Spicing Up a Vanilla Character

[dios4vida]

Hey folks!

So I just finished red-lining the first draft of my current WIP. Other than some soggy middle syndrome (who doesn't have that?) and a severe need to show more emotion in my descriptions, I have one major problem with this ms: my characters.

They're essential. My protagonist is the only one who could accomplish this mission, he's perfectly equipped to handle things, his companions have their own issues and roles and I couldn't remove any of them and have the plot still work. So on paper, in regards to the plot, they're stellar. But when I read through it, they just aren't interesting people. In and of themselves, they're pretty dull. Their personalities are as flat as a sheet of notebook paper.

And here's where I always have problems. If a character doesn't jump out of my mind screaming "HERE I AM!" I have the hardest time giving them personalities. Issues, needs, conflicts, desires; sure! No problem. But what's the point of having a protagonist who wants two contradictory things, has to defeat his inner demons, and stretches himself to his limits if he isn't a fun person to hang out with? He's filled with purpose and conflicts, but he's boring!

Does anyone have any advice for infusing characters with personality? Pretty please?

[wilderness]

Off the top of my head, I would try filling out a few character worksheets and see if the reason the characters are not enticing you is because they are not fleshed out enough. Maybe they need more flaws. Maybe they need more backstory. Maybe they need just a few little human quirks.

Here's a couple I found by Googling:
http://www.the-writers-craft.com/creati ... heets.html
http://www.charlottedillon.com/CharacterChart.html
http://www.writingclasses.com/Informati ... PageID/106

Hmm...maybe I need to fill these out too

[Mira]

Wow, interesting question.

Like Wilderness said, I might give one of them a quirk, to start. Maybe a flaw or something irrational. Maybe one of them will only eat standing up, because he's afraid to get his pants dirty.

Then have another one of the group find that flaw irritating. Maybe she thinks people who fuss over their clothes are silly. Then give her a flaw, too. Maybe she doesn't like to ever sleep by herself, she gets scared. So, she wants the guy with the clean pants to sleep next to her, but he won't because his feelings are hurt. Also, she snores.

That's light stuff, but if you want to go deeper into personality, I'd start with their childhood. Who raised them and how did their childhood impact them? That has a major impact on personality, it shapes us all.

Hope that's helpful!

[MattLarkin]

They're essential. My protagonist is the only one who could accomplish this mission, he's perfectly equipped to handle things,

Just in case you meant that literally, the protagonist may be more interesting if he is not equipped to handle things.

...his companions have their own issues and roles and I couldn't remove any of them and have the plot still work. So on paper, in regards to the plot, they're stellar. But when I read through it, they just aren't interesting people. In and of themselves, they're pretty dull. Their personalities are as flat as a sheet of notebook paper.

And here's where I always have problems. If a character doesn't jump out of my mind screaming "HERE I AM!" I have the hardest time giving them personalities. Issues, needs, conflicts, desires; sure! No problem. But what's the point of having a protagonist who wants two contradictory things, has to defeat his inner demons, and stretches himself to his limits if he isn't a fun person to hang out with? He's filled with purpose and conflicts, but he's boring!

To be honest, I suspect it's not as bad as you think. If you really gave them inner conflicts, desires, needs, etc. they are almost bound to be interesting people, assuming those aspects come across. If they don't come across, perhaps you could focus on bringing some of those things out.

[dios4vida]

Thanks, wilderness. I'll have to go check some of those out.

Then have another one of the group find that flaw irritating. Maybe she thinks people who fuss over their clothes are silly. Then give her a flaw, too. Maybe she doesn't like to ever sleep by herself, she gets scared. So, she wants the guy with the clean pants to sleep next to her, but he won't because his feelings are hurt. Also, she snores.

This is a very interesting concept. I'll have to explore that one.

Just in case you meant that literally, the protagonist may be more interesting if he is not equipped to handle things.

Oops. My bad. He's not at all equipped, but he has the proper skill set, etc. that he will need to find a way to win - even though he doesn't realize it.

If you really gave them inner conflicts, desires, needs, etc. they are almost bound to be interesting people, assuming those aspects come across. If they don't come across, perhaps you could focus on bringing some of those things out.

