Okay, I have a character idea that I really enjoy. I already know that it's a pretty popular stereotype to have the royal character be arrogant, condescending, and blunt, as well as being completely incapable of functioning in the world outside of their sheltered lifestyle. I also know that the other popular stereotype is to have the Royal be lazy, and they have to learn to responsibility of their position (I'm pretty sure that's meant to be their big "moment", where they grow as a character). But I had another take on the royal character I wanted some feedback on, if you would be willing. So, my idea is that this character is a typical royal character (Arrogant, condescending, you get the idea), but with a bit of a twist, those earlier traits are an act put on by her to accurately play the part of a royal. The character I have is a young adult woman with a brother. This brother is older, so he will have first dibs on the throne. The problem? The brother doesn't understand his position at all and thinks that he can act like fairy tale kings and get it right, completely ignoring all of the important work that goes into the job. The woman realizes this and realizes that she would need to be an actual leader for her people. She adopts a personality befitting the role: aloof, level-headed, talks in the typical royal speak where she doesn't use any contractions (I'm talking about the grammatical ones) and uses way too many words in a sentence, you get the idea. She hopes that this personality will inspire trust from her people, as well as deter others from attacking her kingdom (She has other methods to prevent others from attacking her). The reason she does all of this is because she's always felt extremely responsible for the people in her care, mostly due to how her family and staff described being a queen as someone who protects her kingdom and her people, and does whatever she can to ensure the safety of the kingdom. She doesn't have to put up an act all the time, however, there's a character that she can act as herself around. I have these characters interact like this because I know it's quite harmful to hide yourself from the world, and this woman isn't supposed to have any major emotional issues, so the outlet was a necessary add-in. Ah, right, this woman, due to her strong feeling of responsibility towards her people, she actively joins a rebellion started by her brother to overthrow her father, who is trying to turn the kingdom into a dictatorship. What I hope this character to be is a sort of "counter" to the usual royal stereotype. Where the typical royal sees their privilege as something that they should have because they were born right, this woman takes the privilege a different way. She feels the weight of all of her subjects and she really doesn't want it. But she knows that she can't just leave the responsibility to her brother because he'll screw it up, so she endures it. I just wanted to finally see a royal that takes their responsibility seriously, as well as explore the difficulties a benevolent royal might go through just by trying to be what everyone expects them to be. I really like the idea and I don't think I've seen it before. Is this already a thing? I think that would be nice because then I'd know whether or not this is a boat that was created with a mesh floor. Is this character compelling? What do you think, in general? All feedback is appreciated. Thanks in advance. Edit: I have a chapter written up that's supposed to show the two characters' dynamic, as well as the woman's internal struggle. I could post it in the workshop, if that would provide context to the post.
Personally I find that it is not whether or not a character falls within a stereotype, but more so how that character is delivered to the reader. In vis-à-vis to your character, it makes sense to me. But I find the "why" of the character a lot more defining and important than the "what". For example. Why does she care? Why is she different to her brother? Why did she grow up so differently? Perhaps she was never cared after to the same extant as her brother. Or perhaps she used to sneak into the lower town and mingle amongst the commoners (making her more 'rebel'). There are many reasons why and you can keep on asking. If she did go to the lower town, why? What was her purpose? Perhaps you simply have not outlined the reasons why she is that way, but it is something to think about. It also applies to her brother too. Historically speaking, rulers that were particularly 'kind' towards their people were often considered weak as kings (or queens). Most of the time, it required and cold and ruthless mind to be a king. To ability to hang someone for no other reason than to be an example. However, to be truly loved by your people (as far as history is concerned) it usually involved being kind, true, but more so being understanding of the other classes' situation and not treating them like scum. There are a number of types in that aspect. Stalin, for instance was particularly cold and ruthless. However, nobody can say he was a bad leader. Sure, he killed hundred and thousands of people and systematically purged most of his armed forces. But he nonetheless recovered the soviet union, kept it stable enough to last until 1991 and much more despite that large inherent defects within it founding that contributed to it's eventual downfall. There are others. For example, Louis XIV "The Great" or "The Sun King", was a devout catholic and a true believer in divine right to rule. Additionally, he had a sharp mind and an amazing skill to pick out talent people as he courtiers. However, he was quite cold and ruthless. Especially when it came either to justice (whom he would uphold the law to a great degree - even exiling his own family for conspiring against him in The Fronde). Additionally, since he believed in his god given right to rule, he thought of it as almost heretical to go against his word as he equated his rule, to a god granted gift and any whom go against it, go against god. It was a suprisingly efficient tactic, especially when dealing with the clergy whom, under his rule, reduced in power significantly. Of those rulers who were particularly kind or generous to their people. Or pitied them too much. They often became the prawns of larger and more ruthless people. Often resulting in them being controlled by powerful councilors or nobles. Just something to keep in mind.
Okay, I enjoyed the history lesson towards the end. It's also nice knowing that what my character does, personality wise, actually might have the effect she wants from it. If I were to come up with a concrete reason as to why they grew up so differently, I would have to sit on that. I will, however, say that the mother never appears in the story (A leftover of the original concept, but she just has no role in the story as it exists now). At this point, I'm fairly certain that she started her, as she puts it, charade at an early enough age that the brother doesn't notice the difference between the real her and the fake one, he just believes there is no fake. I would like to believe that I have a good grasp of why she's the way she is. She has a strong sense of responsibility for her subjects, as everyone around her told her that a queen is someone who is responsible for her subjects. This sense of responsibility added onto the knowledge that, as a royal, she has way more power than anyone else. Around this time, she started to realize that her brother was obsessed with fantasy, and decided that he would be a terrible leader. Due to all of this, she decided that she would have to take on all of the responsibility of being a leader that the people could look up to. She started to do her research and ask her older servants about past rulers. This all gave her the impression that a strong leader is emotionally distant, always focused on the good of the kingdom, that they always know exactly what to do, so they had to be incredibly smart, and they can't be afraid of anything, so she tries to hide her fears from people. I will agree that I should probably try and put my characters pasts into words more. I know who these characters are, as well as why they are the way they are, in head, but sometimes I forget to acknowledge that I'm the only one who can see inside my head.
I think your princess character has a pretty sound personality base. The fact that she's a young woman, and growing up looking toward to possibly being the leader of an entire kingdom gives off a strong theme of feminism, that could be a build for the readers. Id love to read about the growth and development of a eventual Queen, kinda an exciting perspective. On top of this, there's the counter weight of her brother being a young man, Destined to be "the king", the common expectation.. And yet, he isn't fit to be one. I dont know if your story is meaning to display some gender stereotype breaks or not, but I can see the possibility of some of it. That's just my possibly jaded opinion though.
I guess it could seem like that, but I fully intend to keep politics out of my stories. I just don't think I would want to read any kind of story that pushes hard for a certain "side" when it comes to politics, so I'll keep it out of mine. In their kingdom, the man isn't expected to be the ruler, the oldest is. The only reason the brother is next in line is because he was born first.
Another appropriate term would also be Absolute/Equal Primogeniture, which throws gender out of the window, instead having an age-based bias.
Equal Primogeniature Sounds good too, even if I've never heard of the before. Is the story going to be centered on the prince or the princess? Or a third partied "neither"?..
