What I gave was just a snippet of the characters as I didn't want to bore people with long-winded backstory for these characters. All of these characters have quite detailed backstories which are still developing. The feedback has given me some food for thought on how they fit into the story. The main story starts when all these characters are middle aged and in order to defeat the villain they must re-establish their friendship and overcome the issues between them. As I write the main story I am developing their back stories also so much so that they are becoming stories in their own right. I agree that the scope of this is quite large but I have all this stuff in my head that I have to get it down and the more I get down the more stuff pops into my head. I just keep jumping around in time. I'll write a scene for the main story then something will come to me and I'll write a scene for one of their backstories. This is probably completely the wrong way to do it but it's just what seems to happen.
Don't worry. I have a large character cast too. It has challenges but that's what make it fun. Ya know?
For me, a strong character has a multilayered personality and doesn't exist and isn't tailored just to move the plot along. Sure, you give them traits that fit your story, but you create an illusion of realism. I'm currently reading this thriller and one POV character is a female doctor -- sounds outwardly strong, doesn't it? -- but I already know she exists to be kidnapped and then saved by the hero. I'm forgiving 'cause I know full well I'm reading a gratuitous male fantasy (for whatever reason my gratuitous escapist fantasy is also pretending to be an SAS hero, but whatevs) which is basically Harlequins for dudes with wish fulfillment galore, but I find her to be an example of a weak character as her "personality" is molded to support the hero's personal journey. I think if your characters have a personal journey, they will come across quite strong -- though it's not the only thing, I believe. Have you watched the TV show Salem? Plenty of female characters there who have goals, ambitions, and personality. Some are decisive, some over-bearing, some still trying to find their feet. Contrast them to the male characters of John Alden and the doctor dude whose name escapes me, whom I'd consider weak characters. Their personal journeys are stunted, they mainly support the growth of the main female character, and they don't appear as multifaceted and complicated as the women. With a big cast, you will have to make sacrifices of course, but I guess what I'm getting at is it's the depth of exploration of the character that makes them strong for me, not just the things they do, the muscles they've built, or the number of lovers they've turned down. On a side note, I watched the first season (and maybe the second as well, can't remember) of Orphan Black and the Ukrainian character made me cringe. Maybe "the crazy Russian" isn't a trope in North-America, but to me that was the most stereotypical representation of not only a Slavic person, but an "unhinged PTSD case." It wasn't the reason I stopped watching, but I remember distinctly being pretty aggravated with the character and the lead actress' portrayal of her.
@ChickenFreak just to answer some of your questions: It's not that she doesn't want him there - she does. She was abandoned as a child and raised by the priestesses of her Goddess. This has caused her to have difficulty trusting people. Her devotion to her Goddess also blinds her to her own true feelings. She does actually love him but doesn't know it, not until the end of the story and it takes his death for her to realise it. His role within the group is solely to protect her but her role in the group is as the conscience and to keep them on the correct moral track. She confronts him and makes him make a choice and he chooses to leave which forms part of her resentment to him on top of his perceived descent into evil. She his a key part of his redemption toward the end of the story. His trust issues and the fact that he has to face up to what he has done in the past must be overcome in order to restore his relationship with her and eventually find peace. This more relates to her backstory than the main story really. By the time the story starts she has discovered much about her past but she had to do it alone without the one she loves. She is angry towards him for abandoning her but must push that aside for the greater good. Eventually as he faces up to his past she learns to forgive him and finds peace with him Yes I suppose she could be considered more passive. Again this relates more to her backstory than the main story. By the time the story starts she is married with teenage children but she feels guilty for abandoning her sister for her husband and must learn to forgive herself. Yes. It is her knowledge and experience in seeking artifacts that is key to the group succeeding at certain plot points. She is somewhat the agony aunt of the group if you like. She helps the other characters through their personal journeys. She is the moral compass for the group. Faerys is the main antagonist. It is she who sets all the events off. She commands the armies to attack. She sets the other antagonists in direct opposition to the protagonists. Her goal is to rule the world. Simple Fauerstein does just follow orders. I have toyed with the idea of her changing sides toward the end but she is probably more of a minor character than a major one.
