\u201cIt\u2019s the
\ncharacters, stupid.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u2013 Ronald D. Moore, Executive <\/em>Comics are DC\u2019s Final Crisis<\/em> saw the return of Darkseid Imagine a When dissecting your characters, whether protagonist, Uniqueness<\/strong><\/p>\n This quality may sound self-evident and I\u2019m sure you\u2019re Glinterhilda may seem as original as a computer virus that To accomplish this, you have to ask yourself many questions. Universality<\/strong><\/p>\n \u201cWhen we\u2019re –<\/span><\/span><\/span>Michael Wright, Author of Playwriting in Process<\/em>\u00a0<\/p>\n At first Robin This In the end, Bibliography<\/strong><\/p>\n King, Wright, Remember: you can follow all the NaGraNoWriMo posts here<\/a>!<\/em><\/p>\n Be the first person to comment! <\/a><\/p>\n
\nProducer of Battlestar Galactica<\/em>
\n(2004) and Caprica<\/em><\/p>\n
\nalways filled with over-the-top superpowers, bright spandex costumes, and
\nuniverse-spanning storylines. While these flashy props were enough to sustain
\nthe comics industry in its infancy, the modern comic reader expects more. Many
\nof the biggest, most complex stories are known for their iconic moments with
\ntheir characters.<\/p>\n
\nand a time-travelling bullet, but we all remember it for the simple image of
\nSuperman holding the lifeless body of his best friend \u2013 Batman \u2013 in his arms,
\nsorrow filling Big Blue\u2019s face. Marvel\u2019s Civil
\nWar<\/em> brought heroes toe to toe with one another, splitting teams and
\nfriendships alike. What became iconic was the bitter struggle between two men
\nwho used to be best friends: Iron Man and Captain America, then Stark\u2019s grief
\nover his actions leading inexorably to the death of Steve Rogers.\u00a0<\/p>\n
\nphoto in a frame. A couple is standing in front of the Eiffel Tower, quite
\nhappy. The frame is a fun pewter souvenir from the Tower itself. The focus \u2013
\nhowever \u2013 is still the couple. Stories are just the same. We may set it in a
\ncreative, dramatic setting. We may dress it up with superpowers, costumes, or
\ndeep philosophic meanings. None of this works, however, without the characters
\nto drive the story. If the characters don\u2019t ring true, the entire story falls
\napart. Characters are how we \u2013 the reader \u2013 access, understand, and empathize
\nwith a story.\u00a0<\/p>\n
\nantagonist, or a mere cameo appearance; they need to feel real. The
\nthree-dimensionality of a character can make or break your story, no matter how
\nbrilliant of a plot you\u2019ve devised or how epic the setting. Creating a
\nbelievable character involves a precarious balance between two not-so-small
\naspects: uniqueness and universality.<\/p>\n
\nalready thinking, \u201cMy character is completely original! No one has ever written
\nabout a half-dwarf, half-cyborg ex-porn star-turned airline pilot-turned super
\nhero name Glinterhilda!\u201d This is probably true, but I\u2019m not talking about her
\nbackground, I\u2019m talking about how she interacts with other characters, how she
\nconnects the reader to the material, and how she approaches each new situation.<\/p>\n
\nboosts computer performance, but if she reacts to every situation just like
\nJohn McClane in the Die Hard<\/em> movies,
\nshe won\u2019t come across as unique no matter how complex her back story. For this
\nreason, it\u2019s important to really flesh out a character. Figure out who they
\nare, where they\u2019ve been, why they react in the ways they do. While all
\ncharacters are drawn from real life or other fiction, the good ones aren\u2019t
\nsimple carbon-copies. Even movies based on fact will dramatize the real-life
\ncharacters.<\/p>\n
\nHow did Glinterhilda become a cyborg? Why did she turn to porn? Why did she
\nleave porn? Why did she become an airline pilot? Why did she stop? Why did she
\nbecome a super hero? There are even questions we may overlook such as why her
\nparents named her Glinterhilda. While you may find the answers to these
\nquestions never coming up in your story, they all affect how you character
\nmakes decisions and how she interacts with other characters.<\/p>\n
\nbiased, it\u2019s generally because we\u2019ve gotten hung up on a particular and
\nforgotten to connect with the universal about another person.”<\/p>\n
\nglance, universality may sound the opposite of uniqueness, and it should. While
\neach character should be unique, there is \u2013 in each of us \u2013 a universal quality
\nthat every other human being can relate to. \u00a0<\/span>Superman is a nearly omnipotent alien, but we
\nrelate to him because of his love and caring for Lois and his parents. Even Lex
\nLuthor has a deep caring for humanity. That\u2019s what misguides him in his mission
\nto destroy the Man of Steel.\u00a0<\/p>\n
\nWilliams\u2019 portrayal of Andrew in the film Bicentennial
\nMan <\/em>drew in audiences and made them cry for him over and over again.
\nAndrew, however, was an android. Despite this limitation, it was his stark
\nhumanity that drew in audiences. \u00a0<\/span>Characters
\nhave parents, loved ones, a sense of humor, a reverence for things holy, and
\nall other characteristics that you endow them with. These traits make each and
\nevery unique character still represent a range of real human beings. Without
\nthis universality, your readers will never connect to your story. They need to
\nfeel as though they have something in common with your characters.\u00a0<\/p>\n
\nuniversality doesn\u2019t just apply to your leading men and ladies. The characters
\nmost likely to suffer from two-dimensionality aren\u2019t your protagonists, but the
\nantagonists and the side-characters. Stephen King wrote, \u201c\u2026no one is \u2018the bad
\nguy\u2019 or \u2018the best friend\u2019 or \u2018the whore with a heart of gold\u2019 in real life; in
\nreal life we each of us regard ourselves as the main character, the
\nprotagonist, the big cheese; the camera is on us <\/em>baby.\u201d An actor never judges the character he or she portrays,
\nand neither can a writer. You have to love your characters, all of them. You
\nhave to understand and relate to all your characters. The most frightening villains
\nare the ones we can imagine running into at our local Wal-Mart, and they need
\nthat crucial universality to become that.<\/p>\n
\nthere is no single best way to create characters. Stephen King begins writing a
\nstory, knowing his characters only as vague references, and then they develop
\ninto human beings as the story grows. Other writers may spend hours writing
\nin-depth character histories before ever inserting a character into a story.
\nThe journey to great characters is up to you \u2013 the writer \u2013 so long as the
\ndestination is true, life-like characters that write themselves.<\/p>\n
\nStephen. On Writing: A Memoir of the Craft<\/a><\/em>. New York, NY: Pocket, 2000. Print.<\/p>\n
\nMichael. Playwriting in Process: Thinking and Working Theatrically<\/a><\/em>. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann, 1997. Print.<\/p>\n