Writing weaknesses: Characterization and reader manipulation

*Gratiui thread hijack*

This is one of the more daft ideas I've ever had the misfortune to read. (Your creative writing instructor must have been a masochist. ). For myself, I consciously choose to avoid writing characters that I dislike or loathe. You could get away with this if it's an OC of yours that you happen to dislike. But for canon characters, it gets dangerous. If you don't like your OC, you can muck up their characterization all you want, and the only person you'll enrage is your own self (and that character, perhaps). But if you muck up the characterization of a canonite, then be prepared for the hate.

*End thread hijack*

In terms of showing versus telling, I can't say that I've ever consciously worried about it in my fics. Maybe that means I'm sloppy or lazy, but I tend to put in what needs to be said at a particular moment. Sometimes, showing rather than telling means you'll have to write a paragraph or more describing the actions of a character just so the reader knows what that character is feeling. God, that is BORING. Sometimes, it's easier to just say, "Character A was sad" rather than go through four pages describing said character pacing back and forth, sitting down, then getting up, staring out a window, heaving a couple of well-placed sighs, looking at a holo of a dearly departed loved one, then staring out the window some more, then feeling teary-eyed, etc. See how crappy that is?

 

Actually, I found the writing assignments very helpful once I got over my initial stubborness. He made us think beyond what we LIKED and go into a character's motivations. Once we realized we had to truly make the character likeable, even though we might not agree with him or her, we had to create a backstory, motivations, and explanations that would prove sympathetic to the audience. I think it's easy to write a sympathetic character you like, but much harder to write one that you dislike. Let's face it, we can dislike people even though they're "good." We simply don't click. And we like people that aren't "good." They have something charasmatic about them that draws us in. Like may not be the right word, perhaps we're fascinated with them. Anyway, the point is, I really felt those assignments made me think of writing characters in a different way. It was sort of like a Mary Sue/Gary Stu lesson, though of course we didn't say it that way. We had to create rich, complex characters that we didn't necessarily like. A challenge to be sure, but one that stretched our writing muscles.

 

Well, that sounds rather different than forcing yourself to write an established character that you don't like. Creating and writing a character that you don't find appealing can be a good way to stretch yourself as a writer, if you are into that type of thing.

 

I've done the writing for a character I didn't like. Trying to get inside the head of somebody you despise is a very good way of stretching yourself.

 

Usually in the showing aspect, I think it should only take one sentence to show a character's reaction unless you want to expand on it.

 

Excellent example!

The entire mood of the scene is conveyed in a few lines without the author even once stating an emotion.

 

I'm trying out the show not tell style and it's kind of fun. It's kind of giving my chapters a more...movie like feel to it. I'm just beginning on using it so hopefully I'll get even better and more creative at it.

 

I'm comfortable with my own style thank you very much. I don't do sudden POV shifts anymore and I've managed to fix my tenses in the eight months or so since I signed up, so I'm happy with where I'm at right now. I don't mind showing and telling at the same time, and I'm going to stick to that.

However, my English professor constantly preaches 'show, don't tell' so I'm going to follow the 'show don't tell' rule for my college papers.

 

I wanted to comment on the avoidance of anything ending in -ly when it comes to dialogue. There seems to be some confusion between guidelines and rules. One involves the use of the word "should" and the other the use of the word "shall." Generally, you should avoid using expressions like 'he said happily' or 'she answered sadly.' In most cases, you can make the dialogue or the action show the happy and the sad. But this is only a guideline because you can't or may not be able to stick to it.

An aside - In my line of work, we have rules and guidelines. The rules apply to general roadway design of highways and streets. The rules cannot be sidestepped; an engineer must adhere to them because it's been proven that the rules define the "correct" way to do something. When it comes to defining things like roundabout or signage design, there are just too many variables to make any rules applicable. In those cases we have guidelines. The guidelines tell the engineer what they should do, but leave it to our better judgment to make the design fit within the circumstances. Often, the engineer can't meet all the guidelines because of the existing field conditions and characteristics, but we aren't "wrong" (read "not correct") because of that.

What I'm trying to say is that people really shouldn't see absolutes in what anyone is saying here, and if they do they're missing the point. The art in writing comes in knowing the guidelines - I'm going to avoid using the word "rule" - and bending them to serve your purpose as the storyteller.

There is a great example of using an adverb in relation to dialogue from Tempest. I'll try to dig that up...

 

Just an aside...
I found an interesting item indicative of the basic nature of the 'show don't tell' prinicple. Josephine Nobisso's Show; Don't Tell! is a picture book on the elements of good writing geared at grades 3-5 expounding on the importance of selecting powerful nouns and adjectives to convey the story. It also has scratch and sniff sections. The School Library Journal trashed it in their review, but I'm intrigued enough to dig up a copy. I'm dying to know what good writing smells like.

 

It smells like too much coffee.

 

Never! It smells like chocolate. DARK chocolate.

I used a lot of writing curricula when I taught. I liked "Wordsmith" a lot, though it tended more toward academic writing. That is, if I'm remembering correctly. I used so many. I taught my kids early about writing, starting with basics like Spectrum Writing and moving on from there. Megan loved it, my middle son hated it, and my youngest son thought it was pretty cool - as long as he could write about Mortal Kombat.

 

I'm happy if it smells (or better yet...tastes) like either!

Oqi, I completely forgot you teach writing at your university.

 

Actually, I teach obscure history at the university and I teach advanced academics at the high school level of which about 80% is writing. I'm a jack of all trades.

