It’s very easy to want to make your characters perfect, or some times better versions of yourself, you can strip away certain flaws and foibles, transcend the boundaries of human existence but flaws are what make a character genuine. If your character is too perfect he or she is just going to tick off your reader, and in my case the writer as well.
My first stories at age ten involved people who discover that they’re princesses of some strange mysterious country, things of that nature are many little girl’s dreams but then to not only discover that you’re a princess but that you have super powers and billions of pounds in cash…all these just added on top make the story flat and dull. The characters become cardboard cut-outs.
I remember one story I started involved a family that moved to a mysterious island. Every family on the island and two children most one boy and one girl, but a few had two boys or two girls. I mapped out the entire island named every single family and all their members and wrote down who lived where what the island had as far as stores and other public buildings. I, of course, had names for the family moving in, including the fact that they had triplets, all girls, and how the twin girls of the triplets, given this story involve fraternal twins and one of the fraternal twins split into two. I wrote out several pages of it and gave it to Mum, she responded with a page of notes, asking me very poignant questions such as WHY would they move to the island in the first place? What’s going on with that?
All these mysteries needed to be answered, wouldn’t the family be very freaked out by the fact that every single family on the island is essentially a nuclear family? How do they feed themselves? The island can’t possibly be big enough to have all the animals and fields needed to supply it’s population. How does it function? Where are the multiple generations? grandparents? How are there no families with children younger than twelve? etc.
These are all valid points. I hadn’t really thought things through any further than “this is neat!” At the same time it taught me that even if you don’t initially tell your reader what’s going on you have to know the answers to these questions. To me the family was just another card-board cut out. I wanted them to be there so I put them there but that doesn’t work. There has to be a reason; it might not be a good reason. It might be that one of the parents grew up on the island and left but is now back because they’re looking for family inheritance; or it might be a caring reason such as a plea from a friend who is still there. The island might be an innocent place, or it might be some kind of freaky science experiment; either way there have to be reasons and motivation.
My main focus had been the fact that the twins were literally trying to kill their sister Odette. Why would they do that? Were they just messing around? Why would sisters suddenly turn so malicious? Sociopathy? Mind control? Alien possession? Boredom? I’ve since realized that killer twins is a bit cliche but at the time it was a horrific and enticing idea to my fourteen year old brain. Odette was the “perfect” child and they were the “devil” in return, foils, as I had recently learned in English class; but since then I’ve discovered these things should be more dynamic, that characters work better provided they’re more well-rounded and have more motivation than just that their author is bored and wants to try something; but then when you’re younger it’s easier to see the world in black and white, there are less muddy areas.
Now, I’m very embroiled in the mud. I understand that people who are good can do some horrendous things if they’re properly motivated, and that people who are on the bad side of a conflict, as far as a main character might be concerned probably have positive motivations for doing so which make them much more sympathetic. Still my characters surprise me. I was writing something out last night which wouldn’t let me sleep about Sam from “Too Deep”. He was talking about his “nemesis”; a character that’s on his side who he can’t abide and I realized that it was a really good thing said character was there. While he and Sam despise each other and disagree on pretty much everything, that character is the only reason that someone who is very significant to the plot lives, because if Sam had his way he would have just offed her because all he sees is liability.
Normally I see Sam as someone who is pretty conscientious of humanity and people’s right to life. I find it hard to imagine he would just kill someone even though I acknowledge that early on he’s very kill you as soon as look at you. Later on I see the conscientious person and I forget the evolution that has to go on for him to get to the point where he realizes this. You don’t just switch from feral to educated.
There’s one point I’m writing out where he and another rebel are essentially “lost” and they stumble across a group of houses and are looking for supplies, and I realize, this is someone whose grown up on the streets of what is tantamount to hell…why would he think twice about killing these people if he views them as a threat? Just as he teaches his rebel ally about emotion, conversation skill and intuitive response, there are things they may well agree upon that I find objectionable but he wouldn’t.