I think that's some of my problem, and something I've got some notes on fixing in my next draft. What I'm really feeling is off is that I have all of these deep issues and plot-related aspects of their personalities, but they don't feel like real people. All of those surface things - quirks, personality traits, the little things that make someone unique and human - are missing. (To use an example from Children of Sun and Moon, Naresh is a quick-tempered guy who acts on impulse. He doesn't often think of consequences until it's too late. So we 'know' Naresh and can anticipate the way he'll act and react to situations. My characters don't seem to have that at this time.)

Most of the issue is that in my first raw draft, my characters were very different than they are now. I changed a lot of their backstories to make them deeper. But in my rewrites, instead of changing their reactions to reflect these backstories (which are much darker) I just took away the overly happy vibe I got from them - which means they became neutral. And now I'm having problems infusing some of those unique things into them.

It's not a tragic issue (not in an early draft like this), it's just something that I'm having problems finding a workable solution to.

[polymath]

Protagonists and heroes, heroines too, come in two axes: round or flat and static or dynamic. Static or dynamic is fairly straightforward; give a central character a want and put opposition in the way, giving the hero something to push against and be pushed by to cause change. Round or flat is more challenging. Flat characters can be as artful as round ones, though readers crave round characters.

Round characters have dimension. Flat characters don't. One spectrum for developing round characters is idiosyncractic specifity of personality and behaviors. Not quirks, per se, but details that reveal intimate vulnerabilities and faults and frailties.

Another spectrum for round characters ranges between self-serving and self-sacrificing behaviors. Self-serving acts may be appropriate survival actions or if they cause harm to others they are selfish. Society says so. Self-sacrifice is human nobility.

Idiosyncracies come in an infinite variety. Beacuse they are unique, they develop character and are both familiar and exotic. They authenticate a narrative.

Idiom is another feature of round characters. Nautical terminology is a culture group idiom. For a maritime scene scemario or a larger drama, nautical idioms are appropriate. They migh be out of place in a skyscraper office, which has its own idioms.

Idiom isn't just language, it's also how a person dresses, behaves, lives, chooses, reacts to causes. when the action or reaction are unique to a region or a culture group. For example, say it's blowing a gale. A windsurfer would grab the gear and head for water and get right into the teeth of the gale. Most anyone else would head inside.

[Hillsy]

I'm a little late to the party - but I think personally this is the one thing I can actually look at myself in the mirror and say "You do this well"

And it comes down to one, very broad, thing: POV.

This isn't about POV as in 1st person, 3rd person malarchy. Think of it like this. Captain No-Character looks at the world and sees unequivocal fact. When writing from his POV, 'things' happen and those facts are relayed to the reader in accurate detail. Now how you translate those deatils in terms of style (flowery prose of accurate statements) is irrelevant. The reader sees the story through an unfiltered lens.

This is a person with no character. He can have quirks, troubles, demons - hell he could even be a mass-murderer, but at no point is the character interacting with the POV.

A Character interacting with POV is essentially diliberate misinterpretation of, or direct reaction to, fact. Captain No-Character looks at a fruit stall, Captain Vegetarian looks at something unsullied by meat. If you can come up with 2 dozen characters, each with a backstory, and get them to all look at the same fruit stall - you should be able to write 24 different paragraphs. Why? The stronger the character, the further away from the correct account of events you are, and the closer to the character's pure thoughts. You can go to far of course, but for a "rich" character, you should get as far away from the accurate description of events, while the reader still knows what's going on.

An example? There's a great fight scene Richard Morgan writes in "Altered Carbon" that has the grand scale of 3 blows. But the line I want to raise goes something like "He led with a right, but only to disguise a roundhouse kick. I don't know what films he had been watching but no one kicks above waist height in a real fight. It’s slow and flashy, all the things you don’t want to be when your at risk of real physical harm".......now I won't fully break it down (there's sooooooo much character in there) but notice how few descriptors there are, but there's at least 3 inferable opinions. 1) what he thinks of flashy kicks, 2) how much of a threat he considers his opponent 3) how much creadence he gives TV choreographers....there are more subtle ones but that's not the point. The character has taken the cinematic recording of an action and completely muddied it with his thoughts. The POV now has a clear filter on it.

OK then, tips? I can't emphasise how much self loathing I feel for using my own stuff as a reference, but I know this character pretty well.

