How do you Justify killing off Characters

Discussion in 'Character Development' started by Cacian, Jan 20, 2012.

  1. CH878

    CH878 Active Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2011
    Messages:
    252
    Likes Received:
    11
    Location:
    England
    Quoting Margaret Thatcher? :p

    I'm actually trying to decide at the moment whether one of my main characters dies or ends up in prison for twenty five years. I'm leaning towards prison, because I don't think the death I had planned really does him justice, I'll probably wait till a later book to kill him.
     
  2. minstrel

    minstrel Leader of the Insquirrelgency Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2010
    Messages:
    10,742
    Likes Received:
    9,991
    Location:
    Near Sedro Woolley, Washington
    I don't really see the purpose of this thread. In reality, people die. Sometimes violently, sometimes accidentally, sometimes of natural causes or diseases. But they die. Refusing to include this aspect of reality in fiction makes the fiction weak. Any fiction, even fantasy or sci-fi, grips us as readers because we believe the characters have problems analogous to the problems we have in real life. That means those characters face the possibility of death, just as we do. If we remove the possibility of death, we also remove the possibility of self-sacrifice, we diminish the possibility of heroism, and we practically eliminate the possibility of tragedy. In other words, we reduce drama to a pale shadow of what it could and should be. We bore the reader with inconsequentiality.

    I'm not saying I kill off my characters in every story I write. I don't. But the possibility of their deaths is always there, as it is in real life. And sometimes I do kill off a character if doing so makes the story stronger. I don't need to justify it.
     
  3. Anniexo

    Anniexo New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2012
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    0
    The way I would justify killing a character off is, if it helps the plot move forwards. I have done so in a story I'm writing to drive the main character to do something that moves the plot quite a lot, and also change how she feels about another character.
     
  4. JPGriffin

    JPGriffin New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2011
    Messages:
    180
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    Connecticut
    Hopefully I don't duplicate a post, but I have to say I share the same opinions as a few members who posted here, about how characters that are put in deadly situations manage to survive by what can only be described as miracles. Most of the time, it's simply too far-fetched, and if a character becomes that skilled with a blade or magic in terms of fantasy, with words and persuasion in terms of fiction, and technology in general for sci-fi, then the character just becomes too unreal to make a connection to, in my opinion. Mortality's a huge connecting factor, and something that many people forget. For instance, I'm going to refer to a book that many people here enjoyed shredding, Inheritance by Christopher Paolini.

    To state bluntly: wards are cheap. They deflected any form of natural steel and wood, took only energy to use, and could be monitored, placed, and removed with a few words. I would've loved to see Eragon take a good arrow to the chest or arm, because that would have made me legit worry about his survival. I loved to see Roran fight more in the final book, simply because 1) He didn't rely on wards, but his skill, 2) He couldn't kill an enemy with a single word and a small amount of energy, but again relied on skill, and 3) Because he didn't have an elf or dragon to back him up, only an Urgal at best. He was MORTAL, and he could DIE.

    Death is natural, especially in any combat-centered novel, in any genre. Death is what makes us think, "Oh, crap, who knows who might be killed next?" Children's books know this, and a lot of media beyond writing uses that concept. Many Disney movies used a death to grip the viewer- Mufasa's death from "The Lion King" worked wonders- and children's books also used it; just look at Big Dan and Little Ann from Where The Red Fern Grows. Adult writers (Writers who write for adults, not older writers) show that they have the concept down, and they won't be looking for that teary-eyed moment outside of romance novels. In any of the aforementioned cases I would never accuse the author of murdering a character, they were simply using it to advance the plot or get readers interested. And besides, as Felipe stated,
     
  5. jc.

    jc. Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2012
    Messages:
    251
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    Hawaii
    I view a story as just that: a story. I kill characters when I no longer need them and if their death will serve some kind of purpose, like trigger an important event in the story.
     
  6. RusticOnion

    RusticOnion New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2011
    Messages:
    306
    Likes Received:
    8
    If a character gets too reckless then he dies... Nothing to it really...
     
