making a YA protagonist more active

[Windcutter]

This is a constant issue in the query sector, "make your MC more active." But even when I read some published books, I often see that the so-called active protagonist only seems to be active without actually doing much.

For example, they investigate something, but if you analyze their actions, they basically meet a few people, ask some questions without any success, and then a secondary character comes along with a load of information.

In another book, the protagonist can be promoted as totally active: she strikes a deal with character X to fight together against a common enemy. What she actually does is keep character X company as he gets them through their quest using his own resources and something MC simply happens to possess. In yet another book, pretty much everything the main character does to further the plot is the result of her guardians (one dark, one light) giving her information and directions.

However, the root of the problem is clear, especially in Sci-Fi, Fantasy and Suspense/Thriller: most often the ordinary teen protagonist is pitched against a powerful enemy. They simply have no or very few weapons and resources at their disposition. Take Artemis Fowl (okay this is more MG, and he is a bit of an antihero), an inventive and super-active main character--what if he were a normal American teen from a middle class family? He wouldn't have been able to do 1/10 of what he does in the series.

So: any tips, thoughts, ideas?

[bickazer]

Well, the easiest thing to do is not make the main character a normal American teen from a middle class family. I think teen warriors are pretty popular right now? There was a pretty big discussion about it not too long ago on these forums.

On the other hand, I don't see anything terribly wrong with a passive protagonist either, at least if done right. Quite a few of my favorite stories have protagonists who spend a lot of time being manipulated for either malevolent or benign reasons, only for them to eventually realize it and break free. I feel that you can have a more powerful story showing a character acquiring their own agency/freedom rather than making them an active go-getter from the start.

It's even more complicated and fun when the MC doesn't even realize they're being manipulated. So you can have them believe that they're in charge of their own fate/furthering the plot, only to realize that no, they're being used. Of course, it takes a lot of skill to write manipulation that subtle, and I'm kind of afraid to name examples because spoilers.

Granted, I hate the kind of passive characters you're describing, because that's just lazy writing. But I'm a big fan of main characters caught up in a struggle with forces they don't quite understand, which is a bit more complex than simple hero vs. protagonist stories, I guess.

[jmlee]

As far as this goes from the writing perspective, I think planning is really important on the author's part to make sure the character(s) stay active. Don't give them something they can't realistically tackle; make sure you have a plan for how they're going to take action to leap the hurdle or whatever.

I think a lot of people go at it by setting all the odds against their character and then going "OK, now how do they get through this?" and a lot of times the odds are too high. And you end up having to have... magic or some random new character with super powers show up to fix it. I think tackling plot like this by beginning with the solution -- an active way for the character to grow and/or show their abilities -- and then fitting the conflict to that is a more practical way to go.

I guess what I mean is, if you plot starting at the action, you're more likely to get a more active character. You want active, not reactive, so start with the part that's important.

[wampuscat]

I think it's difficult to connect to a character who is passive. That said, I don't think that active needs to mean moving and fighting and winning, etc. I, personally, think active means that they need to propel their own story forward, rather than waiting for outside sources to do it for them.

I've actually just been thinking about this very thing. I'm nearing the end of a first draft and I keep wondering things like am I revealing too much through conversations with other characters, how many chase scenes are too many, does this action really work or am I forcing it, am I going crazy because it's the end of a first draft and I'm trying to shove everything together... etc. etc.

[LadyA]

I think by active vs. passive characters they mean make sure your MC is actually doing something, anything - it doesn't have to be fighting, or something literally 'active'. Let me give you a (rubbish) example:

Caleb's whole town is blown up by an evil dictator. Caleb is upset, all his family have died. = Passive character

Caleb's whole town is blown up by an evil dictator. Caleb is upset, all his family have died, so he and his next door neighbour get together and set out to destroy the dictator before he bombs the next town, where their friends live. = Active character

Also, another example of an active character is Melinda from SPEAK. She doesn't actually go out there and kick pervert ass, but she grows as a character, etc.

Sorry if I'm not much help!

[Gary Clarke]

Originally Posted by LadyA

Caleb's whole town is blown up by an evil dictator. Caleb is upset, all his family have died. = Passive character

Caleb's whole town is blown up by an evil dictator. Caleb is upset, all his family have died, so he and his next door neighbour get together and set out to destroy the dictator before he bombs the next town, where their friends live. = Active character

Just to expand on this example a little

Caleb's whole town is blown up by an evil dictator. Caleb is upset, all his family have died, so he walks a thousand miles to the next country, takes an apprenticeship with a clockmaker, reconstructs his shattered mind as he learns to rebuild clocks, falls in love with a damaged girl and helps her to rebuild herself = Active character too.

