I agree. My daughter is a novelist. She defines her characters to a razor's edge and they still surprise her. Most of the time, she can imagine a character in a specific plot and they outline the story for her. If you build characters around plot, you'll have limited characters. The reader will spot it.
I agree with this, I started writing the character before the plot and it really helped a lot rather than just making it up as you go, It's better to know what kinda character he/she is ahead of time
I'll beg to disagree. Most plotters feel the way you do, and most pantsers sooooo do not. The important thing, in my experience, is to figure out which one you are and go with it.
One thing I’ve always found puzzling when approaching a new script is the conundrum of do I base this character off of one person or multiple people? Sometimes I’ll even scoff at the idea that the main character should be based on me. Why is that? Lol, it’s like… At what point am I inventing an original character on paper or am I simply writing about one person I know in real life? Is that originality? When fiction and the real world collide! Lol
Some writers would say just write what feel true. Are the audience going to know if it's based on you or not, and does it matter? I think originality is overrated. The audience connects with things that feel real and true. And some would say that each writer's authentic voice and perspective is what is original; 10 writers would write the same story 10 different ways.
A sitcom with characters and a full movie with a plot, because in a sitcom it's more for the conflict between the characters and not specifically to create a narrative, while in a movie that has a leading idea, the characters have to serve the idea and message of the story, usually movies that work on the characters first, the main narrative changes Along the way, this is how it works for me anyway 😊
Yes. Character driven movies start with the characters pursuing what they want or think they want (story goal). When they discover that what they thought they wanted is not what they NEEDED, then the narrative does change because the goal should change. It’s the transformative process. That’s so much more interesting for me to follow than stuff just happening to a character I don’t care about or relate to at all.
I’m going for glory for the first time on a book and what I did was first structure out all 40 beats and my big beats naturally landed where they’re “supposed to” while using beats to structure as a general outline actually helped me generate a good plot and good ending. After that I wrote the first 6 pages and quickly realized I needed to do character bios 😂 so I’ll probably use the bios to restructure the story beats if I need to and that will naturally clean up the plot
It shouldn't be that you start with either story or character but you start with both and you bring both into existent together. I will say though it's better to start with story than character. People like to pit things to do with story against each other but in my experience, if you have one aspect of story and it's putted against with another, both are correct. It's not show don't tell, it's show and tell. It's not character or story its character and story. It's amazing how many people select character. Yes, it's true we connect to character but there is an arrogance to think if you focus on character that your story or storytelling is and will be good enough. You need to focus on both and intertwine them in your thinking. Story is the harder part and so I would say you need to focus more energy on that than character but both are correct. All the giants in the industry are story focused but truthfully they are story AND character focused. Everyone is character focused. Want to get ahead, be story focused too.
I find with my writing a hysteresis effect between character and plot. It doesn't matter where I start, as I write (like now with an outline I just finished), I discover things about my characters as they interact with each other. Every time they do something, their character develops. I rewrite with this in mind, changing the things they do, which naturally develops their character. This repeats until, eventually, I know who the character is and what they do. Orrrrrr until I get frustrated and move on to another project hoping that someday I'll be wise enough to know how to deal with that story.
I would absolutely lose my zest for life if I did bio sheets on my characters. I'd feel as if I were chiseling away at their tombstones. I basically do what Jack Grapes calls method writing. No outline--that'd kill it for me, too.
I can't think up fantasy plots on their own or they end up cliche. Without the emotional input of the setting and the magic system, my characters are odd. I like to develop an interesting magic system and setting first, and then as it reaches about 20% the characters start to appear. Plot sparks ignite as the characters come to life and begin having conversations in my head in various locations. A character's wound, flaws, and personality will change over time to increase the troubles and failures they will have in Acts II and III. Their initial needs, wants, and goals in the ordinary world are really the last to be fleshed out, as they can't be properly considered until the inciting incident is clear, where we can develop interesting reasons for a refusal. As the story develops, those things that seem so important get sidelined by the building tension, stakes, and conflict. That's my current flow. While it keeps increasing in complexity, I'm not finding any pain points, and my inner child is happy to play and imagine.
