In an interview for tomorrow's Grauniad Mick Jagger shares Jack Nicholson's advice on acting, to "start with your character's sex life". I thought it was an interesting take on writing characters too. I'm interpreting it as instruction for background, not literally how the characters are introduced to the reader on the page. I would be interested if anyone here has done that or seen it done, or anything like it ("start with their appetites ", "start with their most humiliating secret" etc.)
Characters in stories differ from living people in some ways. Real people think about sex several times an hour - but usually that isn't interesting enough to write out for a character. The reader has enough bodily functions of their own to contend with without us making them read about it as well Erotica characters are an exception that proves the rule - their sex lives are the most interesting thing about them I'd suggest to "start with whatever the characters want to tell you" and to give them a certain amount of privacy until there is enough trust between reader and character. It would feel unrealistic to get too much information too soon. And probably we only want to read a small subset of sex that advances the story. I think people are extremely contextual in our real-life relationships, and our attraction to other people is very much driven by our wider sexual histories - but with characters it's often better to view their courtships in isolation. That saves us having to describe their previous relationships, and it might help to make the ones the story is about seem more special.
I don't know. I guess I 'pants' characters, because I put almost no forethought or extra-novel content into them. I usually have an idea of how they present as soon as they're in the story, and learn the rest about them along the way. Maybe it will seem inconsistent. Oh well, second draft. As for tricks and bylines, they are definitely useful for some people. IMO, the most important and acutely defining part of anyone's character is how they interact with others, and what they can DO. Maybe it will be some kind of somersaulting sex move, but more than likely it will instead be they're rude to old ladies, support others through failure, and have great aptitude in mending clothes. That leads on to a larger point: tastes such as favourite meal, political party, depressant (alcohol, MJ), band, cartoon, etc. in real life do not a personality/character make.
Lol, I think it refers more to dominant, submissive, abusive, permissive—slow and steady or goes in guns blazing etc. Psychological profiling beginning with their sex style. Yeah, seems pretty solid actually, if a bit Freudian. It definitely suits Nicholson and most of his characters. Of course a lot of stories never really delve that deep into the dark or personal territory. Many remain pretty PG or G rated (yeah, I'm an old-timer, never did get used to all the newfangled categories). For those you might want to start elsewhere. Or who knows, develop a secret fetish background for a character who doesn't show it at all on the story's surface level? Interesting...
I was also thinking even more basic. Are they getting any, as much or as little and as often or infrequently as they like, with the person or persons they like, because, whichever way the causality goes, it might correlate quite closely with other behaviour and moods.
Very relevant here, just happened to hear the Black Crowes: She don't know no lover None that I've ever seen To her that don't mean nothin' But to me, it means Means everything It might seem basic, but really it gives a tip-of-the iceberg glimpse of a psychological profile. Of both the singer (Songwriter? Song narrator lol?) and the character.
I suppose it could work well with deep motivations and psyche. As for day-to-day personality, I never think to myself "Hm, based on my interactions with Phill, I suspect he's very dominant during sexual interactions." I never even try to draw conclusions there (and I've been wrong when I tried), because the degrees of separation are too great IMO. You can present as an intimidating person and also have a baby role play kink.
True. It gets complicated because people cover up and compensate or just have weird quirks most people never see. Apparently a lot of highly competent CEO types go to hookers and want to be dominated because they have to play that part all day long at work. I guess if you have to be so extreme to do your job you need balance in some form, to be able to go in the other direction for a while. Many people are very different behind closed doors. But that could be the next step (or three) in building the character
I should add that when I say things like this I'm usually thinking along a spectrum but I always forget to mention that. It's just the way my mind works. When I say things like dominant and submissive, it implies extremes, but there's a full spectrum. Someone can be mild, moderate or extreme in either direction.