I will confess that I have not read every post in this thread so if I am about to say what's already been said... The strength or weakness of any character, male or female, will be defined by their responses to the challenges and dilemmas the plot throws at them. So, to write a strong character, avoid weak responses. In my experience 'strong women' are women who have healthy boundaries, not rigid, but not over flexible, not impermeable, but confidently managed. Above all, they are self-aware, aware of their vulnerabilities and strengths.
Oops, I just realized... I was thinking more along the lines of "what makes a strong character" than "what makes a strong person". Sorry about that. A strong person (in this case, a woman) to me would be someone who's resilient in the face of adversity, resolute in her decisions, and puts other people's needs above her own (I've always found generous and kind people very strong, you know the kind who do stuff like help human trafficking victims even though traffickers are often dangerous criminals who wouldn't hesitate to try to snuff this person or couriers who drive parcels of food and other essential to war torn areas in places like Syria or Crimea). If you're looking for something female specific, motherhood is obviously something that takes a lot of strength, but also surviving female specific tragedies like miscarriage or abortion, or even rape (not female specific, of course, but more common among women). Also something like a big sister doing her utmost to protect her little sister -- or even vice versa.
I don't like this approach. Isn't it Buzzfeed themselves, the great SJWs, who complained about black people being taken as the spokesperson for your entire race? Why does anyone EVER assume one character is representative of an entire group? Like, I have a character with alopecia universalis in one thing, I don't have another. This if for realism. I don't want another one I don't need another one. And anyone assuming Max as the representative of alopecia universalis or mixed race German/Czech people is the real bigot.
If you want to take about personality strength then I'd raise you I have a courtesan who becomes a powerful business force, showing her talent, will and agency. That kind of thing. That they can really exert their agency well, though they don't have to succeed. Personal internal strength is about will and self-control and stuff.
Margarete Thatcher was a strong woman but a beast who wreaked havoc. Malala Yousafzia is a strong woman who inspires and contributes to positive change in the world. Maye your criteria of 'strong' is too narrow.
For me, George RR Martin sums this up perfectly when asked about writing strong, believable female characters: "You know, I've always considered women to be people." Instead of asking yourself how to make a strong female character, worry about writing a strong, interesting, engaging character who is female.
Am I correct in saying that people are still uncomfortable in seeing a one sided male on female beatdown even if the female is a strong female character? Someone on a different writing site called the dude in my story unsympathetic! And I was like what's unsympathetic about praising his younger sister over a week, feeding her pride and making the suggestion that she can and should spar with the creator of the universe, promising that he'll be right there if anything goes wrong. Then when lil sis is critically injured by the deity's first strike, instead of assisting, he starts attacking the wounded spot over and over without warning, holding an orb that gives him the element type advantage and just not stopping the attack even when she can't fight back? But on the other hand; That's literally the only way he can win. She's the world's greatest hero, and he knows that she will turn the fight around at some point. He doesn't know how, but he knows that if he shows her any path to victory, no matter how tenuous or remote, such is her genius that she'll take it and win. So he can't allow a second of recovery. The comeback has to be to little too late. But that's why I have to approach the fight from his PoV, if it's from her's she'll look like too much of a victim and people will complain, when really she's the protagonist being flipped around and used as the antagonist here.
For what it's worth, Helena isn't presented as being the way she is because of her nationality or because of any adult trauma, but because of severe childhood and adult abuse in a cult-like environment. Her keepers deliberately unhinged her. Of course, you may not find that any more realistic, but I'm confident that a Ukrainian-adopted clone scripted as having had a normal upbringing would have been depicted quite normally.
My strong female character is strong because my main character enjoys her strength and they bounce off each other in different ways. Positive and negative, yin yang, that kind of thing. One thing I do hate is labelling, though.You are who you are.
I, for one, am sick to death of reading "strong" female characters who are just males without the dangly bits. I'm sick of masculinity being the ideal way to portray a strong female. It's okay for a female to be feminine and not have to apologize for it. I really enjoyed the character of Rey in the new Star Wars film. For me, she's the perfect example of a strong female character. She's awesome, relatively fearless, but also willing to emote and have doubts and insecurities. She can go all Jedi on Kylo Ren, but she's also incredibly sweet to BB-8, unafraid to be girlishly enthusiastic about all the legends coming to life around her, and still convey that hurt, abandoned child deep inside without it compromising her strength as a character. She was equal parts powerful and vulnerable and loveable. That isn't to say all female characters have to be loveable. I just like her because she feels balanced. I'm weary of female characters who have to be hard and combative, coarse, cold, or emotionally stunted, in order to be considered powerful or strong. Just make sure your characters are more complex than simple stereotypes, and you'll be fine.