I write sci-fi and I couldn't agree more. The novel I'm releasing next year started with a photo of a young woman I saw while researching hair colors. I thought, "I wonder what she's up to?" Wild ride, writing this way, isn't it?
@@5Gburn It's a great way to do it. I find that if I try what the pantser's do and go for a less upfront design, the characters turn it into smut. Everyone has secret trysts. 😄
@@mageprometheus Literally lol'd. I will say that at about the 2/3 mark, my brain does a sort of semi-chaotic outlining process, but by that time your fantasy would become erotica 😂
This was more or less my take a while back, in the Writing Promts or Rules of a Novelist video! It believe that it'd greatly behoove this channel to open a Discord server or something similar. That'd be pretty stellar, yo!
I tried starting with worlbuiding, but it doesn't work as a story if it's not about someone i.e. the protagonist. Likewise, I find it difficult to start with a character if the world they inhabit is undefined as it would surely have shaped them into who they are. It seems like starting with a character, their want and need, motivation, while having a grasp on the setting and history and the overall theme, not to mention the character arc and/or change is necessary. I've tried creating world before character, or character before world, and neither works for me at least. I'm starting to realize how the need (not want) the theme and character arc are of even greater importance early on.
A man falls into a sink hole and spends all of Act 2 (the story) trying to get out. He broke his leg on the way down. He doesn’t have anything to eat or drink. Then it starts to rain and the hole starts to fill with water. The temperature is going to start dropping as night approaches. He hears wolves howling and then he sees one look down into the hole as if it’s thinking about jumping down. Now even if the man could climb back up, will he be attacked by the lurking wolf? You might be curious to see if or how he gets out? But do you really care? Would you keep turning pages to find out? What if you find out the man is a Father and the man’s baby is in the car at the top of the hole. Then the man is diabetic and his insulin is in the car. He’s claustrophobic and he has had nightmares before about being buried alive. If the man dies, so will the baby because no one knows where they are. His wife died a few months ago and the baby is all he has left of her. Now how much more interested are you in the story? Characters introduce stakes and tension. Characters are who the Story matters to and that’s how the Story begins to matter to the reader. The characters are the readers way into the Story. More importantly, we relate to the characters - not the things that happen to the characters. We learn from what the characters do and don’t do and from their fears snd misbeliefs that lead them to make their bad decisions all throughout Act 2😂. If the video didn’t convince you my little comment won’t either and I know it was a weak premise but I was just trying to make a point. Opinions vary and that’s fine! Cheers!
In my opinion, both ways story can evolve If there is sea, you can create story about that standalone If there is a big shark in that sea, you still can develop a story around that shark in that sea. But, plot and character are like siemeas twins
Chicken and egg. Start however you want. Starting with theme or plot doesn't automatically mean you will have a passive protagonist. Maybe you don't even have a main protagonist? Try different methodologies and see what works for you. Better to just start working on your project than endlessly debating how/where to start. For some writers, character bios, or any kind of planning/prep is just a form of procrastination.
