Learn Writing with Uncle Jim, Volume 2

[Chris Grey]

There's no correlation between quality of description and amount of ink spent. Look to Raymond Chandler for guidance. You only need to give minor characters as much ink as they need to fit in your story-- they all have their own stories, to be sure, you can gush more about them there, but in this story a simple "not more than six feet five inches tall and not wider than a beer truck" will do.

[RHQ]

Originally Posted by euclid

My stories tend to be like ant hills, overflowing with minor characters. My current WIP has 27 characters already and I'm only up to chapter 10. This is a big worry, but it seems unavoidable. I've thought about it and I think I could eliminate one minor character. I reckon there are only about 8 more characters to come. That's a total of 34.

Wow. I've just outlined my new novel (which I plan to draft during NaNoWriMo.) So far there are three characters with plans to bring in possibly five or six more later in the story.

In my current WIP there are plans for 12 characters total and all but two are essential to the plot. (The two are household servants who serve a function, but could be deleted if they really had to be.)

I'm curious Euclid, are all of these characters actual participants in your plot or are they people like, "shop clerk", "waitress" and other incidental people your main characters meet along the way? For me personally, I don't really count those kinds of characters (thus the two servants who I could delete).

Kelly

[James D. Macdonald]

How about this, Euclid:

Take a favorite book by an author you'd like to be. Re-read it. Write down all the characters, and their functions in the story.

[Ken Schneider]

You can have as many characters as you want. As long as they are not, as UJ would say, 'wack-a-mole characters.'

You don't want characters who your reader meets, and never hears from again. Unless, that character has something very important to tell your MC, just before H/S dies, or is a ghostly messenger, or someone your MC tracked down to find an answer to some pressing question.

If not, you don't need that character. IMO.

I don't, as a reader, need to know Joe the hardware clerk just because the MC buys a shovel.

As we already know, our characters should connect with the reader.

And, whack-a-mole characters don't fullfil that bill.

[Cuppa]

Another question from me.

Dialogue! I have a fear that my characters are all speaking in the same informal style of dialogue, and that I rely on 'beats' and circumstances (age, position) to separate them.

Quick example of my 4 oft used styles-

"Yeah," Jake said. "I'll go, but don't think I'm going to stay for long."

"Yes," Mark said. "I will go, but I will not stay for long."

"Go!" Sean threw up his hands. "Sure, I'll go. Won't stay for long though."

"Really don't want to," James said, looking at his shoes. "But I guess I will. If I have to."

Are the four examples different enough? The last two sentences have the most character imo since they have 'beats' (official term?) between the dialogue. The last is best, since the sentence has a bit of flavor starting with his true feelings.

Right now I am using the last two sentences with beats and informal speech for my main characters, more formal speech like the first two for the characters you would expect that from.

Is it okay to rely on beats and circumstance to create character? Am I worrying about nothing?

Edit: What RJK said brought something to my attention. Should I simply make the character conflict better?

Thanks for any help!

[RJK]

In my current WIP, the MC works in a convenience store. I'll be describing a lot of her life through interactions with her customers and internal dialog. I'll probably have dozens of these one liner characters. We'll see them once, possibly twice, then never again. Obviously, I won't be using up any ink on developing them.

[OddButInteresting]

Providing you remain focused on the central narrative, minor characters can either be used to contribute to the generation of context (it is unlikely that a character would find his/herself walking the streets completely alone in one of the world's biggest cities), or to be compared and contrasted with the protagonist, as Greg said before.

Now that I've addressed the current topic, I should like to ask a question of my own if Jim (or indeed anyone) would be so kind as to provide me with an answer.

Hyphens

Would you say that the utilisation of hyphenation is gramatically-correct in the following sentences?

"How did I end-up here?"

"He got-off of the bus."

"And all of a sudden she just bursted-in!"

Terrible lines, I know. They're just examples.

I've recently come to notice that no-one else seems to hyphenate words in the same fashion that I have done above, and it's caused me to question whether or not I should get to work on clearing-up my grammar.

[James D. Macdonald]

Would you say that the utilisation of hyphenation is gramatically-correct in the following sentences?

I'd think it was incorrect in all of them.

[James D. Macdonald]

Are the four examples different enough?

I would think that a full chapter including dialog in Share Your Work would be more helpful.

[OddButInteresting]

Originally Posted by James D. Macdonald

I'd think it was incorrect in all of them.

