Plot and Character checklist

[Philosopher]

So, I am new to the world of published fiction. I mean, I have been reading, and I have been writing, for over two thirds of my life but only recently have I tried to turn my major WIP into a publishable (if thats even a word I'm not sure) piece.

I would say that all writers and avid readers agree that it is essential for all characters to have 'depth' and all plots to be resolved, before a novel or series even has a chance of being 'good'.

I would like to gather peoples ideas are on what exactly are the requisites for a character to have 'depth' and if you want to define your take on 'character depth' that would be great too.

On a side note, if anyone thinks a plot needs some essential aspects to be full and resolved, then add those too

This way, I can try to put together some form of universal checklist (if even possible) of what a constitutes character depth and plot resolution. Im sure similar things have been done before, but I would like to interpret others raw opinions myself and express the outcome in my own way. Be it a checklist or a summary of the exercise.

 

[Brian G Turner]

I think you'll need to read some books on this - "How to Write a Damn Good Novel" might be a good starter, and Stephen King's "On Writing" is a good all rounder.

More importantly, you must have the will to write not by thinking about things in abstract terms, but as an artist who must express themselves in a clear and accessible style.

Write. And write some more. See that you try a few different formats and genres, and generally hone your skills so what the Masterpiece slams into your imagination, you have the tools to get it out.

 

[Philosopher]

To get it out of my head is not the problem, my main problem is making sure it fits the bill. E.g. making sure its of a standard people will enjoy / respect. I figured it would be nice to have a 'checklist' for want of a better word, before I ask people to review it. Thanks I will read those books and see how things progress from there!

 

[Boneman]

Defining depth and character depth is soooo difficult. Especially since characters gather depth that you hadn't even thought existed, when you first put pen to paper.

I've liked characters that I hated - I always thought Saruman got a rough deal; he was doing the best he could in the circumstances as he saw it... but I really don't like to read books where the character is drawn so thinly, that they do become unreal (ha ha, this is fiction) and unbelievable. So for characters, for me, they have to be believable(even the bad guys).

One of the biggest massacres in writing occured when Anderson and Herbert took over the Dune story, because so many of the characters simply weren't believable. It's a lazy way out to say 'I'm writing fiction, I'll have the characters do amazing things, or stupid things, or courageous things, and it will be fine' if the writer has given us no notion of what drives the character. If there's no character arc, there's no journey for the character or the reader.

So for me, checklist on character must have an arc to it, or it's pointless.

 

[Mouse]

Yeah I agree with Boneman. Characters should be imperfect and flawed to have some real depth.

 

[alchemist]

On plot, there usually needs to be some element of mystery; not as much as in a murder mystery novel, but something that raises questions the reader wants answered. Whether you answer them or not, that depends on you.

 

[Karn Maeshalanadae]

Well, in response to not answering the questions being raised, that can't keep up for long because it tends to turn readers off. Mystery and suspense are great-they're what drive a story forward. But to drag a reader along from volume after volume with nothing, and then when the story finally does end and nothing is answered, that's just frustrating.


Which can really be one thing that gets me about some video games, actually....I just tend to think there needs to be answers to everything.

 

[slack]

I would like to gather peoples ideas are on what exactly are the requisites for a character to have 'depth' and if you want to define your take on 'character depth' that would be great too.

Essentially, a character is his actions. So if you want to create a character with depth, then you need to create dramatic scenes which showcase that character's personality through his actions. How does one create a dramatic scene? With conflict.

I think it is important for every character to have an arc. His beginning should be different from his ending. He is either better or worse off. He has changed.

 

[alchemist]

Yes, I should have qualified there's a limit to how much you can't reveal without losing the reader. But sometimes a mystery is best left unsolved.

 

[Karn Maeshalanadae]

With a mystery left unsolved, though, there is just the feeling of "wtf was THIS!?!"

That frustration I mentioned, hehe. And anger that ultimately comes of it. No story should be a waste of time, so unless there is a followup series/sequel/whatever coming by, I get angry with there being no summary of anything in a story.

I think it is important for every character to have an arc. His beginning should be different from his ending. He is either better or worse off. He has changed.

And yes, this is true as well. I think Frodo Baggins from LotR was a good example of this. He seemed just as cheerful and carefree as the other hobbits of the shire at the start, but after his experiences and journey, he seemed more solemn.

 

[goldhawk]

Some genres, like love romance, are very formulistic. But the thing about speculative fiction is that it's speculative. I wish you luck in finding a checklist for it but I don't think you'll get far.

A character has depth if the character is driven by his emotions, not by the need of the author to move the plot along. A good plot has conflict. Not just physical conflict between the protagonist and the antagonist but also an internal, emotional conflict within the protagonist. Not know which emotion is going to win out in the end is what keeps readers interested. Just having your characters go through the motions, without emotions, creates a very boring story.

So, think about what emotions are driving your protagonist to act and then throw in another strong emotion to conflict with it. Then you'll have the beginnings of a good story.