Borrowing this from my favorite authortuber Abbie Emmons. A man’s leg gets broken in a car crash. That’s a plot event. Maybe even inciting incident. It’s a bad thing. Nobody would want that to happen. We say ‘Oh that sucks. That’s going to be a pain.” But what if the character is an aging runner who has qualified to be in the Olympics for the first time and the Olympics were just two weeks away? Are we still gonna just say “Oh. That sucks?” Or is it now a completely different reaction because of who the character is? The plot now matters SO much MORE because of the character ‘s life goal and dreams, and now we tap into the tragedy of training your whole life for something just to lose out when you’re two weeks away. We feel the anguish and the enormity of disappointment. The character brings the emotion which immerses us in the story - not the plot. The plot is necessary obviously but it should not drive the story. I agree with this interviewer for sure. In the example, Act 2 now becomes how will the character handle what has happened to him? What will he do to try to cope and why won’t it work? Etc. He will act and react in accordance to who he is which would best be figured out first before the plot and then let his organic reactions help you craft (retro engineer) the plot. Alternatively, push the Olympics out several months from the crash instead of two weeks. Story becomes can the guy possibly heal and rehab in time to still go and compete? We’re rooting for him aren’t we? There are stakes tied to the character versus no stakes or much less stakes or ‘universal’ stakes for plug and play random Character X as in NO ONE would want to break their leg. We don’t invest our time going to movies or reading about universal stakes that are the same for everybody. We want to know how a specific person fares against a plot that forces them to face their specific fears, fatal flaws, hang ups. That’s how we see their transformations. That’s what makes stories matter to the characters and to us. I’ve paraphrased this example but Abbie Emmons is both much more eloquent and detailed in how SHE explains it.
Character over plot can be summed up like this: An earthquake hits in a largely populated City and the statistics start coming in every hour on the news. Thousands dead, thousands more unaccounted for. It’s a major event / plot / thing that happened. We listen to the hard cold statistics and shake our heads about what a tragedy it is and then click over to another channel. Cynical I know but I’m just keeping it real. An hour later, the next time we see the story on the news, we see a reporter talking to a woman just found in the rubble. She crawled under a sturdy table and somehow survived a two story building falling down all around her. She says she almost panicked but she could hear a child crying nearby and that gave her the will to dig her way out from under the table - to keep fighting so she could get help for the child. The child stopped making noise she kept going, praying the child was still alive. When she finally got free she called out for help and people came running. Two minutes later you the viewer are on the edge of your chair waiting because the reporter says that rescue personnel can see the child but she isn’t moving. They reach the child and get her clear of the rubble. The woman runs over and they hold her back while they work on the child. Are you thinking about clicking over to watch Wheel of Fortune? Cheers ring out when the child takes a breath and starts to cry. The woman bursts into tears of relief and joy. The reporter is visibly moved as she turns to the camera and repeats for those just tuning in that a woman and a small child have just been found alive among the rubble. Earthquake = massive plot event. Property damage. Lives lost. Sad yes. Looking at the event from the perspectives of two specific people (two characters) out of the thousands affected and knowing what the personal stakes are for them - that’s compelling. The characters are what make us care about what’s happening to them, not the other way around. Story isn’t what happens. Story is how and why what happens, matters to the characters and transforms them, changing their lives…and sometimes ours (the audience’s) too.
Your people didn't even get names or shapes hear -- but specific motion of event/sounDid. Therefore I'd say the flow of events is what matters (the ripple effect instead of stagnant pool surface)
@@kevinpruett6424 I think your keyboard messed up and I didn’t 100% follow your meaning…except I can tell that you are disagreeing with my comment. That’s fine. I wasn’t doing a full blown draft of a story so no I didn’t give names to the woman and the child 😂😂. But the point is that they are not statistics anymore as soon as you single them out from the thousands. You can tell a good story about an individual but you can’t tell as good a story about a statistic - no one cares about numbers and no one cares about plot happening to numbers. You can have big plot but if things happen to characters we don’t know or care about or relate to then we don’t enjoy the story as much. That’s why I think you can have a weak plot but good characters and people will stay invested in the story but if the characters don’t pull you in all the plot in the world won’t engage the audience in a significant way. Maybe there are a few exceptions but by and large we stay for the characters and they should drive the story. It’s fine if you disagree and think that plot should come first. Just like it’s fine if I think characters should come first. Whatever helps get the project going right? Good luck with your writing.