My MC in the novel i'm shopping at the moment is a military trainee who doesn't really have much of a backstory, or much in the way of quirks, or earth shattering conflicts. He is introduced with probably 3 main characteristics: He's quite sarcastic/snarky, he hates authority, and he's incredibly altruistic. So how do I get him to "Come alive"? Broadly speaking I change the tone (POV) of the description depending on what's happening. So any musings he has have an optimistic, idealistic bent, or an attachment of how things "should be". Any discription of authority figures, or people folowing orders have a sarcastic, sneering tone (I checked, I don't say 1 positive thing about anyone he sees marching. They are never 'crisp' or 'smart', or 'efficient' - instead they 'stomp' or 'clatter' or move like 'their uniforms are 20% cotton and 80% starch'). Things that matter to him have urgency, or his language will become more floral when talking about ideology. When he talks about things he disagrees with, his language becomes terse and simple.

Any one of these things arn't important, but what I'm trying to show is that description, action, dialogue etc etc is always passed through a filter that is "Layne" before it reaches the reader. And largely I don't do it consciously (exept on editing). Once you've got a grip on what emotion/opinion/relevance a character will apply to any given fact you are relaying, then your description will start to lean that way. You've got inside your characters head. Your character OWNS the POV.

Christ I've gone on about it....I'll shut up now

[wilderness]

Great tips, Hillsy! I think most of us naturally filter our world through our MC's POV, but probably not to a great enough extent. It's definitely a good idea to go back and make sure every observation, every description, every assumption is made with our character's personality in mind. Your examples were really helpful too (yes, even from your own work).

[Hillsy]

Great tips, Hillsy! I think most of us naturally filter our world through our MC's POV, but probably not to a great enough extent. It's definitely a good idea to go back and make sure every observation, every description, every assumption is made with our character's personality in mind. Your examples were really helpful too (yes, even from your own work).

Thanks... ....though I would stop short of saying every observation/description/assumption needs to be checked. I know what you mean, but for someone like me who struggles with processing the intention behind hyperbole, it's a junction to crazy-ville you don't wanna take.

Basically, if you feel like your losing that personal feel that good character gives you, then you're probably sticking too true to the events, and not enough to the unique slant every character brings to proceedings.

[MattLarkin]

All of those surface things - quirks, personality traits, the little things that make someone unique and human - are missing. (To use an example from Children of Sun and Moon, Naresh is a quick-tempered guy who acts on impulse. He doesn't often think of consequences until it's too late. So we 'know' Naresh and can anticipate the way he'll act and react to situations. My characters don't seem to have that at this time.)

Don't stress. Since you brought it up... You weren't reading my first draft. Nobody but me read that. I had always intended Naresh as reckless, but I felt it didn't come through on the page as much as desired. So I revised the story to emphasize this.

For example, in the scene where Naresh finds Malin and Chandi in the garden, originally he just traded snide remarks and clenched his fists and huffed and puffed. In the final version, you may recall Naresh actually attacks Malin. And, of course, this also adds more consequences later, more tension between the two of them.

The point is, nobody gets everything they envision out of their first draft. If they did, they wouldn't have to revise, only copyedit. Being more of a pantser, I suspect you may have to do this to a slightly greater extent. Your writing process helps you discover who these characters are. Once you know that, it colors everything they say and do. Don't hold back from this. Go big. In fiction you can play up these traits more than in real life.

[Nicole R]

Hey Brenda!

I just blogged about building complex characters yesterday...spooky timing. Check it out!

I'm going to cheat a bit since I've read your pages. I think you have all the elements there to make incredibly interesting characters. Some ideas:

- Slow things down: Give them time for reflection and doubt; if they're always moving so quickly on to the next thing, we don't get as clear a glimpse of their own personal take on what's happening.

- Sprinkle in actual thoughts: I have a feeling your MC would make some hilarious quips about the stuff he faces. Let us see that...in his own words.

- Focus internally, too: I got some great advice from critters on my first draft WIP. They said in some scenes I'd done such a great job describing the external scene: key players, what their facial expressions were, who's doing what and what the overall mood was...that I hadn't given enough time to my MC who was observing it all. I needed to emphasize more what HE was thinking, how HE was reacting to what he saw around him. That might be something to consider too.

Hope this helps! Feel free to PM me.