Here’s a riddle. Where does this come from (and NO USING
GOOGLE to find out)?
“A person discloses himself in his actions, and the better
we know a person, the better we understand his actions.”
If you guess it, leave a comment that gives a hint.
The dichotomy between character and plot is a false one. To
speak of whether one is more than the other is to miss the point that you can’t
really have one without also fully developing the other. Indeed, why would you
want to?
The best way for us to know and understand a character is
through what she does. Yes, her internal thoughts can be revealing. But what
she does (which includes what she
says, by the way) is even more important. “Telling” has its place in good
writing, but it’s rarely a good method of revealing character in a novel.
But it doesn’t just work one way. To understand a plot – why
things are happening as they do, we must understand character. Certainly it’s
true that we only care about things that happen if we care about the
characters, but it’s even more than that. The plot only makes sense in light of
understanding the characters that are driving the plot. And if your characters
aren’t driving the plot…they need to. Even in a murder mystery, where the
precipitating event may not be related to your main character, from then on in,
your characters—especially your main character—need to drive what happens.
And then we come full circle. The things that happen in your
story (your plot) also will change your characters. If they’re not changing, we
as a reader aren’t interested.
The quote in the riddle is referring in particular to
someone shrouded in mystery. Which is what your characters are to your reader:
shrouded in mystery. You as the writer must reveal your characters, and your
best method of doing that is use action. As we know and understand your
characters, their actions will be understandable (even if they sometimes
surprising).
No comments:
Post a Comment