How do you create characters?

I agree with ChickenFreak That my character will change as the story moves along.
I'm often surprised at the direction they take.

 

Every story I've written where I defined my characters ahead of time has had better characterization than the stories where I didn't

 

I agree with @LostThePlot, entirely, but that's because it's what works for me. And that's all we can do, right? Just say what works for us? If I do a character sheet for a character, and then I start writing them and realize that my character actually doesn't care about the neighbor girl that was supposed to be important to him and now he's all about that quiet girl sitting over there under a tree reading a book - I just wasted a whole helluvalot of time creating a character sheet for the neighbor girl that he doesn't even notice. I think that just running with the basics and creating a character on the move, literally, as they move through the world you've created is the best way to get to know a character, but again - that's how it works for me. And it makes sense, to those of us who write this way, to see what they're made of by putting them in a scene that challenges them.

It's also a bit myopic to suggest that what doesn't work for you, simply doesn't make sense for anyone, don't you think?

 

I'm a discovery writer too, and I use character categorization all the time

I think @Michael Pless was talking more about @LostThePlot saying "everybody has to do this" than about LTP saying "I personally do this."

EDIT: wait, are you talking to Michael in that part or LTP?

 

Well I try to develop them as the story progresses.
Much fun seeing how they will react to their interactions
and environment. Works well for me. Never quite sure
how they are going to adapt and evolve over time. It
takes time and patience and being in their heads.
If you don't know them, then you better learn to.

 

I was talking to Michael, and I know what he was saying, and I also know that LTP's comment started with the words "I think" - which is the same thing. It's an opinion, and he stated that, even if it didn't come across that way.

Edit: I pay attention to that because I also default to statements like "you need to..." when I mean it as an opinion. It's just how I talk.

 

I think what goes along with this is also 'envisioning.' I don't mean 'thinking up.' I mean you need to settle back, imagine your characters, imagine the scenes, even scribble down bits of dialogue to get you going. This doesn't always happen at the computer. It happens in your head as well. I'm good at doing this while I'm walking, or even sitting on a bus. You do this enough, you find you HAVE to get it written.

 

Outside of my protagonist(s) I tend to write them as I go on, never really setting everything in stone until I need it... and even they maybe going back and changing some things. Even my main character is always subject to change depending on what I feel the needs of the story are as I go (in my current story I'm still debating if the time shift should be one year or two, which would obviously change my main character's age a bit). I'm sorta a scattered author like that.

 

You've obviously not read my first post - the one that triggered my second post. I suggest you do so before accusing me of being short-sighted - I stated my preferred method and that my characters can and do change as I write and for that I got told I was wasting my time and more. I view that as inordinately stupid and think it's quite poor that you level an accusation at me when clearly I merely responded.

Try reading before you write.

 

Whether you plan a character or just write a character you are just coming up with things that you think fit. It's just that when you do it in your writing you actually know what matters to the scene and the character and when you do it when you aren't writing you don't. The creative process is the same. But by being closer to the text, closer to the character, you have the opportunity to organically grow a character instead of dictating who you want them to be by fiat and then trying to force them to do what the plot needs them to do even though it doesn't make sense. And that's why I specifically think that planning characters will either be wasted time or lead you astray. Because if you change your characters on the fly so they fit the plot better then you wasted your time planning them. And if you don't change them and contort the plot to fit them then it has lead you astray.

When you write a character and let them grow in the scene instead of on a character sheet then you can write them like a real person; like you have a real relationship with them. Because you don't know them at first and you have to learn who they are in the same way that both the reader and the other characters are learning who they are. You start out a bit shallow and slowly become deeper as they reveal their inner self on the page. And letting that happen in a way that isn't forced to meet your plan, that's something magical. Sometimes it takes a long time to get to know a character. That's a good thing. And it doesn't matter if you have to come back and change improve your work once you've written further into it. That's absolutely fine. That's good. Because now you're foreshadowing things that are actually going to be a big deal to them, you're setting up a bigger reveal and showing the reader shades of a character that was allowed to grow on their own terms.

I don't really understand how it's myopic to not plan characters. And yes, I absolutely would advise every writer to plan less and write more. That is the sole piece of advice I think everyone needs to hear. I think that planning is one of the biggest writing sins because it lacks heart and it lacks authenticity. To my way of thinking it's cynical to sit and plan out how exactly you're going to get an emotional reaction from the audience, and how you're going to get them to like this character. Both of those things will be determined by the writing, not by the planning.

Some people plan and I will never understand them. I couldn't possibly do it. It would take all sense of joy from my work. And I promise you; I have never have a problem writing a coherent story together. In fact I tend the other way; my stories if anything have a bit too much going on that all dovetails together in the ending. And I don't plan any of that. That's just how it worked out. The main plot, the romance, the family drama and best friend's b-plot somehow all manage to tie up in the same bow without any need to plan out where those character arcs go. And my feelings on this can best be expressed by the phrase "What do you mean you can't write like that?". Yes, this is me and my process. And you do what works for you. But I genuinely can't imagine why it's so hard to write like that. You sit down and your write it and you let the plot grow out into the middle part and you tie it all together at the end. Why is that so hard? Why can't you just sit down and write a book man?

