During narration, at what point do you take time to develop your character? While it would be nice to open or interrupt the story to give the reader a good sense of people you're writing about, it's not always possible. On the other hand, developing the character throughout the story may leave the reader lacking critical understanding your participant's behavior or traits. Granted, the situation will usually determine the amount of time you can spend with the character without detracting from the story's flow, but what's the minimum? Describing just enough of the character with the intention of revisiting him/her/it later in the story may not always be the best approach. Consider for a moment a character with some very unusual trait that will become key later on. While the behavior is not related to the action at the moment, would you toss it in early to make the actor memorable?

I made a web page where I made links to all of the things I could remember from all the places I have ever lived or worked. If I could remember for instance the paper in the little town I grew up in and it had a link on the net I put it there. The same way with the schools I attended. Because I worked in some very unusual activities I linked to them. I left out completely anything that would constitute myself. It was strictly an environment. Highly confidential it probably by it's sequence was only a single thread though at any node there was a flood of other points of view about the same focus. I made it to keep strangers from using me sort of as a pinball bumper to carom off into much more celebrity paths that the words of my life brought into sharp contrast. It is still up on the Internet though I have only given one person the address to look at it. My genesis of this was the way that identity is stolen or simulated to create a fictitious person as a spy or crimianl imposter. I don't think anyone can actually become me no matter how much information they have about my surroundings. I would offer three books which people thought they could play off. "The Eiger Sanction", "The Day of the Jackal", "Joey"

GonWaki, does your question imply that narration and character development are separate entities that do not mix, like oil and water? About four years ago I started writing a screenplay. Its gathering dust on my shelf for a year now and has gained me neither fortune nor fame. But it was fun to do and I learnt a lot in the process. When writing a screenplay, you are restricted by what can be visualized on a screen and made audible through a speaker. There is description of scenery, props and outward appearance; there is action and dialog. Unless you use an off-screen narrator, which is hard to pull off in a visual medium like film, there is no narration. Its pointless to write in a screenplay, "Mr. Kowalsky is a grumpy man". How could a cinematographer shoot that? You have to write dialog and action that show his grumpiness. A screenplay of 120 pages is full of character development, though we never actually look inside the heads of the protagonists. Their nature is revealed by what they say and what they do. My point is, advancement of the story and character development are one and the same. In a novel or a short story you have the additional possibility to let the reader participate in the characters thought processes. However, it is, in my opinion, not advisable to interrupt the story and give the reader a list of character attributes or a lesson in psychology. Instead of writing something like "Jim was a shy guy ...", and thus slowing the pace of the story, it is better to create a scene in which Jim squirms and stammers and makes a fool of himself in a crowded room. When the author claims "Jim was a shy guy .", the reader is informed but not involved. The dramatic scene showing the poor guy ridiculed, on the other hand, makes us feel with the fictional character. Characters develop because the story advances, but much more important is: the story advances because the characters develop. Theres no need for any interruptions. Narration and character development dont interact like oil and water. They are like salt and water. I have a theory where the notion, that character development interrupts narration, originates from. It happens when you plot a story in advance and then squeeze some characters in. Such characters can be made of cardboard, without affecting the flow of the prefabricated plot. However, such a story is trite and pulpy. Ideally, believable and life-like characters come first. Their decisions, made in accordance with their skills and character traits, determine the flow of the story. No need to throw in paragraphs of psycho babble that stop the story dead. There are characters and there is a conflict. The conflict changes the characters so they are finally able to solve the conflict. When are we supposed to start developing our characters? For me there can only be on answer: at the very beginning and then keep at it till the end. The moment a character says or does something, the author is writing character. Once your hero has saved the world and kissed the princess you may stop, not a line earlier. Of course, some character traits and skills have to be introduced early on. Say, you have a hero with a unique talent. He can hold his breath for ten minutes or build a bomb from a pencil and a shoe-string. He uses this skill to save the world. If you havent introduced this odd ability before, the deus ex machina bursts out with a bang, ruining all credibility. The solution seems contrived. It is much better to show the heros skill very early in the story in a casual way. The reader forgets about it while the story progresses. Then comes the pay-off: "Wait a moment! That guy can build a bomb from a pencil and a shoe-string! The world is saved!" That has a strong impact on the reader (even makes him/her feel smart if he/she has been able to figure it out in advance) and upholds credibility. Hopefully, the reader admires the authors clever plotting. (By the way, this is one reason why rewriting is so important. Sometimes, you simply have to go back and add something at the beginning.) Of course, it may be necessary to fool the reader and disguise a persons real character until the surprise ending. Why not, as long as its believable and involving.

Good points all. No, I didn't mean that narration and development cannot be used together although I can see how my statement could be interpreted that way. I suppose a better way would have been to ask how to balance development throughout the story (character building) with narration.

When I wrote fiction, which I admit hasn't been for a long time, I find that the character takes over early on. At some point, no matter what I thought the plot would be, the personalities take over and provide the fuel for the story engine. That is the best moment...when you lose your consciousness of yourself as a writer, and become the observer and recorder of their story. I don't experience it any more, but I remember it well. I never describe the characters very much...I want the reader to fill in as much of the story as possible. It matters very little to me what the character looks like...it is how they think, how they make decisions, how they relate to other people that is important to me. Was important to me.

My grand father was a sportsman who hunted and fished. At work he was a foreman. At home he had premiums he had received from salesmen as if he worked in purchasing. He also purchased things for himself based on what he saw as prizes on TV. These were things like Polaroid cameras or portable radios or even a small personal refrigerator. When he died the obiturary said he was a mechanic. It seems the state had the last say. I saw an exhibit at the Custer Museum in Monroe, Michigan last week that featured artifacts of the Knights of St. Pierre. One of the items was a tooled ornate belt with large letters on the back saying "Foreman." My grand father was an Elk. I also saw a fireman's hat from the turn of the century with the badge rank as "Secretary' rather than "Chief." Without research the characters are watery and dusty.

No character, no plot, no story .
Interesting psychological profiles .
And how they came into being .
Childhood flashbacks, Insightful interactions .
I think although most writers may deny it, their best characters are most often based on real people .
A relaxed attitude, and a keen and non judgemental mind often penetrates the most ardent defenses .
Use whatever is best - but modify if necessary to mantain anonymity .
Direction with aim towards a conclusion . And pace the changes in mood and atmosphere .
Initially, during planning, keep the details out . Toss them - the moods/atmospheres - around till you feel you feel you're ready (ie when the knots in your head release) . Then research like mad .
Often about this time, a preternatural calm descends . You're ready to write . Don't force it . Let it flow, let the story tell itself as you calmly knit your tapestry in words .

I try to do this when I program on my pc .
This is a site for code writers too isn't it ? :>

Message edited on: 09/20/2004 14:17

Good advice! Sure, we don't mind coders stopping in. Just let me know before you release anything aimed at PCs. I'll fire up one of my unix boxes (I don't do linux) to be safe :)

I remember hearing on the radio a few years back of a writer lamenting a feminist critic's dissing of her work, saying that the story started out with a disparaging character..the writer wryly commented that the critic had never heard of character development..;)