In real life, think about how many boring plays, soccer games, and spectator events we sit through not because we like what we’re watching or because we care about what’s happening, but because we care about who it’s happening to! We care about our kids, our friends, spouses and other family members and we will follow them and watch them navigate the events in their lives because we’re invested in them - not what’s happening TO them (plot). We don’t have to like or care about what’s happening - but if we don’t care about the characters, we can take or leave plot events.
@@kevinpruett6424 You’ll watch because you actually like the sport right? Or do you mean you’ll go to a sporting event like tennis when you don’t like tennis and you’ll sit and watch it just to burn time and you don’t know anybody involved in the matches? Is that what you mean? 🤔 Because I’m talking about the scenario if for instance I hate football but I go to a football game that my nephew is going to play in - like that. I’ll sit through those two hours watching and waiting for the plays my nephew is in. I’m there to see him even though I’m bored to tears by the game itself (plot) because I care to see what my nephew (the character) will do and how he will play and I’ll be on the edge of my seat praying he doesn’t get hurt. But I couldn’t care less about the actual football game (plot). I would not go to a football game and just hang out unless I knew someone involved either playing or coaching or cheerleading etc. The parallel is I’m not showing up for plot unless I’m invested in the characters and if I’m invested in the characters then I will forgive a weak plot / but not the other way around. Can you tell me if the tennis example is what you would do / what you meant in your reply? Thanks for your comment. Do you start with plot first? Just curious. Not trying to argue. It’s just interesting to me that people seem to feel strongly one way or the other and not many land in the middle…
@@nikkinewbie6014 I'm telling you I actually like sports (plot). To me if the plot is weak, the characters end up doing boring things. Personally I forge no more than the main character until I have some fairly firm goals in mind for what they will explore and examine. Granted, I have a mechanical, analytic sort of mind, and not a shoot the breeze kind of person. I bond through building/performing, not ordinary activities, not low stakes motives
@@nikkinewbie6014 and I have actually played a number of sports myself because I love the concentration and strategy: tennis, baseball, football, hockey, frisbee, basketball
@@kevinpruett6424 Ahh. Okay. Thanks for clarifying. I see that you feel strongly about your view as do I. I just can’t imagine sitting through a sports event (plot) when I’m not somehow invested in a participant (character) because I wouldn’t care who won or lost and there would be no stakes to keep me interested. But if I understand, you’re saying that if you go to a game you are going for the sake of watching the game itself (the plot). The game is most important and you don’t have to know anybody connected to either team and you don’t have go care about one team more than the other to have an enjoyable experience. (Good read)…if the game is being played well (strong plot) you’re all in. But would you still be invested in watching the game (plot) if the score is 54 to 3 at halftime (really weak plot)? Would you stick around until the last play anyway (finish the movie or book) even though you don’t have a connection to anyone who is playing or coaching (character)? You said no because weak plot equals boring actions by the characters. To finish out the comparison, my nephew (character) can be the worst player on the team or the best. Either way I care about him. His team can be winning or losing the game (plot). Either way, I will stay until after the last play until he walks off the field and we will connect when he waves at me up in the stands. I will wonder how disappointed he is if he didn’t get to play. Or I’ll be overjoyed for him that he scored the winning touchdown. I will care about how he FEELS about the outcome of the game and how he would be changed by the outcome. I will tolerate the game (the plot) to see what my nephew learns from it. I’ll sit through the game (plot) and be relieved he didn’t get hurt and be ready to continue to root for him the next week until the season is done (book over). 😂😂. What I won’t do - is sit through the entirety of a blowout game (bad plot) when I don’t care about anybody who is playing (character). That would be a waste of my time…there would be no point for me. By contrast investing in emotional connection - even in spite of a weak plot - and learning something about characters and human nature - whether in real life or through Story - is always a worthy use of my time. Give me a compelling character with a great voice done well and I’ll follow him into a bad plot. Give me a weak, flat, unrealistic poorly written character and I will not follow him for very long - even if it is into the best plot ever crafted because I won’t care about what happens to him. As for characters acting in boring ways there’s an old saying: “if you’re bored, you are probably boring.” Well developed characters with clearly defined story goals couched in solid premises for stories shouldn’t ever be perceived as being passive or boring and I don’t think they are the cause of bad plot. In fact, to my point, characters developed first can be shown to be changing in response to a plot that’s been crafted especially for them - to put them in the ring with their worst fears and deepest misbeliefs. Then they can and should be shown actively overcoming them. (Good plot). If characters are shown to be fighting obstacles and setbacks and opposers / villains they shouldn’t be coming across as acting in boring ways - but if they are it’s not the characters’ faults. 😂😂😂. At the end of the day, everyone has their own process. Whatever works. Thanks for your comment!