And yet some people find that they can't. And that's fine. They can work however they work. But that cannot change how I work or the advice that I give. I think writers just need to trust themselves that they can write things that really mean something without needing anything to lean on. And I think planning is the enemy of good fiction.

Yes, indeed. I'm not saying at all that you shouldn't think about a story or a character before you write. I just don't think that you should set them in stone. It's good to walk in with lots of ideas and interesting things that maybe you will build on. It's very helpful to have this picture in your head of who this person might be, or some little snippet of a scene where you see something interesting in their character that makes you want to sit down and write them. And it's the same for plots; you should have ideas to draw from. But the key thing is to not make decisions about what is and what isn't before you start writing. The book will tell you if this idea is right to use here; if this bit of backstory is something that matters or if that attitude is the right one for this character to have.

As I said before; when you make a big list of stuff that you've set in stone about a character then you are strongly inclined to just throw it into the book whether you should do or not, whether it fits or not, whether that's right for this character or not. I've seen people's character bibles that include things like a characters preferred beach wear, you know? But how do you know? Shy girls wear bikinis too, you know? Just because they are shy doesn't mean they don't like boys looking at them sometimes, or indeed fitting in with their more confident friends. But once you've put it down that this character you don't know very well is definitely someone who always wears a one piece then that's what you're going to run with.

And that takes me right back to my point. If you don't stick with what you initially wrote then why did you bother writing it? And if you don't include these bits of trivia in the book then why did you bother writing it? And if you stick with what you wrote what do you do when a character's voice is even fractionally different from what you first conceived? Either you've wasted time to come up with that information, or you've been pulled off course because a character isn't a dolly that will just walk from A to B in the plot on cue. Even as you get to know them better and find all the other details you didn't think to write down suddenly you see that they aren't quite who you originally wanted. And that's a good thing, you should let them do that, let them grow. But then why did you take the time to write all that stuff out?

Writing to me is about discovery. And that means you can't use a map. You couldn't plan out everything you want from your characters anyway. You should have a direction, you should have some idea where you are trying to get to. But like the explorers of old; you know when you've found something significant. And that might be the El Dorado you imagined, or it might be somewhere else. And it might turn out that somewhere else is even better than what you imagined.

 

In which case I can only state my point again; if you change your characters as you write then why waste the time planning them? What are you gaining from spending the time writing it all down when you know you're going to change it in the moment the exact same way I do. If we are both engaging in the same process in practice and letting the character define themselves with no regard for anything else then what benefit is gained from sitting down and writing down things that you know will be wrong?

No-one noticed your first post because I didn't answer your first post. I stated my opinion and you called that stupid, when I wasn't even talking to you. And that's also why no-one noticed that you apparently do change your characters as you go. Because you plucked my post out and were quiet acerbic for no obvious reason and notably, you very much sounded like you were deriding the very notion of not writing character sheets.

I do still think you are wasting your time, but I think that's a fair enough criticism of all planning and I've explained why. If you try not being a jerk then we can actually talk like grown ups.

 

Why write a first draft if you're just going to change it? Why not start at the second draft

 

Actually, I did read your first post (and all of the posts thus far), though I'm now wondering if you did. I didn't comment on it, because I didn't see any reason to. And, while you did say that your characters change, you also said that you use a CG:

And then you said you're unclear where they come from:

But, again, I didn't respond to what I did read, because it didn't seem to need a response.

I don't think that your first post triggered your second post. In fact, I think it's quite clear that what triggered your second post was your belief that you were being attacked

In fact though, @LostThePlot stated an opinion that you took personally, despite the fact that he didn't tag you or quote you or anything else. He just posted after you. And your response to his opinion was clearly personal:

And then you stated that just writing a character in a scene causes people to backtrack and is against all lecturer's advice (and prevents them writing a coherent story):

And then we come to the last comment (and the one that triggered my response), where you imply that not doing it your way simply doesn't make sense:

And yes, you did say 'to each their own', I did read that. The problem being that you quoted him and that made your comment directed - like mine is to you.

So I think we can all rest easy that I did, in fact, read, and I wasn't accusing you so much as pointing out that you were doing the same thing you accused LTP of doing (being myopic).

Really though, I'm not intending this as a personal attack, I'm simply explaining my position and reasoning, despite the fact that you've so easily accused me of being illiterate.

 

Mine come from a lot of different places but usually I start with two contradictory traits and work out how they can exist in one character (instant internal conflict).

I have a practicing Jain who's a professional pop-culture journalist (anti-materialist values vs. materialist personality), and a fallen Valkyrie who's living as an Orthodox Jew in modern America (tangible proof of own divinity vs. religious practice rejecting own origin story). Some are less clear cut but starting with central conflict is a lot of fun to flesh out.

 

Why indeed

But there is a serious point to be made here. Surely you should just write the thing that you want to write; why, as you say, write a first draft when you know lots of it will be cut or will be changed? Isn't that just a more substantive form of planning?

