Character driven versus Plot driven...

[alchemist]

... with a hint of settings and world building.

I hear everywhere, both here and the outside world, that people want character driven stories, that characters are the most important thing, that character is where you start when writing. Yet when I went to the library yesterday and chose Terminal World by Alastair Reynolds, it wasn't the characters that stood out. It was what I read about the setting and the plot.

Sure, characters are very important. A brilliant fictional world will not compensate for an unbelievable or unconvincing character, but I don't read SFF for the characters. I read for the fantastical, the imagination, the immersion in the far-from-mundane; for tension and drama and stakes of the highest order. You can have the most amazing character you like, but if their world is humdrum and grey and, to be frank, the same as my own, there's little in it for me.

"They're all important," you will cry, but I hear much more about the primacy of character. Does anyone else feel that it isn't THE most important thing in a SFF book? Or am I a lone voice, an eccentric shouting in a vast empty warehouse who wonders why everyone else doesn't think the same way?

 

[Jo Zebedee]

You don't want me to reply to that, do you?

I write characters, but I like to have fun with the setting too, and am growing to enjoy that more as I go on. But the characters are what drives me to read a book.

Having said that, the whole voice thing that is currently going on, I'm not so sure about that. Yes, it's nice to hear a character who sounds like they should, but in third I think there is room to accept that the author is writing them, not the character. (First is different, I think.)

But, for sff, the world building and tech are part of the joy, the sense of "what if" that can't be ignored. The difference is (and I know mine are very character led for sci fi) I like to ask what if you were the person in this world? What would you do? So, for me it's a blend, a what if concept (plot) a world I can have fun in, and the characters to get close to and enjoy. My ambition is to have them all in a single book I write, one day, instead of elements. (My new WIP is focusing more on world building, which I'm weak at.)

 

[Mouse]

You can have the most amazing character you like, but if their world is humdrum and grey and, to be frank, the same as my own, there's little in it for me.

Oh ah, you didn't say that when 'ee was reading TBM!

For me, the plot is just there so the characters have something to do. That probably sounds wrong but I don't care. You can have the most fascinating plot in the world but if your characters are crap, I'm not interested.

 

[alchemist]

Oh ah, you didn't say that when 'ee was reading TBM!

Because it wasn't true for TBM! There were demons and powers and a world beyond our world, as well as interesting characters.

Your opinion doesn't sound wrong at all; you're just at the other end of the character/plot spectrum from me, and it seems a lot busier over there.

 

[Mouse]

That's cos we're right.

 

[allmywires]

Sure, characters are very important. A brilliant fictional world will not compensate for an unbelievable or unconvincing character, but I don't read SFF for the characters.

See, that's the thing. You can have the most fabulous world but if the main character is a prize winning arsewipe then I won't read it. Simple as. I think GRRM's world is amazing but I don't like most of his characters so therefore ASOIAF is not for me. Personally, I think if you have a strong enough cast of characters you can make the setting a character in its own right, though I think it can be difficult to do.

Oh ah, you didn't say that when 'ee was reading TBM!

Or Hunted? I jest, I jest.

 

[Boneman]

I don't think it matters, because there are those who want character-driven and those who want plot-driven and the other 99% want a good story... I doubt if more than 1% of readers even think about it, tbh. They pick up a book, read it, and say I did/didn't like that, and the question you've posed never even enters their head. It's only us writers who know things like that and we're all obsessive madmen/women anyway...

 

[AnyaKimlin]

There is no use in having a fantastic world if the character doesn't fit in it and the plot doesn't make sense in context. The characters have to interact with the world.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I am willing to bet that for sci fi readers there is less of a bend towards "characters are king". The reason I say this, and the reason I hope I'm really, really wrong, is that with my stuff the sci fi readers tend to think the character stuff is too much, whereas if they were in a fantasy setting I don't think people would bat an eyelid. Unfortunately my brain is wired wrong and it wants to put real people in space, darn it. Even some sff readers who read it recently (I think it was AC) and didn't know this was what I was trying to do, fed back that it was very good but didn't read like sci fi but more like something set in the real world.
In one way, it's good because it's what I want to do, on the other hand, other than Bujold, I can't think of too many others doing great family/relationship epics in space.

 

[Fishbowl Helmet]

... with a hint of settings and world building.

I hear everywhere, both here and the outside world, that people want character driven stories, that characters are the most important thing, that character is where you start when writing. Yet when I went to the library yesterday and chose Terminal World by Alastair Reynolds, it wasn't the characters that stood out. It was what I read about the setting and the plot.

