you are damn right. They do tend to go sort of their own way. And I love it.
Thank you, Charly. It’s very good fun when they come to life, isn’t it? Even if they can be rather troublesome at times 😉
There´s no other job like this one, and it is a job, no matter what people around me say.
I agree 🙂
Pingback: Fellow Blogger – Vic Briggs from Shards of Silence | It Goes On
I like the characterization 🙂 and that quote by Nicholas Trandahl
Thank you. It’s a lovely quote, isn’t it? I was very pleased when I found it. Having spent so long with my characters, I’ve come to agree with him.
Huh, you just described a book I read not too long ago. 🙂 I suppose even horribly developed, character-driven novels will make it through the slush piles now and again. ^_^ Great article, thanks!
Thank you. It is true that not everything that gets published is perfectly written. Even the best and most experienced of writers will slip up now and then 🙂
In this case, it was the editor’s slip up considering the novel I read was the author’s first. 🙂 Then again, it’s all subjective, isn’t it? While I really disliked the book, several of my friends loved, loved, loved it.
Interesting. Perhaps there was a distinct lack of novels on that theme or the plot was original enough to make it despite weaknesses in characterisation? I’d be curious to know the title 🙂
I wrote a post about it a few days back (So i read a book…). If I remember correctly, the book is called “The Friday Night Knitting Club”
Will look it up. Thank you. 🙂
Reblogged this on I like country when it rocks.
I can’t believe it took me so long to spot your reblog! Thank you 🙂
Reblogged this on sharonholly and commented:
Very funny post on what not to do when writing. I don’t think I’m guilty of any of the character cliches, but it couldn’t hurt to make sure one of my villains isn’t too much of a brooding rebel…
Thank you for the reblog (and apologies for the belated reply). I know exactly what you mean about those brooding rebels: so difficult to resist having them come along for the run 😉
the ultra religious zealot who rules the household until somebody snaps…the homeless wanderer who maybe leaves trouble in his wake…
but some of the best stereotypes can be found in stephen kings The Stand or James Herberts The Ghosts Of Sleath where the doctor is self-prescribing and mis-diagnoses many of his patients with dire consequences 🙂
That is quite a few more to look into 🙂 Thank you, TwinCentaur.
and i forgot to say that the post was thought provoking and memorable 🙂
Thank you. 🙂
Pingback: The Mystery of an Interesting Plot | vic briggs