  7. UrbanBanshee

    UrbanBanshee Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2012
    Messages:
    70
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Seattle
    The name of this thread made me think of when readers gang up on an author for killing off a character they love. :rolleyes:

    Currently I am only working on the outline for my story but already I have a character that is marked to die. They die for two reasons, one is simply because the types of stories I love the most are ones that aren't afraid to kill off a character. It feels very cheap to me when an author throws in a random character soley to die to try and say "look people can die, I do have high stakes' but noone important ever falls to the stakes. Mufasas' death in The Lion King had it's weight because they killed him after making him the coolest dad ever. The second reason is the situation called for it. It would be a cop out at that point to suddenly have the problem go away and the character be okay.

    I don't kill characters lightly and I do worry a little about how an audience will react to what could seem to be a senseless death. I don't feel the need to justify too much when I do kill off a character. Too often I see stories that go too far and no matter how dangerous a situation gets no one gets hurt. It should make sense when someone does die in story though.

    I'd actually like to see better justification for other general things to happen in a story, like in fantasy when the kid/teenager has to leave to save the world. How do you justify why they leave?
     
  8. Cacian

    Cacian Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,877
    Likes Received:
    5
    well my character never get to the point of recklessness.
    I am in control of what I write how could my characters become reckless.
    I don't understand.




    what do you mean?
    you mean they leave home to save the world?
    if that is what you mean then I would say it is an idea to explore, but the likelyhood of this happening in reality is very slim so because of it is allowed to be expressed in a book perhaps.
    whereas death is a fact of life and os because of this I won't have it in a story.
     
  9. UrbanBanshee

    UrbanBanshee Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2012
    Messages:
    70
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Seattle
    I guess what I meant was, in-story there should be justification. A character shouldn't just drop from a heart attack for no reason so there can be DEATH!! in the story. It does depend on the type of story you are writing too. I don't read romance type stories just to see the love interest die at the end. That would piss me off :)
     
  10. ChickenFreak

    ChickenFreak Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    15,262
    Likes Received:
    13,084
    Cacian, I really think that you should try to understand other people's point of view. Yes, I understand that you want all likable characters that get along, and you want a lack of conflict. That's fine; that's your preference.

    But other people don't want that. So when other people write their characters, they often write characters that are fundamentally different from themselves. Those characters might do reckless things, or evil things, or violent things. Yes, those writers are in control of what they write, and therefore they make a deliberate, conscious, controlled decision to make their characters do reckless things.

    I'm going to make a deliberate, conscious, controlled decision to make a character do a reckless thing:

    "Jane frowned as the headlights flickered and failed, but she kept on driving, accelerating down the narrow lane despite the almost complete darkness."

    That was reckless of Jane. What Jane did is something I would never, under any circumstances, do. But I can still easily make a character do it. That's what most writers do - they make their characters do many things that they would never do. It's fine that you don't like that, and you don't have to agree with it, but I think that it should still be possible to understand it.

    To put it another way: Fiction, for most people, is not primarily a depiction of how life _should_ be, if we made it perfect. That's not its main function for most people, and you'd have an easier time in discussions if you tried to understand those people's point of view.

    ChickenFreak
     
  11. Snap228

    Snap228 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2012
    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Albany, NY
    I agree with this. Also...dying is realistic. Everyone does it, eventually. And in some stories, it's not realistic for all of the characters to make it out alive.
     
  12. Jamez

    Jamez New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2012
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Interesting discussion!

    My justification for killing off characters is simple: I do it because the story needs it. I don't think character death in itself makes for interesting stories, but rather what happens because of it. Things like Dumbledore dying in the Harry Potter books and the implications of his death as the remainder of that story.
     
  13. krtr

    krtr New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2012
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Hessen, Germany
    I'm the author. I don't have to justify anything I do within my own writings. If I say they die, they die.

    My characters are not real people. I don't consider them like children, or as beings that I have to look after. Each character I create is crafted with a purpose and intent as a part of a story, and my only duty is to use the character in such a way that the story is told to its fullest. Often times I know the character is going to die before he or she even has a name because that is their role in the story.