Sure, characters are very important. A brilliant fictional world will not compensate for an unbelievable or unconvincing character, but I don't read SFF for the characters. I read for the fantastical, the imagination, the immersion in the far-from-mundane; for tension and drama and stakes of the highest order. You can have the most amazing character you like, but if their world is humdrum and grey and, to be frank, the same as my own, there's little in it for me.

"They're all important," you will cry, but I hear much more about the primacy of character. Does anyone else feel that it isn't THE most important thing in a SFF book? Or am I a lone voice, an eccentric shouting in a vast empty warehouse who wonders why everyone else doesn't think the same way?

It's more a matter of degrees than absolutes. It's a question of focus. A more character focused book can be interesting, but I find that plot is more my thing. Didn't someone say something like you read it the first time for the plot and the second for the characters. Or some such.

Nothing gets a book tossed across the room faster than a bunch of navel gazing layabouts. I want the characters to be interesting, yes. But I want them to be interesting amid an engaging plot. I want it all apparently. If one or the other has to take a second seat, it's character every time. I have plenty of interesting characters to deal with in real life, interesting plots, not so much.

 

[Drakai]

Depends on the genre but it's Plot>Setting>Characters for me. Of course this doesn't mean characters are not important, they are extremely important.

 

[Nerds_feather]

Let me rephrase the question: Would you prefer a forgettable plot featuring memorable characters or a memorable plot with forgettable characters?

For me, it's easy--while I do enjoy a well-constructed plot, it's the characters that ultimately stay with me. I guess I'd put the balance at 65% character/35% plot for me.

 

[Warren_Paul]

I agree with Nerds Feather, it's all about memorable characters. Character driven stories tend to go deeper into the minds of the characters, show more depth and emotion, and generally have more memorable and believable characters.

Plot driven stories might be fantastical and have exciting stories, but without that character depth they are just a bit of escapism. Sure, sometimes people just want the escapism, but I think people more often want to read stories where the characters move them, make them care for them. You're more likely to get that kind of reaction from a character driven story than a plot driven one.

And it's not just with books. TV Shows are the same too. People enjoy watching exciting action and special effects, but they love watching stories about characters that actually have some depth to them. It's why you always hear complaints about shows that are just a series of special effects in a fancy world. The Resident Evil series and The Matrix series make perfect examples. The first ones delved a lot more into the characters, but the sequels just became all about the special effects and action, and people lost interest in them. Although their plot was suffering too, so I guess in their case it was a bit lacking of both. You'll notice that most of the shows that win all those awards and get critics raving on about them are character driven.

 

[allmywires]

Plot driven stories might be fantastical and have exciting stories, but without that character depth they are just a bit of escapism.

LOST*, anyone?


*I am actually a huge fan. Series 1-4, anyway.

 

[Warren_Paul]

I think Lost's problem was that the writers had no idea what they were doing, not that the balance of character vs plot was wrong. They admitted to making the story up as they went along.

 

[allmywires]

I think Lost's problem was that the writers had no idea what they were doing, not that the balance of character vs plot was wrong. They admitted to making the story up as they went along.

I think they sacrificed a lot of characters for the sake of the plot (Locke/Man in Black especially), especially towards the end. Also that they had no bloody idea where they were going with it, that didn't help either.

 

[Biskit]

In one way, it's good because it's what I want to do, on the other hand, other than Bujold, I can't think of too many others doing great family/relationship epics in space.

Bujold strikes me as great example of what is wrong with the question. Interesting plots, interesting characters, and neither solely responsible for driving the story. The nature and interactions of her characters direct the plot within whatever overarching scenario she has created, whether it be running a war or trying to catch a bride.

I want both - good characters, interesting plot. Take one of those out, and I'll probably give up long before the end of the book.

 

[Glisterspeck]

I've never fallen in love with a plot. Been thrilled, sure, but when I look back fondly on a book or a movie, it's the characters I remember. In fact, I forget the plots, which is handy, because it lets me read or watch the same story over and over, in a sorta constant state of deja vu.

 

[Cynric]

You are not alone in your warehouse Alchemist. There are a few more of us in the shadows. Lurking.


I would say plot is more important to me than characters. I read to learn new things, and immerse myself in new worlds. Obviously, the best books have fascinating characters as guides through the new worlds, but I find purely character-driven fiction more tedious than purely plot-driven fiction. At least the latter tends to have a compelling story.

The book that crystallized this opinion in me was "The Unbearable Lightness of Being". That was the point at which I decided I had done enough reading-for-betterment for the time being, and would return to my neglected genre books with some relief.

 

[Glitch]

I thought the argument behind it was that plot driven stories drag the characters along regardless of what they do. Thus leading to a weak story?

And what is a good plot without strong characters driving it. My plans for world domination won't get very far if my character doesn't quit his day job and get on with it!