How do you writers create better characters?

[freedom lover]

I realized many things when I started writng a fantasy story over the weekend. One of them was that I lacked the understanding to create characters with sufficient depth and personality to seem real. My story's style leans heavily toward pulp, but even those novels have interesting characters. How do you guys do it?

[Sindawe]

Not a creator, just a consumer.

The characters I love have flaws and internal conflicts abounds.

Neo is filled with doubt about being The One.

Samwise is tempted by The One Ring, but resists.

O'Neal knows that is is not as smart as Daniel.

Croaker and Lady don the garb of Darkness, but still bring prosperity and peace to those they touch.

Louis Wu gives up being a Protector for the sake of his child.

Spock is forever torn between the logic of his teachings, and the emotions of his heart.

Sal realizes the vessel is just a toaster, and he's more than the container.

[freedom lover]

I like flawed characters too. I never got Superman and if Peter Parker had been created realistically he would have murdered some of his classmates.

[RaspberrySurprise]

I like flawed characters too. I never got Superman and if Peter Parker had been created realistically he would have murdered some of his classmates.

What makes you say that?

[LadySmith]

Please disregard, RaspberrySurprise.

Peter Parker was a good person who became a hero and people like that don't murder anybody. 

[freedom lover]

What makes you say that?

Which part? The idea of an unstoppable superhero seems boring to me. As for Parker? Its my understanding that he got beat up frequently by Flash Thompson and other jocks. You would think someone like that would just flip out the first time he was bullied after he got superpowers. Maybe kill was the wrong word. If he did kill them he would become a fugitive and have to resort to crime.

That also begs the question; if one has superpowers why deal with Jameson's crap? Why not just spend your days observing and ambushing drug dealers?

I suppose the real answer has something to do with ones moral character. I simply refuse to believe most people would become heros like Parker if given the power to do so.  

Please disregard, RaspberrySurprise.

Peter Parker was a good person who became a hero and people like that don't murder anybody. 

I just saw your post. You're right. Parker went through his challenges and turned out to have high morals in the end. But, like I said, most people aren't like comic book heros.

[LadySmith]

I just saw your post. You're right. Parker went through his challenges and turned out to have high morals in the end. But, like I said, most people aren't like comic book heros.

No, unfortunately most people aren't like comic book heroes.
Most people aren't heroes at all.
That's a big part of what makes heroes special when they do turn up in comic books and in real life.
They try their best, and often succeed, in doing the right thing.
Usually, that's very hard to do. But it doesn't stop them from doing it, or at least trying to.

Those same high morals that you mentioned is what kept Peter Parker from doing Jameson harm even though he has superpowers.
It's also what keeps us responsible gun owners from drawing a weapon whenever we encounter people who are simply unpleasant and annoying.
It's what separates us from the bad guys. 

[BlueStarLizzard]

if your talking about flaws, without having the super high morals. see characters like the punisher. i always like them best when it comes to character dynamic. its not a good guy. its not a saint. frank castle has demons and fights them, but at the same time he succomes to them. he is a killer of killers which makes him just a wrong as the guys he is fighting. but you still root for him becuase his demons started from losing love, not simple greed or hate.
another example would be characters that are inherently bad but still follow a code of conduct or something similar. their code isn't the same as the good good guys, but still has merit. if you've ever scene the movie Hellride, the leader of the biker gang has that sort of code. he doesn't break his promise.
too be honest, i think these type of characters are more real, if overblown.

as for another way to give characters depth. give them human quirks. an obsession for something mundane or a weird, odd habit. something that everyone has but everyone is diffrent. actually, give them several little things, don't spend too much time on it, but make it part of them.

[MicroBalrog]

It's hard to believe I am saying this but it is important to keep in mind what you're writing. Some genres can put up with having a 'perfect' character. In particular, observe Akunin's Fandorin novels. He keeps on and on how Fandorin is witty, and smart, and knows karate, and it all works out in the end.

And the novels are excellent.

The important thing to keep in mind is detail. Sometimes you can describe the character very well by hinting or pointing out something he does.

Consider:

1. Picard's Lipton tea in Star Trek, and Sisko's baseball in DS9.

2. Daniel's allergies.

3. The dinosaurs on the front control panel of Serenity.

People do things beyond whatever your current plot is, and it's important to hint at these people.

It's also important to remember that heroic stuff, amazing stuff, over-the-top stuff is often done by people IRL. You think Rambo films are insane, what with Rambo killing 100+ Soviets? Look up some Medal of Honor citations.

The same applies for evil and insane.