 

[Philosopher]

Yeah I never expected a rigid checklist but after the feedback already received I think it is safe to say that these aspects can be added to some form of list:

1) Does the character change during the plot
2) Is the character fueled by an emotion
3) Does the character have to deal with an emotional conflict

And so on Thanks for the response so far; all ideas most appreciated!

Now a little addition to this: can anyone who writes tell me whether these aspects of the character seem to form naturally as they write, or do you plan these things for each character to some extent before you start writing. I assume its either the former, or both, but I could be wrong.

 

[goldhawk]

Ah, but you see, the protagonist does not have to change during the story. This is often true of detective stories. The world-weary, cynical detective that starts the story is the same world-weary, cynical detective at the end of the story. Who changes are the people around him. These are called catalytic protagonists. For a SFF example, consider David Weber's On Basilisk Station. His heroine does not change significantly during the story. However, she inspires those around her to do so.

So, even your simple checklist is not written in stone.

 

[Philosopher]

Good point indeed. If only stone was easy to write in!

 

[Boneman]

Now a little addition to this: can anyone who writes tell me whether these aspects of the character seem to form naturally as they write, or do you plan these things for each character to some extent before you start writing. I assume its either the former, or both, but I could be wrong.

I plan each character, but then the little divils take over as the story progresses, and flesh out my thinking.

Oh: never reveal something the reader isn't already curious about. (Uness it's worldbuilding...) Otherwise it's just infodumping that readers skim.

 

[RJM Corbet]

Yeah I never expected a rigid checklist but after the feedback already received I think it is safe to say that these aspects can be added to some form of list:

1) Does the character change during the plot
2) Is the character fueled by an emotion
3) Does the character have to deal with an emotional conflict

And so on Thanks for the response so far; all ideas most appreciated!

Now a little addition to this: can anyone who writes tell me whether these aspects of the character seem to form naturally as they write, or do you plan these things for each character to some extent before you start writing. I assume its either the former, or both, but I could be wrong.

All writers are different, and it's not being published that makes a writer. I'm sorry but it appears to me that you're trying to write 'by the book' and I can tell you right now, it's not gonna work like that.

"You've got to know when to lay down, know when to fold up, know when to walk away, know when to run. Don't count your winnings when you're at the table, there'll be time enough for counting when the day is done."

Who sang that, by the way? I don't remember.

You've read all the rules, now throw away the rulebook and just go for it. You can polish it later ...

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I wouldn't say to throw away the rule book, but rather to assimilate the rules and integrate them into your thinking, so that they inform your writing as you go along ... and can be pushed into the background when you're doing well without them.

For a character to have depth, I think, it is important to leave readers with the impression that the individual in question has had (and will have, if he or she survives) a life apart from the major movements of the plot. Not that you should explain the details of that life, but that it should be implied.

Or, in other words, that the character should not appear to exist simply to fulfill a role. It's actually more interesting if the character doesn't fit too comfortably into the role that the story subsequently forces on him or her. It adds a level of difficulty to the challenges that must be faced, and also an element of doubt as to the outcome.

 

[Philosopher]

All writers are different, and it's not being published that makes a writer. I'm sorry but it appears to me that you're trying to write 'by the book' and I can tell you right now, it's not gonna work like that.

......................................

You've read all the rules, now throw away the rulebook and just go for it. You can polish it later ...

I very much like the idea of breaking all the rules with literature. The best writers do it. The thing is they also conform to the basic rules which create for a good read. Once the basis is strong, you can work on enhancing it with breaking certain rules.

I have already written my novel. Now I am polishing it, and thus need to ensure I am not doing anything silly with it before I get people to review / critique it. Once I have 30 posts, I will submit parts to be read and critiqued by fellow writers, but until then I was trying to understand the nature of writing to ensure I am not uploading a load of boring babble. I look forward to your comments!

 

[RJM Corbet]

I very much like the idea of breaking all the rules with literature. The best writers do it. The thing is they also conform to the basic rules which create for a good read. Once the basis is strong, you can work on enhancing it with breaking certain rules.

I have already written my novel. Now I am polishing it, and thus need to ensure I am not doing anything silly with it before I get people to review / critique it. Once I have 30 posts, I will submit parts to be read and critiqued by fellow writers, but until then I was trying to understand the nature of writing to ensure I am not uploading a load of boring babble. I look forward to your comments!

Sorry, I misunderstood. I seem do it quite often. In that case, yes I agree with you. Anyone posting unfinished work on critiques retires sadder but wiser, indeed.

Something like 'it's not being published that makes a writer' wouldn't last 30 seconds. Squirm ...

 

[Jake Reynolds]

Don't forget promises, too, meaning the promise you make to the readers. This relates in part ot the mysteries mentioned above- the promise is a contract between reader and author that, for example, the murderer will be revealed, the character they care about will overcome their conflicts, good will triumph over evil, whatever the motivation of your story is. It is important that readers feel their 'reason for reading it' is addressed, whether that is an answer to a mystery, or a reassurance that all is well with the world.