And the answer I'd give to that is "I only write one draft". I write a book and then I edit it and I don't see editing as being writing. I write through in one big chunk, then come back and shave away the excess to just leave exactly what I want from it without the long stretches of wandering or repetition to leave a nice clean story that flows nicely.

And depending on your point of view that might sound like splitting hairs but to me at least there is a really clear difference between writing and editing, and indeed between writing and planning. To me those are all really distinct parts of the process. Writing is where I'm just going to keep writing until I'm done; where I'm there in the moment and discovering where things are going and letting the characters unfold with me. And once I'm done writing that's when things are mostly set in stone; the book isn't finished but everything I want in it is already in it I just have to scrape off the thousands upon thousands of extra words to leave the finished book. Once I'm done exploring I feel like the creative process is done; by the time I've finished writing the book in the first instance my characters are who they are and they aren't changing, all I'm doing it just trying to express myself more cleanly with them, and ensuring that the characters are shown throughout the book as being consistent with who they will grow into.

In my last book one the secondary characters I didn't quite have a handle on until right at the end where I finally clicked with exactly she was and of course I had to go back and re-draw some parts of her so that it all fit together to build up to that final reveal for her. But I wasn't changing her anymore. I was done writing. And it took me the whole book to find out who she was, to explore the landscape of her, but once I knew for sure then going back and introducing that stuff and subtly building her up wasn't at all me making something new.

And I can understand how to the 'planner' type writers, or to people who edit their work as they write, this stuff might seem to be weird or pedantic or whatever, but I really do feel like there is writing and there's other stuff and these are totally separate processes as far as I'm concerned. If you'll allow me the metaphor; writing is the expedition to find the characters and the plot and charting all the places that I've discovered as I go. Editing is building highways between those bits; no more meandering around looking for the right point, it's demolishing all the trees and native peoples and connecting up all the places I discovered and making that into something that other people want to travel on. Once the writing is done the direction of the road is set, the editing just comes along to make the journey between those points easier for others to follow. They don't want to see me wandering in circles, they want to see the finished character as if I knew what I was doing all along. But they only become those good characters because I had explored around until I found them.

 

This. Sometimes I like to think that @ChickenFreak and I are mildly alternate universe versions of one another.

Yes, there is some form to begin with, but this form is very malleable. I don't feel there's really any value in knowing ahead of time whether the character prefers Twix™ over KitKat™. I just don't see the why of it. I'm also not that interested in pitching a tent in either side of the inevitable Planning vs. Pantsing game. I am that most despised of things: I do a little of both and pay no mind to the clutching of pearls and sharp intakes of breath to be heard from both sides. The scandal of it all.

 

Because I don't know which parts are going to be changed and which ones aren't when I'm first starting out

I always start with a rough outline of what I want the story to look like, and then when I start writing, I fill in the blanks that the outline didn't cover. Over the course of the writing process, I get new ideas for what I want the plot to be like, new ideas for what I want the characters to be like, and new ideas for what I want the themes to be about. Whenever this happens, I always make a new outline to figure out how I want these small changes to impact the rest of the story, and then I start re-writing until I either finish the story or come up with another better idea. It's called "discovery outlining"

Would you like to read the Doctor Who fanfic in my signature to see whether or not you feel my process created a good story? We can argue all we like about how many teeth are in a horse's mouth, but that's a poor substitute for looking at a horse and counting how many teeth it has

Maybe I could email you my unpublished short stories? My unpublished novella? The first 40,000 words of my novel-in-progress?

 

Same here! Sometimes a new idea for a plot changes my vision of the characters, sometimes a new idea for the characters changes my vision of the plot, but the back and forth in my head always starts with an initial plot nugget that I create my initial cast of characters around

 

Yep, this is exactly what I meant about working backwards earlier in the thread. Just much better articulated.

 

Well it's not really a question about which process is the right process, because that's a question without a helpful answer. It's more a question of what works and what's helpful. When I say that I'd advise writers to plan less and write more, I more mean the kind of people who can't figure out why their meticulously planned characters feel flat in their writing no matter what they try. I still think it's good advice for everyone, but if they have a process that works then they don't really need my advice.

And for what it's worth; we're all describing what is very close to the same thing we just relate to it in different terms. I have almost exactly the same process as you, I just don't write anything down. I start out with a concept then I write that and both it and it's characters change, but it all stems from one idea about what I'm trying to do that slowly becomes more specific as I write. These things aren't shockingly different concepts and I think this is broadly how most writers, or at least writers who write a lot, end up writing once they have the confidence in themselves that they can change things on the fly and still come up with something good. I don't want to take the time to write my amended ideas up because I never write ideas up; I'd rather just be writing; but I'm still holding the bits in my head in a quantum super position until I'm finished and it all just becomes itself.

The quantum part of my writing is the most important. And also is not.

 

Ditto. Maybe those of us who can do this are really lucky, but like @ChickenFreak, they just come to me instantly. Within seconds of me writing their introduction, their whole personality and type just arrives in my head.

 

Yes, you are

 

If it's any consolation, nothing else about writing comes easy.

 

If you ever feel like you need some rapid fire ideas then my genius comes at very reasonable rates