PDA

View Full Version : Love, Death, Sex & Violence...


SFFWorld.com
Home - Discussion Forums - News - Reviews - Interviews

New reviews, interviews and news

New in the Discussion Forum


Pages : [1] 2

Shanoncia
February 8th, 2004, 10:42 AM
Generally I'd consider myself to be a very cryptic writer, and as I progress through the creation of my trilogy I find my charcters though beautiful to me, likely to be freakish to others.

Some are quite passionate on there quests to find justifyed violence, and others called lovers find romance in usually unfound places.

My question is this... when you read a novel do prefer characters your can relate to on a basic level...? Or do you really prefer those misfits that tug at the deeper parts of yourself?

Do characters really have to be ral to be good? And how can we judge what real is????

Bardos
February 8th, 2004, 03:32 PM
My question is this... when you read a novel do prefer characters your can relate to on a basic level...? Or do you really prefer those misfits that tug at the deeper parts of yourself?

I prefer the misfits! I hate the characters "you can relate to [blah, blah, blah]". Why? Because they're usually stereotypical, and bore my out of my mind. You see, I don't think that I'm THAT much interesting, so I don't wanna read about guys like me; I want to read about those weirdos (yes, even more weird than me! :D), misfits, and "crazy duds". They are more interesting, and more real, in my mind.


Do characters really have to be ral to be good? And how can we judge what real is????

Yes, they have to be realistic to be good. But reality can vary... What is real for one person might be fake for another. But, generaly, real is something that has feelings -- any sort of feelings -- and acts in a way that you believe it. Even if you write about a demon (not-so-realistic a figure), he will be believable if he acts and sounds alive.

Dawnstorm
February 8th, 2004, 04:41 PM
Originally posted by Bardos
Yes, they have to be realistic to be good. But reality can vary... What is real for one person might be fake for another. But, generaly, real is something that has feelings -- any sort of feelings -- and acts in a way that you believe it. Even if you write about a demon (not-so-realistic a figure), he will be believable if he acts and sounds alive.

I'd go for "inner consistency" rather than reality. (As long as a story doesn't logically contradict itself, anything is allowed).

milamber_reborn
February 8th, 2004, 10:47 PM
Whatever works for the story.

juzzza
February 9th, 2004, 07:09 AM
The best characters for me are those that are unusual but at the same time, I can relate to their thoughts/actions.

It's if their actions are unbelievable or dialogue, when I put a book down.

LUKEDAWG
February 9th, 2004, 11:44 AM
I don't neccessarily have to relate to the character, but to me the graver importance (as mentioned above) is for consistency, thus believability. I don't mind if the character is completely evil, or good (to a definete extent) but they have to make rational desicions that are consistent with their characterization. I find so many times when I'm reading some novel or other and I'm like...oh man so and so would never do that, what's he doing?
But I know this is kind of contradicting myself slightly but I also like characters that do the unexpected, constantly surprising me at every desicion. I think there's a way that you can make a character that is consistent and believable, but yet you still cannot completely discern his morality or his rationality.

It can be pretty damn boring when you know...oh well of course lancelot will go save the maiden in distress instead of going to lead king arthur's army into battle. Because...why? Because that's what Lancelot would do.

I don't want that at all, and I don't think anyone does. They want a character whose desicion making is unpredictable-- now how you come to make him complex and deep enough to be believable and follow the above mentioned characterization...well leaves leave that for another thread. :)

kegasaurus
February 9th, 2004, 01:38 PM
Actually, its very uncomplicated, yet entirely human.

Its called rationale and unfortunately we are all guilty of allowing it to prejudice everything we try to consciously believe.

How many here know of a couple of people with similar ideals adn view points, two people who like to express themselves ina very similar manner, yet two people we feel differently about? Basically they are the same except for the fact taht one we like and the other we hate?

Why does this happen? You've got me.

Life IS like a box of chocolates and unfortunately its not that you don't know what you're going to get, it's more that if you enjoy cherry/almond from eating cadbury's, you're going to apply the same criteria to Nestle. Unfortunately chocolates not chocolate and they all have an individual taste. We take this on a bite by bite basis while comparing to our own structured beliefs.

This is why you will never get two people who like exactly the same thing, not because its not good, but because they experienced their first kiss on a couch, compared to your first kiss which was on a football oval.

I just re-read this and have found taht my intoxicated state still doesn't allow this to make much sense.

It's not that you want the character to make sense (because honestly, do any of us) its more that we need to at least try and think we understand their motivations. We need to apply it to soimething we know, yet we all know very little in the grand scheme of things.

So in conclusion, there isn't one answer, but 6 billion and they're all wrong for the person next to them.

JRMurdock
February 9th, 2004, 04:51 PM
I guess I prefer something different be it the character being odd in a normal situation or a normal character in an odd situation. Just something about the story that grabs my interest. Normal characters in a predictable situation tends to lull me to sleep...


Life IS like a box of chocolates and unfortunately its not that you don't know what you're going to get, it's more that if you enjoy cherry/almond from eating cadbury's, you're going to apply the same criteria to Nestle. Unfortunately chocolates not chocolate and they all have an individual taste. We take this on a bite by bite basis while comparing to our own structured beliefs.

Life is like a box of chocolates, you're bound to run into a few nuts. (or crunchy frogs if you're a python fan).

Maus99

tingmakpuk
February 9th, 2004, 08:40 PM
Life IS like a box of chocolates... just when your thinking the box can't get any better, you bite into something that tastes like crap.

Anyway, a character should avoid stereotypes, but after that you've got to write what seem confortable. If you want to write something off-the-wall, go study at an asylum or a high school. A surprising number of "oddball" characters just don't work, because the writer can't relate to the character.

Shanoncia
February 9th, 2004, 08:44 PM
Wow.... I'm glad I opened this to discussion. It would seem the general consensus is that a characters has to consistant as themselves as oppsed to ourselves. I agree... :)