Films tend to blow because the donors have the strongest say, rather than the artists themselves. But of course, every aura is trying to transfer significance and purpose, or inspire another character to contemplate/adapt. And that in turn stimulates us on some levels
Just statistically most women start with the characters first while most male writers start plot first. If you are an exception to the statistic you’re still good.
In honesty I can't. I was merely passing third hand observable bias. I've listened to A lot of interviews from writers so i could not even give the video or podcast that would back up the claim. A needle in a hay stack. 1 in 1000 plus podcasts@@dudhman
conventional wisdom that states how to do anything in any industry... is a big mistake. There are plenty of great stories where the lead character has no arc. When it comes to story, you have to do it all. Great plot, great lead character, sub plots, secondary characters. This is why it becomes so difficult, because all of the pieces have to work together in a satisfying way for that particular story and voice of the writer. Everyone wants the simple 'trick'. Nothing original comes from this.
I disagree. For me it’s better to write plot before writing character. I can have the greatest character, but I don’t care if nothing is happening with the character. I want a plot, first. I want to see, hear; write a great story….”Once upon a time,…..and they lived happily ever after, the end”.
Disagree. The story is everything. The setting and characters make it interesting, that is all. Too many people start with a character looking for a story. Or a setting that they created then somehow find a story to take place in the setting. Good stories can be told with different characters and in different setting, but you have to know what you are trying to tell.
Well no, story is not everything and neither is character. Obviously a character needs to be in a situation, and the way in which they navigate that situation is the story. So she's right in the sense that a well-defined character will help determine the developments in a story. Many prolific writers have used that precise method: define a character and put them in a difficult situation...then write the rest from there.
Word salad. Plot is character. Backstory is irrelevant and characterisations are just contrived idiosyncrasies. No one cares how a character likes their eggs in the morning.
![Forensic Speak: How To Write Realistic Crime Dramas -Jennifer Dornbush [FULL INTERVIEW]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Swu6xmBJjHM/mqdefault.jpg)
![Forensic Speak: How To Write Realistic Crime Dramas -Jennifer Dornbush [FULL INTERVIEW]](/img/tr.png)
I think it's important for the viewers or readers have a very clear picture of the character. That's why it's important to shape that ahead of time.
I agree. My daughter is a novelist. She defines her characters to a razor's edge and they still surprise her. Most of the time, she can imagine a character in a specific plot and they outline the story for her. If you build characters around plot, you'll have limited characters. The reader will spot it.
I agree with this, I started writing the character before the plot and it really helped a lot rather than just making it up as you go, It's better to know what kinda character he/she is ahead of time
I'll beg to disagree. Most plotters feel the way you do, and most pantsers sooooo do not. The important thing, in my experience, is to figure out which one you are and go with it.
One thing I’ve always found puzzling when approaching a new script is the conundrum of do I base this character off of one person or multiple people? Sometimes I’ll even scoff at the idea that the main character should be based on me. Why is that? Lol, it’s like… At what point am I inventing an original character on paper or am I simply writing about one person I know in real life? Is that originality? When fiction and the real world collide! Lol
Some writers would say just write what feel true. Are the audience going to know if it's based on you or not, and does it matter? I think originality is overrated. The audience connects with things that feel real and true. And some would say that each writer's authentic voice and perspective is what is original; 10 writers would write the same story 10 different ways.