I think sometimes people mix up physical conflict/grand gesture resolution with 'active' . John Green's characters are excellently 'active' without defeating some big bad or going to war or whatever

[The_Ink_Goddess]

Originally Posted by Gary Clarke

Just to expand on this example a little

Caleb's whole town is blown up by an evil dictator. Caleb is upset, all his family have died, so he walks a thousand miles to the next country, takes an apprenticeship with a clockmaker, reconstructs his shattered mind as he learns to rebuild clocks, falls in love with a damaged girl and helps her to rebuild herself = Active character too.

I think sometimes people mix up physical conflict/grand gesture resolution with 'active' . John Green's characters are excellently 'active' without defeating some big bad or going to war or whatever

Active-->they DO SOMETHING.

Actually, I would consider Melinda from Speak to be the ultimate passive character. She doesn't actually do very much, she reacts to everything around her. SPEAK works because of Melinda's amazing voice (and rape stories were relatively new then). The reason why totally passive characters have become such a wildly accepted "no, thanks" from a lot of agents: a lot of people tried to do a Halse Anderson and have a character who basically does nothing but hang around and moan about what's going on around them (though Speak was much deeper than that, I'm not knocking the book itself, just the structure it seems to have spawned), before making a decision/choice at the end of the book.

'Active' doesn't just mean 'physically active', though (although I would think that there should be a bit of that); if the character is making choices/decisions, then that is also active. They're in control of their fate to an extent and, even if they aren't, they're doing something. They're not constantly being dragged places, told things, solely reacting to things.

[Gary Clarke]

Liesel in The Book Thief and Jonas in The Giver, could well be considered passive characters because for much of their stories they are simply witness to or reacting to situations that are perplexing or too large for them to handle - but I would consider them excellent characters and worth reading about (as ever with books though, everyone's mileage varies )

[The_Ink_Goddess]

Originally Posted by Gary Clarke

Liesel in The Book Thief and Jonas in The Giver, could well be considered passive characters because for much of their stories they are simply witness to or reacting to situations that are perplexing or too large for them to handle - but I would consider them excellent characters and worth reading about (as ever with books though, everyone's mileage varies )

Oh, yeah, I agree - haven't read THE GIVER but I love Liesel from THE BOOK THIEF. But I'd still agree that she is a passive character, but passive is not always bad. It's just not a good thing to show up in a query letter. Besides, both TG and TBF are considered modern classics, so we can agree that they probably don't represent most of YA literature.

[Stiger05]

John Green's characters are excellently 'active' without defeating some big bad or going to war or whatever

I don't think you have to fight some great evil to be "active." You just have to do something, take charge of the story. Hazel, in "The Fault in Our Stars" for example, does a lot of things, even though the only big bad she's fighting is death/cancer. Other people encourage her to get off her ass, but she does things. (mild spoilers) Her mom makes her go to group, but she decides to hang out with Augustus. She actively seeks out the ending to the book she likes, even though Augustus has to prompt her to do it. She visits Augustus daily, she tries to find what he wrote for her. The key is, she doesn't just sit on her laurels and let others do her story for her, she actively participates in what's going on around her. (I'm not disagreeing with you Gary Clarke, just further illustrating your point).

I see passive as a MC who just sits back and lets others do the dirty work while they relax. It would be like Sherlock Holmes sitting home playing the violin while Watson went out and collected all the clues, then Holmes swooping in at the last minute to put them together and solve the crime.

[Ashes Oh Ashes]

Treadmill. Tell your characters to try it out. Works every time.

In all seriousness, I think an active character is one who is always pursuing a goal. There is no wandering around just living life. They act with a purpose, and that purpose advances the plot.

[Gary Clarke]

In the main (generalizing here) I think there are three types of active MC:

The MC who is the focus, due to their being smarter, faster, more determined and or whatever, than their companions. So they are the ones who solve the crime, instigate the revolution, bake the cake. (Katsa in The Graceling maybe?, or Miss Marple, or Harry Potter)

The MC who is the focus because they are undergoing some personal change and we follow their destruction/redemption/coming to self awareness (Miles in Looking for Alaska, maybe? or Riddley Walker? )

and the MC who is part of an ensemble cast who are caught at a great turning in time or place, neither more or less influential or pivotal than the other characters but part of a larger story which is told through their experiences ( Shadow in American Gods, maybe?, Liesel in The Book Thief, Cassie Logan in Roll of Thunder Hear My Cry?)

The first type (for obvious reasons) is more common in YA, but I think all have their place inthe reading experience. Of course everyone to comes reading with an itch they want the book to scratch and not every book is going to do that for them - which is why I think its vital the industry gives a wide range of different types of MC so that when one book doesn't work for you, you can be sure the next may

[LadyA]

See, I'm not good at coherently expressing my opinions. My example was a rubbish one, but what i was trying to say was that an active character reacts to the bad stuff happening, whether that's fighting against it or going on an 'emotional journey'. They have a character arc.

I'm just going to shut up now.