EDIT: After having done a little research into hyphen usage, I would say that you're right. It always sounded right to me, but as I said my belief in its correctness had been shaken as of late.

Thanks for your (surprisingly swift) reply!

[David Wisehart]

Originally Posted by Wayne K

Uncle Jim, I'm a master chess player. I studied it as a child with my uncle who was great. I followed Spaski Fisher like it was the Superbowl. I love playing. So I'm going at a good pace through Logical Chess. I can say that I see this. A good story is all strategy.

I've been thinking recently about successful authors who were also strong chess players, and how their chess playing may have influenced their writing.

George R.R. Martin was a strong tournament chess player in the 1980s, and was for a time a chess tournament director. His current fantasy series has a lot of strategy in it. He pushes his characters around like pawns and isn't afraid to sacrifice his pieces.

Vladimir Nabokov composed chess problems, and wrote a novel about a chess grandmaster (The Defense).

Any other author / chess players? There must be dozens of examples.

[Linda Adams]

Originally Posted by RHQ

In my current WIP there are plans for 12 characters total and all but two are essential to the plot. (The two are household servants who serve a function, but could be deleted if they really had to be.)

In mine, I have 25 essential characters. There's probably about three additional characters who aren't named and turn up for one scene and disappear--but are essential in the context of those scenes (i.e., a waitress in a restaurant).

[Linda Adams]

I've always had a terrible time incorporating subplots into my novel--where other people have to weed out scads of them, if I try to incorporate them in, I'll get stuck for months on the subplot and then have to take it out so I can move on. I've finally managed to incorporate some into the story, but I had to wait until it was near the final draft. But one of the subplots made me wonder if my definition is one of the problems.

How do you define subplots? The one that made me think about the definitions was one I hadn't identified as a subplot. It's something that is essential to the main story but does have its own resolution. Most of my associations with subplots is that they're character-oriented things like romances, family problems, marital problems, character overcoming something, etc.--ones I've seen in mystery novels and that I don't find very interesting to read. My hidden subplot was plot-oriented rather than character-oriented.

[Chris Grey]

Originally Posted by David Wisehart

I've been thinking recently about successful authors who were also strong chess players, and how their chess playing may have influenced their writing.

George R.R. Martin was a strong tournament chess player in the 1980s, and was for a time a chess tournament director. His current fantasy series has a lot of strategy in it. He pushes his characters around like pawns and isn't afraid to sacrifice his pieces.

Vladimir Nabokov composed chess problems, and wrote a novel about a chess grandmaster (The Defense).

Any other author / chess players? There must be dozens of examples.

I think George R.R. Martin's current series is more like shogi than chess. No less than four viewpoint characters at any given time, and at least twice that many non-viewpoint characters who are very significant to the story.
Has anyone else seen Zombieland? There's a small cast of main characters, yet several asides and flashbacks to other characters who pretty much fit the "whack-a-mole" description. They're there, they're realistically fleshed out, yet they're only around for one scene and fit a definite function (generally illustrating one of the narrator's points).

[FOTSGreg]

Linda Adams wrote, I have 25 essential characters.

Others have written about the dozen or more characters they have in their work.

I'm not criticizing except to say that in my current work I have something like a grand total of 4 essential characters - 2 of them protagonists, 1 of them a Deputy Sheriff, and 1 a terrorist.

Everyone else is a "bit" player, useful in moving the story forward and serving as "foils", in some cases, for the main characters, but little else. They come on scene, say a few things, and leave. Then, later on, they come back. They don't get a lot of stage time. Heck, most of them don't even get a description.

And I think 4 is probably at least 1 too many.

My previous book had 3 "essential" characters. Two other (currently shelved) projects have 2 essential characters.

TLotR has about 2 "essential" characters - Frodo and Gollum.

Aliens has 1 essential character - Ripley

Timothy Zahn's The Icarus Hunt has 2 essential characters (the 2 protagonists whose names I can;t remember right now).

The Wizard of Oz has 1 essential character - Dorothy

Resident Evil: Apocalypse has 1 essential character - Alice

Star Wars has 2 essential characters - Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader

etc.

etc.

etc.

See a pattern there anywhere?

Good stories have fewer essential characters. Memorable stories have fewer essential characters.

[Izz]

Originally Posted by FOTSGreg

Linda Adams wrote, I have 25 essential characters.

Others have written about the dozen or more characters they have in their work.

I'm not criticizing except to say that in my current work I have something like a grand total of 4 essential characters - 2 of them protagonists, 1 of them a Deputy Sheriff, and 1 a terrorist.

I think it depends on what you mean by essential. If we're talking essential to the plot, then i would differ with you on the examples below as to who is essential.

Take 'The Icarus Hunt' for example:

Timothy Zahn's The Icarus Hunt has 2 essential characters (the 2 protagonists whose names I can;t remember right now).

[SPOILERS FOLLOW. IF YOU HAVEN'T READ THE STORY YOU MAY WANT TO AVERT YOUR EYES NOW]

For the plot to work in this story, a lot more characters are needed than the two protagonists (Jordan and Ixil).

Cameron, the archaeologist who made the find and tricked Jordon into captaining the ship, is essential, even though he doesn't make much of an appearance. Without him there is no plot.

The Patth, as a race, are essential, otherwise there'd be no danger.

The other crew members (5 or 6, can't quite remember which) on the ship, in their varying lengths of appearance, are essential, because without them there could be no mystery as to who the mole is. There couldn't even be a mole, which takes out a substantial plot-related subplot.

Brother John/Ryland, the guy who Jordan is apparently working for, could also be termed an essential character, because he provides another subplot, and is essential to the big reveal, as is Antoniewicz, who is alluded to throughout the story, but not actually met until the climax.

And General Graym-Barker, who also isn't revealed until the end, but who Jordan often calls during the story, is essential too. In fact, he almost plays a deus ex machina type roll, which is almost as frustrating for me as Jordan's (the narrator) lack of reliability.

So that would be 12 characters essential to the plot, by my counting, and by my reckoning of essential, which isn't necessarily right

[Linda Adams]

Originally Posted by FOTSGreg

TLotR has about 2 "essential" characters - Frodo and Gollum.

Aliens has 1 essential character - Ripley

Timothy Zahn's The Icarus Hunt has 2 essential characters (the 2 protagonists whose names I can;t remember right now).

The Wizard of Oz has 1 essential character - Dorothy

Resident Evil: Apocalypse has 1 essential character - Alice

Star Wars has 2 essential characters - Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader

etc.

etc.

etc.

See a pattern there anywhere?

Good stories have fewer essential characters. Memorable stories have fewer essential characters.

Some of these examples are puzzling. How does Wizard of Oz have only one essential character? Without the Wizard (the title character), there's no story; the same goes for the Scarecrow, the Tin Man, the Lion, and even the evil Witch. Those characters are needed to make the story work.

Likewise, I don't think Star Wars only has two essential characters--Obi Wan is important to the story, as is Leia, Han Solo, and the two robots. There are many elements of the story that would not work if these characters were not essential.

I think it really depends on the type of story and the genre. Some stories only need a few characters to do the job, and others need more. Story to me is what makes the book memorable--not the number of characters. One of my favorite books has four main characters and probably about twenty or so other characters needed for the story. For me, it was a great book because the story was great.

[bettielee]

FOTSGreg, I think your idea of an 'essential character' is very limited. Therefore, I doubt her 25 characters are all as important as Frodo or Sam. That said, it doesn't make Aragorn, Gandalf (!!) and Boromir any less important.

[FOTSGreg]

Linda, You misunderstand the meaning of the word "essential".

What character is it within each and every one of the stories cited is so "eesential" to the story that without that particular and specific character the entire story would collapse?

I stand on my observations...

Your opinion may differ. That's why writing is an "art" not a science.

[FOTSGreg]

bettielee, All of the characters you mention are important, ut they are not all "essential". There is a misunderstanding about about who is essential to the story, who is important to the story, and who is secondary and tertiary to the story.

Your characters are important to you. Period, end of statement. They are not all important to the story nor to the reader. You may love character A or B or X or Z, but they;re not all important or essential. Twenty-six characters DO NOT serve to push the story forward. They don't! They just do not.

They're secondary. They're unimportant. They're largely inconsequential side characters who don't fulfill any meaningful roll.

You love 'em 'cause they're aspects more of you, the writer, than they are of the story.

You, through them, are intruding and imposing your will (and influence) on an otherwise good story.

You disagree? Good. Do what you will. I'm neither your master nor your mentor. My opinions are my opinions only and not backed up by anything AW or any of its Mods say.

You can have 250 "essential" characters if you want. Just don;t expect me to read the book, okay?

[FOTSGreg]

Re: The Icarus Hunt - Without Jordan, the deep-cover agent who is so deep-cover we don;t even realize it until the end there is no plot.

Re: The Wizard of Oz - Without Dorothy there is no plot.

Re: Star Wars - Without Luke Skywalker there is no plot.

I stand on my observations...

[smsarber]

Originally Posted by Wayne K

I think we should all breathe. It's a little off topic.

No, it's a good topic. And the kind of thing we need to know and master to write novels.

[ChristineR]

Princess Leia sets the whole Star Wars plot into motion by sending a message to Obi-Wan. Without that, there is no plot. The whole first half of the movie is a reckless attempt to rescue Leia. They wouldn't even be there if it weren't for her.

The droids deliver the message to Obi-Wan, but accidentally let Luke see it. Without that, there is no plot. The droids are also used in many other small ways throughout the story, like turning off the garbage compactor.

Without Obi-Wan, Luke never gets off Tantoonine. Obi-Wan gets them through several close calls with the stormtroopers.

Han Solo is less critical--most of his plot is developed around the fact that he has a spaceship. Some people have argued that the Millennium Falcon is the character, not Han. Anyhow, it would be a very different story with even minor changes to the nature of the spaceship and pilot.

Darth Vader, oddly, I'd say is the least essential main character. Peter Cushing is more important. Darth kills Obi-Wan, who is supposedly not essential anyhow. Other than that, in the first movie, he's mostly just the especially bad bad guy. He could easily be replaced by a bunch more stormtroopers.

I go over this in detail because I want to say that to claim Luke and Darth are the only essential characters in that movie is to claim that most of the plot is non-essential. It's a value judgment, which others may not share. To say that Leia or Obi-Wan are not essential to movie viewers is not correct. They may not be essential to you, but they are unquestionably essential to the movie Lucas actually made, and which became so popular.

[mscelina]

Originally Posted by FOTSGreg

bettielee, All of the characters you mention are important, ut they are not all "essential". There is a misunderstanding about about who is essential to the story, who is important to the story, and who is secondary and tertiary to the story.

Your characters are important to you. Period, end of statement. They are not all important to the story nor to the reader. You may love character A or B or X or Z, but they;re not all important or essential. Twenty-six characters DO NOT serve to push the story forward. They don't! They just do not.

As with everything involved with a craft like writing (and yes, it's a craft, not just an art) is that opinions like this really are subjective. I've edited stories with only one character in them and stories with a cast of thousands. *shrug* The number of characters there are do not impact the effectiveness of the story. It may be that every character plays some part in pushing the plot forward. That's why blanket statements like this are not always helpful. It's different for different writers...and readers. Certainly, in fantasy where readers are accustomed to large casts and intricate plots and subplots, the reader is accustomed to--and in some part expects--a large cast of characters.

They're secondary. They're unimportant. They're largely inconsequential side characters who don't fulfill any meaningful roll.

You love 'em 'cause they're aspects more of you, the writer, than they are of the story.

You, through them, are intruding and imposing your will (and influence) on an otherwise good story.

See above.

You disagree? Good. Do what you will. I'm neither your master nor your mentor. My opinions are my opinions only and not backed up by anything AW or any of its Mods say.

You can have 250 "essential" characters if you want. Just don;t expect me to read the book, okay?

This is largely unnecessary. This thread is for the purpose of learning, not for insulting fellow members. We're all here to learn about our craft. Let's try to remember that, shall we? If you're dead set on this "I'm not your mentor" bit, then perhaps you should confine your comments to a thread that isn't devoted to mentoring, as this one is.

Just my two cents, as always.

[Krintar]

Originally Posted by FOTSGreg

Linda, You misunderstand the meaning of the word "essential".

What character is it within each and every one of the stories cited is so "eesential" to the story that without that particular and specific character the entire story would collapse?

I stand on my observations...

Your opinion may differ. That's why writing is an "art" not a science.

Let's see... LotR without Gandalf in less than 20 words:
Nazgul prance into Hobbiton, stab Frodo and take the ring. Sauron conquers all. The End.
Likewise without Aragorn:
Nazgul prance into Bree, stab Frodo and take the ring. Sauron conquers all. The End.
I would go on, but off the top of my head I can't think of any more examples which involve prancing Nazgul.

Frankly, I'd have to agree that your definition of 'essential' is too narrow. More characters than just the PoV character are essential - to paraphrase Uncle Jim, all your characters should be essential, otherwise why are they there?