[Zardozimo Oprah Bannedalas]

You know how some/many writers outline the story before they write it? Well, I'd advise that. I'd also advise outlining your characters. Their education level, nationality, region, etc - anything and everything you can think of. You want that stuff squared away as you're writing. You don't have to tell the reader all of that, but the information is there if you need it.
Some might use bigger words, or more words, or more profanity, etc. Some might be generally nice guys, others tightly-wound. Some might be slow to anger, others very quick to it. Some might always be willing to give money or buy gifts for people, others might buy gifts as a way to buy people, others might never spend a dime on anyone but themselves. Some might drink a lot, others a little, others none. Keep in mind that people in a particular group will often do similar things, but not identical things... so if you have a group of people in a SpecOps sort of team, they need to have similarities in some areas - in dedication to the mission, personal fitness, marksmanship, etc. They might differ on points of fitness, for example, in the area of cigarettes - but still run a few miles every day. One guy could be a democrat, all the rest republicans. Make your characters different, but not too different.

You might want to outline your characters first, then outline a story. I've found that it helps.
Good luck.

[freedom lover]

Those same high morals that you mentioned is what kept Peter Parker from doing Jameson harm even though he has superpowers.
It's also what keeps us responsible gun owners from drawing a weapon whenever we encounter people who are simply unpleasant and annoying.
It's what separates us from the bad guys. 

True. If I remember correctly Parker only seems to use violence against criminals and those who are violent toward him. Many law abiding gun owners and criminals are willing to kill. What sets them apart is their motivation. One kills only to defend life, the other for personal gain. 

as for another way to give characters depth. give them human quirks. an obsession for something mundane or a weird, odd habit. something that everyone has but everyone is diffrent. actually, give them several little things, don't spend too much time on it, but make it part of them.

I'll try that.

People do things beyond whatever your current plot is, and it's important to hint at these people.

I think I could do something like that.

It's also important to remember that heroic stuff, amazing stuff, over-the-top stuff is often done by people IRL. You think Rambo films are insane, what with Rambo killing 100+ Soviets? Look up some Medal of Honor citations.

I've heard some of the stories. Amazing stuff.

You might want to outline your characters first, then outline a story. I've found that it helps.

I did that after I started, but not to the level you authors have been suggesting.

Good luck.

Thanks. I'll need it. Thanks to the rest of you authors too.

[280plus]

Most people aren't heroes at all.

I can shoot 280 plus, so I'm a hero. You have to shoot 295 plus to be a superhero though so I have yet to attain superhero status.  :|

 

[Devonai]

I constantly stress that my characters are inherently human (including the aliens), and they demonstrate a wide variety of emotions.  I also back up why they feel the way they do.  Every single one of them is deeply flawed, but most remain functional due to maturity and/or positive reinforcement by their peers.  The least flawed character is a former Marine sniper and former CIA case officer, but he is a natural born follower, not a leader, and thus takes a back seat to the more capable, if more emotional, leaders.

My characters also have clearly defined moral and ethical boundaries, although those boundaries differ greatly.  Some are perfectly okay with the concept of genocide, for example, while others abhor the idea.  Lesser points of disagreement include theft of goods, loyalty to recent allies, and dealing with punishment within their own ranks.  If problems fall into ethical gray areas (like kneecaps, Shepherd Book would say), then the characters will argue the topic and more often than not simply do what's best for the mission at hand.

Defining personal quirks is fine, but care must be taken to ensure the reader is not distracted by them.  Unless a quirk directly effects the narrative, mentioning them once or twice is usually sufficient.

On the subject of good guys and bad guys, I follow the advice of the late Blake Snyder:  There are no bad guys.  Everyone thinks they're the good guys, just with differing goals, and may even believe that they are the star of their own movie.  A well-developed character should be able to carry the story alone if you were to write it from their perspective.  This is why I give even throwaway characters a couple of paragraphs to let themselves be defined.

Do all this and you should be able to create good guys that the reader cares about and wants to succeed, and bad guys that can be rooted for in their own twisted way.

[Jamisjockey]

I'm actually writing an action novel.  My sticking points are the unimportant characters.  How much detail to include about them, and some of the less important parts of the story.

[BrokenPaw]

One thing that can help is to "borrow" personality traits from people you know, and give them to characters in your work.  I'm not suggesting that you should take a person you know and just make him or her a character, but rather:  watch people as they interact; does one person consistently take everything that is said to them as an attack?  Character trait.  Is one person a problem-fixer, while another prefers to talk endlessly but never do anything?  Character traits.  Know anyone with a phobia that somehow could relate to your plot?  See how that person reacts when dealing with that phobia.

