I think what can be difficult in characterization is how much you need to know about your own characters. Doing research is time consuming. And if I am on a deadline, it can be risky.
Chances are if you cant even be arsed to take the time to explore what makes your own characters tick, you are unlikely to get an actual deadline you need to work with in the first place.
Applause to this. Developing a character doesn't necessarily involve doing "research." It's not like you can type your character's name into a database and find the information you're looking for. Character development comes through the exploration of your characters within you novel. Sure, there might be some things you have to look up - an character sexually abused since childhood might prompt you to look up what effects that can have on someone in their adult life. But if you don't take the time to develop this character for yourself, all of the research in the world isn't going to do you any good, and you've totally wasted your time on it, anyway.
To have a deadline, you'd likely need to have already sold one or more works--new writers don't, I think, get contracts for not-yet-written books. And to sell one or more works, you're going to need deep and engaging characters.
It has always fascinated me how some people are willing to invest an immense amount of effort in order to avoid applying effort to something. Perhaps they feel that they, themselves, are not worth the effort.
Haha, reminds me of being back in school. I was the master of finding ways to not do stuff. Often involving hours of coming up with clever ways of dodging work. Looking back at it now though, must have seemed pretty funny.
Well, I dropped out of school when I was 20, so I guess that that strategy didn't really work so well for me. I'm 23 now.
The term cardboard character refers to a character that has no emotions. A flat character is a character who is only superficially described which results in the reader being unable to understand him.
Explanation is the key to fix flat characters. Like if the reader doesn't understand why the villain wants to take over the world, that can just make the villain a hateful stereotype. Even if the villain has a reason, that won't be enough. Some robot characters are also card board characters since they don't have emotion.
To be honest, I find it very hard to understand your viewpoint in this thread. Any chance you could take some time to explain just exactly what the purpose with the thread is? Because it seems to me that you are constantly swapping between agreeing with your own statements to disagreeing with them.
We've answered that pretty clearly. Not many people think it can be. You want to write with action driven stories, obviously. Stop asking for permission or looking for an accepted loop hole. I advise you to write something short like this and post in the Workshop. Either it'll work, and you'll be praised as a genius -- or it won't, and people will be able to tell you why. You might even try to read this story yourself to determine if even you would be interested.
That is actually an excellent suggestion. You can get some real feedback on how an action driven story works out, and you can lean what to improve and what already works.
Action driven is merely reporting...but even that is done because people want to know what is/has happened, where it has happened, why it has happened, and to whom it has happened to. The 4 W's. .
I could post a complete action story to see what readers would say, but I can also get carry away with characterization.
So you are saying that you want to write a story without characterization and you want all stories to be without characterization, but you don't believe it can be done because you will use characterization? You may want to rethink your statements.
This whole argument is just...absolutely fascinating. Every time I read it I grin from the humor of it all. So, essentially, Miles, what you're trying to say is, you yourself are incapable of writing a story without getting into the characterization, but you think that writers should just...not do it. You can't, but you've recognized that it should be done. Yes?
Maybe someone told you that your idea is awesome, but you should remind that someone that sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.
Just forget about this. This is dumb. Nothing is going anywhere on this thread. I now agree stories need characterization. I don't think it will work without it. Plus nobody is going to listen to me. Just write whatever you want.
No...every one IS listening to you. We are all beside ourselves wondering which way you'll turn next.
"Nothing ELSE", means you have argued about an opinion before. I must have missed that. Or maybe this was a bet of sorts, like "can i confuse every single person that will read this thread?".