That's what I'm worried about and what prompted the question in the first place. On the one hand I don't want them to be as you said a male character without the "dangly bits" but also I don't want them to be the simple stereotypical female character who is soft for the male characters. Maybe I'm overthinking this and I should just write them and see how they turn out
@Lyrical Um. Yes, those things happened in the movie, but none of them were appealing. It was Hunger Games in space. I felt marketed to, pandered to, force-fed, altogether insulted watching that movie. INSERT OBLIGATORY SEXUAL TENSION WITH MALE CO-STAR. I'm sorry to be so vicious with your favorite thing, but Rey was just Hollywood looking at the recipe book of recent blockbusters, "Okay let's take a little from this pile, this pile, add a lovely exotic accent a-la Keira Knightley in Pirates because that is ALWAYS the ticket..." and shitting out a "character" who ended up being just another "edgy," "independent" masturbatory aid for our franchise-loyalty. To the OP, In spite of the sentiment, avoiding clichés is cliché. You want a relatable character? One that readers will glom onto and root for? You have to study real people. And I'm sorry, but real people are full of clichés. If everything is unique about your characters, real people reading about them have nothing to relate to, and therefore no means of connecting with them. If your character is atypical simply for the sake of being atypical, you're already marketing something you don't believe in. Why are you writing this story? If it's just to sell a book, then disregard all my words because that's the opposite angle from which I write. If you're writing because it's fun, because you feel compelled, because you enjoy the company of your characters, then my advice is this: Trust your gut and never apologize. And what that means is, write the character (and the story) that is actually in your head, not what you think someone else would approve of. I haven't read your work, so I don't know what your goal is, so I can't give you specific things to do or not do. (But I'd be happy to discuss in PM's if you find my perspective useful. )
I think I said it in an earlier post or a post on a different thread but the reason I write is because I have all these characters in my head and I need to get them out. I have all these scenes and ideas and stories and there isn't enough room in my head for them so I have to get them onto paper (or a computer). As soon as I get one out another one comes in. I don't know if they're any good or not but I have to get them out. I'd be happy to show you some of the stuff I have so far. I've been meaning to get someone to have a look at it for a while now. I can PM you a couple of chapters
Apologies for not catching that in the thread — I skimmed. I would be very happy to look over your work. Send whatever you feel comfy sending.
And now we run into the issue of defining masculine and feminine qualities without just repeating stereotypes. I'd say that hard and combative, coarse, cold, and emotionally stunted are personality problems if not disorders, but of course someone can be a man, and therefore masculine, without those negative qualities.
Yes, just write them. A female character should not have "female" as their primary defining characteristic, any more than a male character should have "male" as their primary defining characteristic. Women vary just as much as men, and the space defined by possible women's characteristics overlaps with the space defined by possible men's characteristics by pretty nearly 100%. Yes, different sexes may trend differently on certain things, so that the averages are different, but a main character is rarely pure average. For example, "Men are usually physically stronger," doesn't eliminate the possibility of "Jane was the strongest child in her village school." Now, "the strongest person in her entire country" is pushing things a good deal harder. If you find yourself thinking, "Well, she's a woman, so she should be nurturing, and worry about her appearance, and occasionally think longingly of having children..." or anything even remotely near that, you know that it's time to veer away. Admittedly, there are likely to be some societal influences on male and female behaviors, but that's just part of the overall package of influences on a character.
I will forever disagree with you here. My experience with the film and character was entirely different than yours. Katniss is exactly the kind of "strong" female character I am sick of. Rey wasn't Katniss. She was something I haven't seen in a while, and it was refreshing. I'm sorry your cynicism did not allow you to see that. I'd be pleased if my daughters saw a role model in Rey. She was a lovely character. Those things may not have been appealing to you, but they were to me. I did not feel marketed to, pandered to, force-fed, or insulted. I was pleased that there was not much emphasis given to sexual tension between the two leads, but rather more of a friendship. See? Our experiences were different. Just because I liked it didn't mean I'm wrong and you're right. Art is subjective. You won't convince me that she's a lame character, so it's probably better if we just drop it.