Things like this add depth to your characters.  For major characters in a novel-length work, some significant depth is probably necessary, or readers will get bored.  For minor characters, they need to have at least a little depth, or they'll become interchangeable, throw-away characters, and at that point you might as well combine them (consider Rosencrantz and Guildenstern from Hamlet; they were so interchangeable that Shakespeare even referred to that fact a couple of times in the play.)

Part of the reason for putting a couple of quirks into a character is that it allows the reader to identify with that character, which does a lot of your work for you; if one of your characters reminds a reader of someone they know, then they'll unconsciously fill in details for that character, using their own friend as reference, and that will allow the character to become richer in their minds without you having to explain every little detail.  And one mantra that you will hear over and over is "Show, don't tell."  If your character John is a jerk, show that through having him be a jerk, rather than stating (outright in the narrative, or through dialog) that he's a jerk.  In fact, you can use this game to reveal insight into other characters:  if John's been unfailingly a nice guy, but Jane tells Ann that John's a jerk, then you have given the reader something to chew on about Jane, and possibly the interrelationship between Jane and John, and (depending upon how Ann reacts) you can extend this to hint at the Jane/Ann and Ann/John relationships as well.

Avoid putting a character in the book that is you; too often, because of how strongly a writer will identify with such a character, it will become overbalanced.  Since the writer knows everything that's going on, it's natural for the character to have an unrealistically-canny insight into what's going on.  (This is related to the Mary Sue phenomenon).

There is a pretty good forum for writers to share ideas and discuss things like this, as well as to post their own work and critique the work of others, at Hatrack River.

-BP

[freedom lover]

Thanks again guys.

[AZRedhawk44]

You know how some/many writers outline the story before they write it? Well, I'd advise that. I'd also advise outlining your characters.

Stephen King suggests strongly AGAINST this.  He outlined the Dark Tower series.  It promptly stopped for several years... it might have been the Low Men obstructing his thought process by using Breakers, but more likely he felt trapped against what his creativity was trying to push as a better solution.  Once he discovered that he had lost the outline, he continued writing that story.

He wrote about this in one of the intros to the books.  Mine are packed away in a box, or I'd find the exact quote.  But he basically said an outline kills a story the second you put pen to paper with the intention of framing it.

[BrokenPaw]

I agree with what AZ said.  For me, at least, outlines are for nonfiction, to make sure that all of the info you want to convey is in there, and organized in a coherent way.

For fiction...not so much. 

All of my work so far is character-driven (not in the "character-driven" sense that writers will talk about, where the story is basically about how particular characters deal with one or more situations based upon their personalities, but rather, the characters exist in my mind to some extent, and I take the story in the direction that the characters want to take it.)  I was blocked on my first novel for well over two years, because I thought I knew where I wanted it to end, but I couldn't see how to get there.  But the characters were nudging me to take it in a different direction, and I did, and the story ended in a completely different way than I expected or planned.  And it was a much better ending than the one I had planned, too.

But there are fiction writers out there who swear by outlines.  You mileage may vary.

Outlines are a tool, and (just like any other tool) they may fit your purposes well, or poorly, and you need to decide when to use them and when not to.

[Hawkmoon]

I suppose the real answer has something to do with ones moral character. I simply refuse to believe most people would become heros like Parker if given the power to do so.   

But you're forgetting the story line ... or don't they tell the story line any more? Before he became Spider Man, Peter Parker's favorite uncle (or was it both his aunt and his uncle?) was killed by thugs. So once he became endowed with special powers, Peter decided to use those powers to try to prevent thugs from doing the same thing to other people.

[seeker_two]

I like flawed characters too. I never got Superman and if Peter Parker had been created realistically he would have murdered some of his classmates.

Like real life, a person's background and parents have a lot to do with that. Both Clark and Peter were raised by family who gave them strong moral values. Compare them to characters like the Punisher or Hellboy.

Simplest advice I can offer: Write what you know. If you use your own experiences (even characters you've read before) and observations, you'll do much better than trying to speculate about personalities you don't know.

Good luck on your work.

[freedom lover]

But you're forgetting the story line ... or don't they tell the story line any more? Before he became Spider Man, Peter Parker's favorite uncle (or was it both his aunt and his uncle?) was killed by thugs. So once he became endowed with special powers, Peter decided to use those powers to try to prevent thugs from doing the same thing to other people.

The movie said he got the powers before his uncle was murdered.

Simplest advice I can offer: Write what you know. If you use your own experiences (even characters you've read before) and observations, you'll do much better than trying to speculate about personalities you don't know.

Good luck on your work.

Thanks. I'll do that. I'll think about outlines too.

[Doggy Daddy]

How do you writers create better characters?

Calligraphy

DD