    That being said, I'm not going to mindlessly kill every single character, and I'm not going to do it in a tasteless way. Generally, however, there's a little bit of death in all my works, whether in the back story or in the written story. All stories have death in the future. No matter how much you want to 'keep' a character, they probably won't ever be a permanent fixture of their world. They die sometime, too. Even Tolkien's immortal elves had something along the lines of a death when they left the world of men. It wasn't an actual death, but it meant they would never be seen again and they departed from the world.

    And on an unrelated yet related note to the children's literature argument of previous pages, to the one who argues that children do not understand greater themes... schade. I'm not sure how many children you've met in your life, or if you simply haven't had the pleasure of meeting the right ones yet, but there are some truly perceptive youngins out there. I think that children understand a great deal more than you're giving them credit. Another thing to consider about children's lit is the parents who are more than likely also reading the book, either aloud or beforehand. Children should be given the opportunity to read great things, too, not just some Hamster Huey and the Gooey Kablooey nonsense.

    Also, you mentioned Tolkien. Please note that most of his epic works were, in their original transcripts, children's stories. The Hobbit actually is considered children's lit. ;)
     
  14. Cacian

    Cacian Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,877
    Likes Received:
    5
    Hey krtr great post bythe way and I agree with a lot of what you said.
    I see it in a different way, it is not about keeping a character it is about how much and how long I want to keep stories around them.
    Instead of regretting killing off a character, I decide to keep them just in case I may come back again and again and continue writing stories around them.
    I consider my character like a book, once it is written it never goes away. A book/storu stays on the shelf eternally and so do my characters.
     
  15. krtr

    krtr New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2012
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Hessen, Germany
    I see what you're saying, and it makes sense. But I suppose my thoughts on books and stories are a little different. I see each book as a window, a peak at the goings on of the characters and the story I'm telling. It's a lot like how your lifetime and mine are only a short sample of the history of the world, with ample history before and to come. I think the same applies to characters. They have a back story, a history that isn't necessarily included in the book I write, and after I say the end for one part of a story, that isn't to say that I'm not going to revisit the world or setting with yet another tale. The characters have a sense of continuity to me, and they all eventually meet death in some way or another because of this. But as they were in the story remains in the window of the book continuing ever on, if you will. Some characters just meet their end in the window, that's all.
     
  16. jazzabel

    jazzabel Agent Provocateur Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2012
    Messages:
    4,255
    Likes Received:
    1,688
    Death is a powerful motivator, it scars people, causes grief, fear, gives those in charge to take a life an enormous power. But it is also a normal part of life.
    I don't like sad or violent stories because I've had lots of hard times in my life and I don't need to experience the pain and loss through literature, I know what it feels like. But many readers who like sad or scary stories are living through the pain vicariously, they are learning something about life in a "safe" way, this is why, I think, death is such a powerful motivator in literature.
    But as much as I dislike sad stories, for one of my main antagonists in the story I am writing, loss of a loved one simply happened to be an integral part of her backstory. When I wrote the first draft, I bawled my eyes out, I was so upset, but there was no way around it, it had to happen.

    I remember Stephen King (disclaimer: I actually don't read his novels at all, not my cup of tea, but I keep mentioning him is because I admire his success and also, he gave some very useful insights into the writing process), where was I? :D Yes, Stephen King was telling a story of writing one of his novels (it might have been "The Stand") and backing himself into a corner creatively speaking and the only way around it was to kill most of his main characters in one big blow. Only after that, his story got the motivation and the push to move forward.
     
