I'm sure every writer's heard this question before: "which is more important: character or story?" (some people use the word "plot" but it means the same thing). Before we delve into this, let's discuss the relationship between characters and story: The Relationship Between Characters and Story We've already discussed that a story is "a happening" that involves time passing. Let's expand this definition a bit: A story is a spread of time focused on particular events. Every story involves characters, whether those are people, inanimate objects, or settings, because you can't have events without something to create those events or be a part of them. Characters don't exist outside of stories; stories can't exist without characters. Yes, we could hear a character's name- but without hearing about them, they're not real to us. We could hear a story's name too, but without hearing about the characters, it's not real to us. Characters move the story along, and the story develops the characters to where they need to be. Stories are tellings of segments of time in the lives of characters. With this understanding, let's return to the question: Character or Story Let's deconstruct the question: Which is more important: character or story? More important in what? In the English language? In conversation? No- in the story. Which is more important in the story: character or story? You're asking if what is contained in the story is more important than the story, and you're also saying that the story is contained within itself. The question is flawed. But for now let's just consider the aspect of characters in the story, and ask: which is more important, planet Earth or a person? Well, the person, but if not for Earth the person would be dead- we'd have no person. If not for the story, the characters would be dead. They wouldn't exist. Also, what is meant by "important"? I think what people mean is what is more critical to the storytelling- what makes a better story (does story make better storytelling? Umm...). What people usually mean by the question is actually: Should we force the characters to act in ways they actually wouldn't if it makes the story better? The question makes an awful assumption- that making characters act in a way they wouldn't can better a story. Let me clarify what I mean by "making them act"- I mean a sort of "mind control" where the character wouldn't make the decisions the storyteller's having them make. The question also makes believable characters and good story seem like the enemies of each other, or like they're on opposite sides of a balancing scale. Both ideas couldn't be further from the truth. Bad character development never makes a better story. Bad story doesn't give us the opportunity to see characters in compelling light. Stories talk about the characters- how could making the characters act unrealistically make a better story? Characters drive the story- how could bad story help us get to know and care about the characters? Can We Direct the Character's Paths? Yes! A good storyteller works with the characters; they don't have to make a character be out of character to get the story where it needs to go. Good storytellers use other influences inside of the story to make everything weave together so the character will be developed enough to handle the situations thrown at them when they need to. An example of what I mean: Before a specific story can end a threat needs to be dealt with. The characters as they are won't do the thing that's essential to this goal. The world will plunge into chaos. How should you respond? Give a character a scarring childhood memory, a horrible alternative, an interaction with another character that changes their point of view... influence the characters with the tools already in the story to make things work. Is a character's brother her only confidante? Put that brother in severe danger related to the threat. BAM! Immediately you have a good motive for her going the way she needs to go for the story to work out in the end. Bad character development makes a story worse, never better, because that event in the story is an impossibility and now the rest of the story is a lie. Characters should be influenced instead of forced; if they can't be influenced the way the storyteller wants them to be, the storyteller should either let the story go the way it's going or come up with another character to fill the role. ConclusionWhen you understand the relationship between characters and stories, the whole "character and story" question seems both confusing and silly.
Can you think of somebody this article would help? Send them a link to this post; it will make them a better writer and help me out. Also, if you liked the post, please like or comment- otherwise I don't know! If you enjoyed this post, check out The One Rule for Believable Storytelling and What Is a Story? What Are Story Forms? Want to keep up on the latest posts and news? Subscribe to the newsletter! Check out my latest project: a medieval musical comedy that YOU can get involved in! Check it out!
Comments
|
JoshPowlison.comGo here for the new cool place to find content!
|