Do Characters drive the plot or live in it?

It's like cooking, you have to think about everything. If you have a plot drawn out, that's as good a starting point as any. Now start writing with a mind toward developing realistic characters, and if they happen to change your plot as they go - so be it!

And if those realistic characters begin to go astray, go back and plot an updated outline to guide them back on course.

And if they happen to change that outline so be it!

...and round and round and round.

The key for me is to know my characters really well before I set the plot in stone. By knowing them, I can mode the plot around them. Much harder to already have the plot then try to make up believable characters (at least for me).

But even doing things that way, I find that as the story fills in some characters do end up changing. In the one I'm working on now one of my lesser players has turned out so well I'm going to expand his roll. In fact I may have to retitle the book becasue of him

I think that different approaches can also work for different people. I know some people love just seeing where the story takes them, but other people must have a plot line. I personally need a plot line (albeit a basic one) to know where my book is going and where it will end. My brother wrote a good deal of his novel without a plotline, but recently wrote one to try and iron out some complications.
As for my characters - well they have an annoying habbit of doing things without asking me first. I'll have things all neatly planned, and then I suddenly realise that so-and-so would be perfect dying right at this point. It can be most annoying if you have no plans for said character to die.
And they can pop up with no warning. I was writing a scene where a character has to climb up the wall of a tower into the room overhead. Now, I wasn't planning to have anyone in this room, but three children just slipped in somehow and now they've winkled their way into the next novel as well. So, plot lines are good to work with as a basis for where your story is headed, but things can happen spontaniously as well.

Mark, I empathize with your dilemma, and Mistook is correct -- you really have to keep an eye on both.

Think of it this way: character = story. You say:

Sounds good but everything else I read says to lay out the plot and script it tightly otherwise you'll just wander around and end up with a mess. But if I script a plot tightly, then there isn't anyplace for characters that are more than cardboard cutouts

Click to expand...

Creating a fully developed character doesn't happen outside of the plot, and the plot shouldn't happen outside of knowing who the character is, or you're right, it will be cardboard.

I'd like to sort of rewire your thinking here (if I may be so bold). You're thinking of these two events as mutually exclusive. The way you asked the question, describing the characters as wandering around into a potential mess if you just developed characters first indicates that you're not creating the characters in the context of the story you want to tell. You must throw that sort of thinking out the window and realize that who your characters are will inform the choices they make in the story. What they choose to do or say under pressure will reveal who they really are (which could be wholly different than who they themselves think they are). These kinds of movements in the story can give you wonderful twists to the plot of the story, because it was born out of some inner pain or inner joy or whatever of the character you created. Which does not mean that the plot created in the context of who the characters are can't be as tight as Britney's jeans. The key is to know essentially what kind of story you want to tell, start planning the story by creating the characters + giving them an ultimate goal + throwing obstacles to prevent them from reaching said goal + give them a compelling personal reason why they feel they must achieve that goal and what's at stake if they fail. If the plot starts to meander, then you know you've lost site of what the character wants and why and/or you're making it too easy for them to get sidetracked.

I hope that helps.

(eta because spelling well on your first post is generally a decent idea)
(oh, and sorry for the burnt eyelids on the Britney comment)

ecouteuse said:

Which does not mean that the plot created in the context of who the characters are can't be as tight as Britney's jeans.

Click to expand...

OW! Mental Image! Durn it! My eyes .... my eyes...
Oh, yeah, I agree that the plot and the characters are about as easy to seperate as ________ (insert strange and probably censorable comment here for your amusement ). If the characters are running around blindly in a plot that has nothing to do with them then the story is in trouble.

MarkButler said:

I can create characters and dump them into the plot, but it seems like the best plots only happen "because" the character is a certain way, if the character was any different the plot would not have happened. It sounds good but how can you script a plot that depends on the specifics of a character that is developed during the writing of a plot and still keep the plot from being totally "seat ofthe pants"

Mark

Click to expand...

Sounds like we're back to the "Outliners vs Non-outliners" argument.
I never devise a plot beforew writing. I let the characters come, put them in a sticky situiation, and take it from there.... the "plot" (I prefer "story") come through a combination of the character's character and the situation - how s/he deals with the stuation - is the catalyst for everything that comes afterwards, and one event, and how the chaarcters deal with it, leads to another. It would be impossible for me to create a plot in advance.

Both.

The academic response is that literary fiction is character-driven while genre fiction is plot-driven. As a consequence writers of literary fiction are more inclined to start work without any plot to speak of but with a good idea of the characters involved and the situation they find themselves in (as Aruna does, and as I do) while writers of genre fiction are more likely to start work with a good idea of the plot they want to write, and then to use their characters primarily as a means to further their plot.

There are exceptions, of course: for example, P D James writes crime novels but has some fantastic characters. But it is a good guide.

MarkButler said:

This probably seems like a dumb question, but all the training material I read seems contradictory.. on one hand you should develop interesting characters and on the other hand you should script up your plot.


Mark

Click to expand...

Try reading Stephen King's "On Writing," and Ray Bradbury's "Zen in the Art of Writing." Neither will tell you to script a plot.

I believe in character and in story. Get these right, and plot takes care of itself.

A well-plotted story with cutout characters is boring to me -- not memorable. I may buy the book and read it for entertainment, but ultimately it would not be very satisfying. You really need to pay attention to your characters and not just use them as pegs to plug in the holes. I can tell you how many books or movies bore me because things keep happening (sure are exciting) but I care about no one. I don't care if a character lives or dies. I don't care if the world blows up and I won't see these people again. It's interesting, at the time, to see how things turn out at the end, but ultimately, I don't care.

Think back on all the literary or cinematic works you cherish... Sure, you'll find that you enjoyed the story/plot (but probably won't remember all the details) but what do you REALLY remember? The characters, and how whatever happened to them or what they did affected you. **** happens. So what? But when **** happens to people you care about, it's something!

Think about the three Jurassic Park movies. To me, only the first one is memorable. The other two are entertaining, but I don't remember much about them. Sure, the story of the first one is fresh and exciting, and all... but do you not think the characters have something to do with it? I mean, we care about Dr. Grant, Mr. Hammond, Malcom, and the kids... that's really what made the first movie great.

Some people like to plot their stories tightly and some like to write organically. Different methods. But still, a writer should take care of both plot and characters, no matter if you're a plotter or a grower. Interesting people who you care about doing interesting things that lead to other interesting things that you care about...

Even in a heavily plot-driven story, give your characters something to chew on. Think about back stories for these characters -- what do they want? Do they go home to their families? What make them tick? You don't have to tell the readers everything, but give them "characters," make them real instead of categorically "good guys" and "bad guys." Make us care about them -- yeah, even the bad guys... remember Hannibal Lecter?

I think this has to do a lot with outline...

I like to know how I want to begin and how I want the story to end before I do anything close to getting my character profiles.

Then I like to outline as I go...and change it as the characters grow.

Hence, I believe that the characters and the plots/subplots must go hand in hand. The plots need to fit the characters and the characters need to fit the plot.

Otherwise it just doesn't work. It's too cardboard-y.

It's like having a 3 year old dive into a torrent and save a 250 lb man.

maestrowork said:

Make us care about them -- yeah, even the bad guys... remember Hannibal Lecter?

Click to expand...

Most especially the bad guys. They're often the most interesting characters in the story (as above). I completely agree with maestro here. You HAVE to have characters worth reading about, otherwise your plot doesn't matter two spits in a strong north wind.

bird

Plot

I've always thought the concepts of "plot-driven" and "character-driven" both have some serious problems. Genre or not, there's no reason to leave either great character or great story out. "Driven," I think, is usually an excuse not to do one or the other.

And of the two, it's always great character that last, that keep readers coming back for more, generation after generation.

As for plot, don't get me started. I believe with all my heart than King and Bradbury have it exactly right.

"Plot is, I think, the good writer's last resort and the dullard's first choice. --S. King.

"Remember: Plot is no more than footprints left in the snow after your characters have run by on their way to incredible destinations. Plot is observed after the fact rather than before. It cannot precede action. It is the chart that remains when an action is through. That is all plot ever should be. It is human desire let run, running, and reaching a goal. It cannot be mechanical. It can only be dynamic." --R. Bradbury


On outlining, Bradbury says, "Oh God, no! You’ve got to let your characters LIVE! They make their own lives, you can’t make their lives for them!"

Each to his own, but I'll stick to this philosophy until the day I die.

Write interesting characters and put them in unique situations.

I look at it sort of like the opening of the Twilight Zone (or was it Outer Limits?) "Presented for your approval..." The plot elements are the events which are presented to the characters for their approval. They will do with them what is in their nature to do.

For example, in a future book, a secondary character walks out of a restaurant abruptly when she sees apple pie on the menu, or becomes physically ill every time she smells apples baking. The casual reader will think it a bit odd, but will mentally file it under "quirks" of the character. But we authors know her back story: that when she was five years old, she was climbing in the apple tree behind her grandmother’s house when a bad storm came up suddenly and a tornado appeared. She rushed into the house and her grandmother hurried her to the storm cellar, but then went back into the house to turn off the oven where an apple pie was baking, so it didn’t burn. The tornado hit and she was killed. The character unconsciously ties the two together, so that even twenty years later, she can’t stand baking apples. If the secondary character reappears in future books, it might be explained. But for the purpose of the "plot" she’s a part of, it’s not important for the reader to know anything more than she is going to walk out of the restaurant at a critical point that plays into the plot. Often, the plot creates the necessity of a quirk that then becomes a character element.

So, I think that while the plot needs to be solid, it's important that the characters are real people. One well-known author once told me something that I've found useful. "The plot of a book is a series of events in the lives of the characters. In order for it to be a good plot, the characters first have to have good lives."

Once you create strong, well thought out characters, you'll probably find that your plot will change. The personalities of the people you've thrown together will make it better. IMO, that's part of the fun of the process!

Cathy C said:

Once you create strong, well thought out characters, you'll probably find that your plot will change. The personalities of the people you've thrown together will make it better. IMO, that's part of the fun of the process!

Click to expand...

Amen. I can't tell you how many times my characters change the plot for me and I am, to be honest, pleasantly surprised. It's so much better than what I thought up before. I use my plotting as sort of a general direction... putting my characters in interesting situations. But what they do with the situation surprises and delights me. The destination might still be the same (I feel very strongly about how the story ends), but the journey could be unpredictable and, quite frankly, fantastic (at least for the author ).

If characters are portrayed realistically enough, they will take over the plot and determine its course. You set up a situation and visualize what their reaction would be, and often that will propel the story line.

There's a balance to be maintained in order to keep it from looking like you are shoving characters into situations they would normally not go into without the right motivation.

I tend to write character driven stories, but I know what I want to happen in them. As someone said, knowing your characters well will help you control them and how they react.

Laura J. Underwood

It sounds good but how can you script a plot that depends on the specifics of a character that is developed during the writing of a plot and still keep the plot from being totally "seat ofthe pants"

Click to expand...

Think of a plot that turns on character.

An action-oriented plot scenario: There's a city-state in a remote area. It has something that another city-state covets. The second city-state sends an army to conquer the first one. Big battle. The second city-state wins.

A character-oriented plot scenario: There's a city-state in a remote area. It has something that another city-state covets. The second city-state sends an army to conquer the first one. The approaching army is seen by one of the protagonists--but only because he's somewhere he isn't supposed to be. If he warns his people, he'll have to reveal he was trespassing, which will bring some sort of terrible punishment. By the time he finally makes up his mind to give warning and face his fate, it's too late (or maybe he succumbs to cowardice and never does give warning). Big battle. The second city-state wins.

In the second example you have all the big plot events, but a character dilemma is at their heart. With your basic scenario developed, you can then back into creating the character. What's his agenda in trespassing in this forbidden area, whatever it is? What sort of person would overcome his fear of terrible punishment to warn his people--or let himself be ruled by cowardice or self-interest and say nothing? After the battle, how does he cope with the fact that he's partly responsible for his people's defeat? As you follow these questions and the character develops and changes as a result, you may find your plot changing as well. Presto--a character-driven plot.

- Victoria

for me, it's a feedback loop: rough outline of plot begets an appropriate main character whose personality sculpt the plot which further defines the character.

no one without the other. eveyr event i think of tells me more about teh character, and the more i know about the character the more i can see what should come next.

by Fallenangelwriter: rough outline of plot begets an appropriate main character whose personality sculpt the plot which further defines the character.

Click to expand...

Nicely phrased, fallen! This is especially true of historical fiction. In that case, the plot elements are the historical events that actually occurred. In our book, we looked at the events that happened and thought, "What sort of man would lead this project? He'd have to have a leadership element. Hmm... Would he have been in the military? Probably yes, as an officer or senior non-com. That would make him... let's see, about 35 to 40." Etc., etc. Once we developed the character and gave him a past, then he REACTED to the elements of history in specific ways.

Does that make sense?

This debate always reminds me of the question - "What came first, the chicken or the egg?"

I think the chicken comes from the egg but the chicken, once it becomes real, shapes the egg in which it grows.

When I started my current WIP, I only knew three things: (1) Who my main characters were, (2) a pivotal event that divided the story into two parts, and (3) what the climax was. Everything else came up as I went: their friends, what they did, where they went. However, as I went along, details and metaphors made themselves apparent, at which point, I'd take notes about those things and weave them in where appropriate. Eventually, I did have to construct an outline, because I'd jumped ahead and written a chunk of the middle and also the end, and therefore I had some problems to solve in getting the characters from one point in their lives to another. And I had a few timeline issues that I had to track.

All I really know for sure is that the parts that I've written with a general idea of where I was headed are much better written and more meaningful than the parts that I've written to satisfy a plot gap. And the dialogue is much better when you let the characters have their own conversation. One of mine got pregnant that way. Who knew? That development caused quite a domino effect that I was not prepared for in the least. In fact, I was rather annoyed with myself for letting it happen. But the book is stronger for it, so now I have to deal with the ramifications of that.

I'm learning to develop plot and character together. My natural tendency is to start with the plot.

A mugger steals a man's watch. The victim's brother then hunts down and shoots the mugger.

There's my plot. But I don't add another plot point until I can answer "Why," with absolute thoroughness, about the mugger, the man, and the brother. Answering "why" usually leads me to the next item in the plot. And a lot more whys.

"When I started my current WIP, I only knew three things: (1) Who my main characters were, (2) a pivotal event that divided the story into two parts, and (3) what the climax was."

mkcbunny, were our brains split at birth? i couldn't have expressed the process of my own WIP any better

does anyone else feel their characters are like ghosts whispering in your ear? in my experience i'll write a chapter then get stuck, only to realize my characters want to do/go/be something else. eventually i'll hear a "message" that tells me what i need to change or rewrite. it's a very strange sensation, but incredibly magical.

a friend of mine recently compared writing to dreaming...we are in control of the scenario yet we're also helpless bystanders. food for thought...