  17. Cacian

    Cacian Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,877
    Likes Received:
    5
    How about a soft blow instead...hehe..that is/was Stephen and I am me.
    I can think of many reasons of why my characters stay alive because I wish to have a continuity in my stories.
    I very much dislike series and sequels because the first is never like the second and so on.
    I found many time that once I have read series one and I liked it a lot, thenI go on to read series 2 and three but I found out it just loses all its thrills and I lose sight to why I liked the first one.
    I wish to avoid disappointment and at the same I wish to carry on writing as long as I am alive and so I am thinking of intruding a sequel of characters rather then stories.
    For example once I have written one short story with all my characters intact, then I move to write a totally different new story, then for my third story I proceed to pull out one or two characters from story number 1 and 2 , get these characters together and write my third sequeled around them.
    By this I would have created a chain, a type of consistancy that my readers would follow and perhaps appreciate because allthough the story is totally different from the first second and one they have read, they will recognise the characters and will get to knwo them better, just like getting toknow friends better.
    Familiarity breeds success and my readers should bond with my characters and hopefully would want to read more and more of them and about them.
    This makes my writing style consistant and I know because I am like this, some readers would enjoy consistancy in how they read.
    It is a like saying, newspapers readers would buy a new daily newspaper in the knowlegde that one or two or three columnists they already know/like have new articles in the new newspapers hence the motivation to buy something new and read something different.
    Stagnation in every is not healthy and something new and fresh everyday gives a the reader a sense of changes and progress.
    In other words a columinist does not write for the same newspapers all the time and the reader gets to buy a new newspaper with one or two of his favourites columnists amongsts other new ones ,offering the readers different views and angles on different stories in adifferent environment.
     
  18. jazzabel

    jazzabel Agent Provocateur Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2012
    Messages:
    4,255
    Likes Received:
    1,688
    Sure Cacian, but that is you, and some readers will like it some won't. So it is a good thing that everyone is different :)
     
  19. Enzo03

    Enzo03 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2012
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    1
    I'm not very fond of the "total control of my characters as tools of my story" idea. Although ultimately it is indeed true, I try to convince myself that the characters are actively attempting to achieve the best possible outcome. More often than not the circumstances do not allow for what a character would absolutely want and sometimes this can include their death. If a story absolutely requires a character's death for some odd reason then I make sure that they meet their end, but usually not through a completely and totally direct result of me "controlling" what they do.

    Sometimes I have to play out multiple scenarios or multiple ways that a scenario could go to get a result close to what I want. I try have to balance plausibility, personality, and what I want.

    As I'm writing this during one of my classes, I can't exactly put everything that went through my head about this right now (it's gone).
     
  20. AKhalifa

    AKhalifa New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2012
    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Cairo, Egypt
    Ask G.R.R Martin. Bastard broke my heart in a dozen places.
     
  21. Thom

    Thom Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    Messages:
    162
    Likes Received:
    63
    The easiest way may be not to justify it. If it's accidental, then it just happens with no preamble. If it's in battle, then the easiest justification is the opponent...
     
  22. Cole

    Cole New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2011
    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    0
    Shouldn't have to justify anything so long as it helps develop the plot.
     
  23. Toph Bei Fong

    Toph Bei Fong New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2012
    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    1
    I think that killing characters can be used as a huge tool in writing stories. It creates loads of emotions, it allows the plot to move, and it can be made very memorable.

    On a similar note, is there ever a time when it's too early to kill a character? In a story I'm writing I had originally planned for a character to die in the second arc, but then I had to rethink it. I didn't want the story to get too dark too soon, so I had to rework elements of the plot to allow for the character to live. And then I rethought my decision again. Did I let her live because I had made her so lovable and couldn't bring myself to kill her or was it really because it made the story better? I'm still struggling with the decision. Killing characters is hard T-T
     
  24. Show

    Show Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2008
    Messages:
    1,493
    Likes Received:
    35
    ^^^^I'd say it's too soon if the reader hasn't had the time to develop the appropriate emotional response to the death that you'd want. I've killed off characters in Chapter 1 but I felt that the reader has sufficient time to develop the kind of connection I was going for.
     
  25. leke101

    leke101 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2010
    Messages:
    30
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    London
    Wow, killing off characters as a power trip? Does anyone actually do this. It's kinda of weird if you ask me. I kill of characters if I believe their death will have a profound effect on the character and allow for some good character development. I never kill of a character for the sake of it. I kill off a character if I know his/her death will have a strong impact on the characters.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice