When creating a character, what red flags would show me that I'm creating an unbelievable or unsympathetic character? I know that to be believable and sympathetic a character must not lean too much to a single extreme or be a caricature. Besides paying careful attention to character traits when reading, how can I learn more about what constitutes a caricature? What signs might there be that I'm writing an unbelievable character or one no one will care a thing about?
|
Well, first and foremost - do you believe in the character? Do you think he/she is sympathetic? If so, you're already in a good position - because you have a believable, sympathetic character, you just haven't convinced your readers of that yet - meaning, if you get negative critiques on the point, you just need to figure out why you like the character, and focus on bringing those elements out more strongly. But that's not what you asked - you asked about warning signs. Here are a few:
That's what I've got at the moment... Hope these are helpful :) |
|||||
|
|
I think, the worst way to introduce a new character is starting by detailed description of her/his background and motives before the character starts acting.
|
|||
|
|
If your character is perfect, that is a bad sign. Your character must have weaknesses and fallacies. If you're writing a guy who is all good (or all bad), the reader won't care about him or your story because there really is no story to tell. |
|||
|
|
|
It might be a good idea to base a character (atleast partly) on someone you know, or another character you are familiar with. This way there's something real about the character which atleast some readers might relate to |
|||||||||||||
|
|
I like to discover a character like solving a mystery. Provide enough information to figure it out without giving it away. Clues can be provided indirectly. A character may reveal something about herself in one conversaton but omit it in a similar one. What someone doesn't say or do can be equally important. Their past should be consistent with their actions but not predictable or way off. Indoril Nerevar had a great point on providing too much background before any action. Never thought about it before but it makes sense. That way you identify the character in the story and don't just read a bunch of facts about them with no context. It's nice to base a character on what or who you know, but you have to be careful how you present them. Unless you can recall how you met this person and learned about them, you may want to have a fresh start and meet someone new. It could provide a better understanding of the discovery process. How did you know they came from a wealthy family? You don't remember seeing the Christmas card of their family in front of that massive fireplace and the dozen questions you asked about it. Now it seems like you've always known, but the reader won't. |
|||
|
|