 

oqi, don't forget your weird obsession with infectious diseases.


I checked my bible to see what it offered on these topics. Saith Elements of Style:

Place yourself in the background.

Write in a way that draws the reader's attention to the sense and substance of the writing, rather than to the mood and temper of the author. If the writing is solid and good, the mood and temper of the writer will eventually be revealed and not at the expense of the work. Therefore, the first piece of advice is this: to achieve style, begin by affecting none ? that is, place yourself in the background...

Do not inject opinion.

Unless there is a good reason for its being there, do not inject opinion into a piece of writing. We all have opinions about almost everything, and the temptation to toss them in is great. To air one's views gratuitously, however, is to imply that the demand for them is brisk, which may not be the case, and which, in any event, may not be relevant to the discussion. Opinions scattered indiscriminately about leave the mark of egotism on a work...


The first one IMO applies no matter what the purpose of the story is. Whether you're writing to talk about Obi-Wan dealing with the war, or to trumpet an anti-war message in general, if the character has substance, so will the message. No need to try so hard.

The second applies more to nonfiction and academic writing, but I think the very first clause - Unless there is a good reason for its being there - works for fiction. The paragraph went on to state that if you're invited to speak at the dedication of a cat hospital, and you hate cats, just decline without revealing how much you hate cats. They're looking for your services as a speaker, not your opinion.

In the same way, if you hate Mara, that hate probably has no business in a vig where Luke mourns Obi-Wan's death unless she was somehow involved. "You're evil!" cried Luke, horrified that such a young person could have murdered Ben so viciously. Her beauty - the long red-gold hair, the fiery green eyes - was nothing more than a siren's call, a pretty face wasted on a creature of darkness. And so on. In fact, that example draws from putting yourself in the background. You're so focused on building Mara's evil behaviour and Luke's reaction, that you forget for a moment how much you hate one of them.

With "Show, Don't Tell" and adverbs, EOS says Do not explain too much and Do not construct awkward adverbs. Let the dialogue reveal emotions, and don't use an adverb in writing that you wouldn't use orally.


This bit of random advice scared me:

When writing with a computer, you must guard against wordiness. The click and flow of a word processor can be seductive, and you may find yourself adding a few unnecessary words or even a whole passage just to experience the pleasure of running your fingers over the keyboard and watching your words appear on the screen. It is always a good idea to reread your writing later and ruthlessly delete the excess.

But...what about word counts?! I hope that doesn't apply to NaNo.

 

Very thoughtful, but advertising isn't allowed here.

 

Edit: Advertising gone, post redundant

 

Place yourself in the background.

I agree with this. Unless you're doing a 'this is Obi-Wan Kenobi' like Stover did in the ROTS novelization, the narrator should be invisible. One of the problems I have with some authors (like Jack McDevitt or Peter Hamilton) is that there is a breaking from the third person into a true narration. Unless you're doing an overview, stay away from narrating and let your characters and events tell the story. This, of course, is more difficult, but ultimately far more rewarding, to both the writer and the reader(s).

Do not inject opinion.

Absolutely right. I have a lot of opinions, several of them strong. But I don't inject them into my story to transform my characters into my mouthpieces. One of the bazillion problems I have with Christopher Paolini's Inheritance Trilogy is that he often forces the scenes and distorts the context of those scenes in order to preach his personal beliefs to the reader. Every scene in Ellesmera (or however you spell that city) in Eldest is a good example of what not to do with your opinion.

This problem is frequent in political thriller novels as well. Ever read Vince Flynn, Brad Thor, or Tom Clancy? Dozens of the characters are simply spewing what the author believes, and the few characters who disagree with the authors' viewpoints are skewered into stupid, naive, or traitorous (or all three!) cardboard people.

Let your characters speak for themselves. The best aspects of a quality story is the diverse personalities and views of the characters, so much so that they feel alive. That increases the power of the story.

Do not explain too much

I make that mistake too often, I think. I often say 'he said regretfully' when it should be obvious in the dialogue that s/he is regretful. But at the same time I think that 'said' should be substituted when it isn't clear what tone the character is saying by dialogue alone. Sometimes you have to say 'whispered', or have to say 'yelled', 'shouted', or 'screamed' to show what specific emotion the character is expressing through the loud tone of voice.

Do not construct awkward adverbs

That one I also do too much.

I've actually used archaic/not-well-known words like 'vitreous', 'asinine', and 'effulgent' in RL (hey, I'm an English major) so they pop up in my stories whether I want them to or not.

 

Occasional use of SAT words isn't a problem if it jives with one's overall writing style. At least, it doesn't bother me. It only gets to be a problem if they're used too much, or in places where a smaller, simpler word would actually fit better.

I've been guilty of infodumping before, although I like to think that I don't do it any more than profic authors do. Then again, I probably don't do it as well as most of them, so that doesn't help my case any. It's usually less about emotions and more about events, and because showing-not-telling how a battle turned up takes up a lot more time and space than showing-not-telling how somebody feels (and it's harder to make huge tactical blunders in quick retellings!)

I try to keep a tight third-person limited POV in most stories, changing character occasionally, though I've experimented with first person and even on rare occasion second person. First-person present tense can be good for satire or major angst. Third-person with a narrow view makes it more difficult to slink into narration, unless it's about that one character, because s/he simply doesn't know what's going on in everybody else's heads and is forced to relay only what s/he can know from his/her senses, including the Force, if applicable for the characters and situation.