You can't have one without the other, in my opinion. Characters are what help your reads connect to the story. They are what tie a reader to your pages, yet without events the story becomes as interesting as reading an IKEA instruction book. If you need to focus on one first, focus on the characters and the events will fall into place once you have their personalities set up.
Characters. I mean you need both to some level and I'm gotten real good at plotting somewhat but I always come up with characters first and I really think I'm good at making them all seem their own person.
Well the correct answer is both of course, all writers want both character and events to be interesting but that wasn't the question. The question is what's more important, and for me that has always been character. They are the eyes and ears of the story, the beating heart within the pages of their life, and the driving force of the emotional journey. Events mean nothing if the characters mean nothing. Even if your MC is fighting mecha dragons in space with a lightsaber, the readers won't care if they're as bland and a piece of toast and will ultimately forget what happened because they had no emotional connection with the story. It would all boil down to cheap thrills, kind of like a roller coaster, it's fun but that's about it. I would much rather read a story that was slow on plot but has fascinating characters than a story with dull characters but an action packed plot. Hell if I wanted to do that I'd watch Michael Bay's Transformers; end of the world, robot car aliens fighting in the streets, but plagued with stereotypes and a boring main character (I don't even remember his name). I typically make my characters first and try to challenge them throughout the story and test their limits. That's what creates drama, characters trying to overcome obstacles either physically or mentally and following them on their journey to do so. For me characters are the most important part of any story because they are the meaning behind a string of events, their story makes up... the story.
Events. Although I almost feel badly for that answer, because I'm not sure it's the "correct" answer. But I guess I've always thought of character as being a function of reactions to things that happen, rather than being the driving force of a narrative in and of itself. Although I'd say that, more precisely, what's important is what you might call scenarios or premises. The rules that structure which events can happen, and in turn be reacted to by characters. Maybe this is why I've always been pulled towards speculative fiction, a lot of sci-fi (Asimov and Clarke come to mind) is really heavy on setting up elaborate premises that are then acted out by pretty forgettable characters. But it's the ideas behind it that I'm interested in. None of this is meant to imply, of course, that writing good characters isn't necessary. It's just that a "good" character, to me, is one whose reactions to things are consistent with some internally coherent set of motivations (whether those motivations are known or not), not necessarily someone who arouses strong feelings of empathy/disdain/whatever in me personally.
Sounds like everyone here has different preferences, which is awesome. For me, both are linked quite strongly, but I would stray toward characters by quite a bit. Once a cast becomes endearing to me, they can be going to the loo and I would follow them inside. Well, that might be taking it too far, but you get it .
I know, a male shouldn't say this... Anne of Green Gables (the first one). The entire book is about her character. What actually happens in the book? Not a great deal. I read, sorry, tried to read several books of Stephen King. It was like trying to read Anne of Green Gables without the interesting characters (or Anne book 4). I know something cool (as in bad) was supposed to happen, but I simply couldn't care.
It's kind of impossible to create one without the other, I think. I feel like if the events are really interesting but there's no spark to the characters it's like when a buddy tells you a story about all their work friends you've never met - no matter what happens, I don't really care because I don't feel like I know these people at all, so the events that happen to them are kind of meaningless. On the flip side, I would find it nearly impossible to create a believable character without showing what kinds of events and conflicts (both internal and external) mold and shape them into who they are.
Characters make the events, dude! Characters all the way: how they interact, how they look, what they say. They are the event.
Definitely characters... Events are for the most part stagnant. They happen and then a new one happens and then a new one and so on so forth. How the characters externally and internally deal with events is what drives us to read a good story. J.K. Rowling didn't get famous because of her absolute evil villain or her world building techniques; watching a young boy growing up, shaped by the events, is what made her famous. Same with G.R.R.M. Take away his characters and you've go an extremely cliché plot; some unknown evil is descending upon the world and nobody knows how to stop it - characters are what made him popular. I mean, think about real life. Do you engage in sex (event) for the sake of it, or do you engage in it because it feels (character development) good?
I once read an interview about just that kind of question. It appears that there are two major schools of thinking out there, "Character-Driven" or "Plot-Driven". I think plot-driven novels are more numerous, but there are some very, very good authors who write character-driven bestseller books and ended up on winning lotus/hugo lists. Personally I am a character-driven kind of reader/writer, but there is some for everyone out there *smile*. Just do what feels right for your writing!
I personally find characters more crucial, and I tend to write character-driven plots. To me, getting inside the brain of a fellow human being is a fascinating venture. So many events would be meaningless without the emotional and motivational pull of characters. I'm not saying I find characters to be intrinsically better or anything. It's just my opinion.
I would say that characters are shaped, or at least revealed by events. An interesting character in a dull situation is likely to be dull; and a dull character in an interesting situation is likely to be dull. That said I would take character over events, personally. I find the ever-escalating spectacle seen in most modern popular film and literature intensely tedious.
We're all writing, I think, in the hope that someone, somewhere, will actually read what we have written. If so, the question really boils down to whether our readers will prefer character development or an action-packed story. In fact, if you read all the upthread comments, most of the preferences expressed are from a reading, rather than a writing perspective. So I think the answer lies more with the genre we choose and the audience that we write for. One poster upthread mentioned Stephen King's novels. I'd hate to invest several pages of a Stephen King novel learning about the motivations of a character who is destroyed on the next page. Come to think of it, that's the same reason I don't bother remembering the names of my daughter's boyfriends.......
Characters. If they're well-written enough, they can make even the most typical 'Chosen Hero Destined To Save The World' story interesting. That said, I'd like the plot to be somewhat interesting, but characters all the way.
Novel writing and screenwriting is all about the characters. what attracts you to a good book or movie? Characters. It is the heart of creative writing. Finding a protagonist you can root for or a character you can relate to. This is what makes for an outstanding reading experience.
Characters that do interesting things create interesting stories. What comes first, the chicken (event) or the egg (character)?
My opinion about which is important doesn't matter. What matters is that actions define characters. Let me put that another way: without actions, there could be no characters and, by extension, no story. Now I'll leave you to make up your own mind.
A bit of both, but I'd rather read about a well developed character rather than shallow characters with lots of things happening to them.
I write character driven stories. The other stuff that happens just gives them something to do that will reflect who they are. Someone mentioned Transformers movies. I can't watch them; they bore me to tears. Interchangeable, generic characters mixed with action-for-the-sake-0f-action. Yawn. Yet the box office success tells me there are hundreds of thousands of people who are attracted to that sort of thing. Exceptional characters stand out. I'll use movies as an example. Die Hard is probably my favorite action movie. Has something happening almost all the time. Why do I like it so much more than any of the myriad of copycats? Hans Gruber vs John McClane. Two truly interesting characters. Stir it all together and you get a great story/movie. I just re-watched Romancing The Stone. Its an okay plot, not terribly unique. Has decent action. The main characters are interesting enough but what I came away with (both times I saw it, about 30 years apart) was Danny DeVito's character. It could have been a throwaway role played by any forgettable actor but he made the character memorable. I may forget plot details as time passes but I'll never forget DeVito's smarmy smuggler character. Plot is important but I think characters are importanter.
I would say they're both pretty important. To a degree they can compensate for each other; strong characters can make dull scenes bearable and interesting events can mask poorly written characters, but only to a degree. My advice would be to do the best you can on both, though it's okay to sacrifice one for the other occasionally.