In the first video, the speaker (Brandon) talks about what makes a character great. Some of the things the class members said was that a good character is relatable, exists beyond the page, has growth and motivation, admirable, but flawed. He notes that sometimes authors put the character’s role before the character’s actual character, and this is something that should be worked on to make characters interesting. His big thing about characters is making them proactive rather than reactionary. They need to actively be doing things of their own will (or pursuing their passions and plans) rather than simply responding to circumstances thrown at them.
Next, he talks about different character types used in literature. There are capable characters, and sympathetic characters. Capable characters excel at what they do, while sympathetic characters are those we can easily empathize with. Sympathetic characters should have similarities with reader (flaws, short-comings, ect) but more importantly they need to show EMOTION. He says this is a problem with new readers—they are more about showing than telling, being more cinematic than in-depth with what their character is feeling. There needs to be a careful balance, however, because you don’t want to overload with drama but at the same time you need to breathe life into the characters and show that they have feelings.
The next set of lectures talk about how to humanize characters, make them seem more dimensional rather than flat and bland. Brandon says this can be accomplished by giving the characters quirks, passions, flaws, and limitations. Quirks in media have often been used as a comedic contrast, like the men in the bar in Disney’s Tangled. You have those big burly men who have silly side hobbies. But quirks don’t have to be comedic like that. He used the example of having a bounty hunter who collects stamps, or the new high school student who likes art. The point is to have something to a character that goes beyond the plot.
There’s some methods to encourage this, and one is the Dossier method, which is kind of like a questionnaire for your characters that lists questions as simple as “what’s their favorite food” and the like. He warns not to go overboard, however. Being an author is like being a stage magician; you show them a little detail, while working things behind the scenes. Skimp on the big, note the small details.
Lastly, he mentions another method for characterizing, which works well for “discovery writers” who just kind of write whatever comes to them. He says you could try casting the wrong person for those roles, and figure out why they can’t work in that role. You feel for how characters belong in your story. He goes on to talk about how the reluctant hero, though not always the best for every story, is interesting to readers because you throw the character out of their comfort zone, and readers are interested in seeing how they cope or develop to deal with their problems.
Some problems can come from this method, as sometimes the MC or character you’re developing can become bland or not well formed. But he just encourages experimenting and practicing.
In the next lecture, he talks about how to make characters sympathetic. He talks about another set of character types: the Everyman and the Superman. The everyman is your average joe forced out unexpectedly on a journey—the Frodos of the universe, if you will. They are more relatable, being prone to flaws. The superman is your capable character, the ones who are good at what they do, and barely have any flaws (he jokes that their flaws are that they are just too good). These would be your Sherlock Holmes, James Bond, ect. Brandon says that a good character has both of each. They can be the everyman with some superman capabilities. Maybe they have one talent they excel at, but are still pretty average joes. Many modern stories show the progression of the everyman to the superman as part of the plot. We love rooting for the underdog and seeing them grow into something more.
Next video talks more about developing flaws and handicaps. He distinguishes the two by defining flaws as characteristics that are the character’s fault. These are internal problems that define the character at the beginning of the story, but do not have to define them at the end. These can be overcome and changed, and worked into the whole progression thing we love so much. Examples: shyness, rashness, rudeness, ect. In contrast, handicaps are something that is not the character’s fault, something that is external that they really can’t do anything about. And really, you don’t want them to. It’s like the one-armed man who wants to play football, or something along those lines.
In the next video, Brandon answers a student’s question and goes more into detail about making characters proactive. He says that looking into their hobbies (quirks) and passions (goals) and continuing them even after the plot monster interrupts them can help build that. There’s the Try/fail cycle, where the characters make attempts to fix their problems but end up failing at first. His example of a proactive character is Han Solo—particularly in the scene where Darth Vader interrupts their dinner by walking in the door. Rather than standing and saying “Oh no!” What does he do? He takes out his gun and shoots the sucker! It fails, but at least Han tried doing something rather than taking in the problem and debating his choices.
His last video wraps everything up by saying that limitations are more interesting. It’s geared more towards making sure magic systems/technologies aren’t overpowered, but he goes over how it’s important to think out the ramifications of your limitations. How the world would be different and all that. But yeah, overall, a very informative lecture!
Bookmarks