@@Ruylopez778 well said 🤘
Is it easier for you to start with character or plot?
A sitcom with characters and a full movie with a plot, because in a sitcom it's more for the conflict between the characters and not specifically to create a narrative, while in a movie that has a leading idea, the characters have to serve the idea and message of the story, usually movies that work on the characters first, the main narrative changes Along the way,
this is how it works for me anyway 😊
Yes. Character driven movies start with the characters pursuing what they want or think they want (story goal). When they discover that what they thought they wanted is not what they NEEDED, then the narrative does change because the goal should change. It’s the transformative process. That’s so much more interesting for me to follow than stuff just happening to a character I don’t care about or relate to at all.
I’m going for glory for the first time on a book and what I did was first structure out all 40 beats and my big beats naturally landed where they’re “supposed to” while using beats to structure as a general outline actually helped me generate a good plot and good ending. After that I wrote the first 6 pages and quickly realized I needed to do character bios 😂 so I’ll probably use the bios to restructure the story beats if I need to and that will naturally clean up the plot
It shouldn't be that you start with either story or character but you start with both and you bring both into existent together. I will say though it's better to start with story than character. People like to pit things to do with story against each other but in my experience, if you have one aspect of story and it's putted against with another, both are correct. It's not show don't tell, it's show and tell. It's not character or story its character and story. It's amazing how many people select character. Yes, it's true we connect to character but there is an arrogance to think if you focus on character that your story or storytelling is and will be good enough. You need to focus on both and intertwine them in your thinking. Story is the harder part and so I would say you need to focus more energy on that than character but both are correct. All the giants in the industry are story focused but truthfully they are story AND character focused. Everyone is character focused. Want to get ahead, be story focused too.
I find with my writing a hysteresis effect between character and plot. It doesn't matter where I start, as I write (like now with an outline I just finished), I discover things about my characters as they interact with each other. Every time they do something, their character develops. I rewrite with this in mind, changing the things they do, which naturally develops their character. This repeats until, eventually, I know who the character is and what they do.
Orrrrrr until I get frustrated and move on to another project hoping that someday I'll be wise enough to know how to deal with that story.
I would absolutely lose my zest for life if I did bio sheets on my characters. I'd feel as if I were chiseling away at their tombstones. I basically do what Jack Grapes calls method writing. No outline--that'd kill it for me, too.
By far the most useful and practical of these videos
I can't think up fantasy plots on their own or they end up cliche. Without the emotional input of the setting and the magic system, my characters are odd. I like to develop an interesting magic system and setting first, and then as it reaches about 20% the characters start to appear. Plot sparks ignite as the characters come to life and begin having conversations in my head in various locations. A character's wound, flaws, and personality will change over time to increase the troubles and failures they will have in Acts II and III. Their initial needs, wants, and goals in the ordinary world are really the last to be fleshed out, as they can't be properly considered until the inciting incident is clear, where we can develop interesting reasons for a refusal. As the story develops, those things that seem so important get sidelined by the building tension, stakes, and conflict.
That's my current flow. While it keeps increasing in complexity, I'm not finding any pain points, and my inner child is happy to play and imagine.
I write sci-fi and I couldn't agree more. The novel I'm releasing next year started with a photo of a young woman I saw while researching hair colors. I thought, "I wonder what she's up to?" Wild ride, writing this way, isn't it?
@@5Gburn It's a great way to do it. I find that if I try what the pantser's do and go for a less upfront design, the characters turn it into smut. Everyone has secret trysts. 😄
@@mageprometheus Literally lol'd. I will say that at about the 2/3 mark, my brain does a sort of semi-chaotic outlining process, but by that time your fantasy would become erotica 😂
@@5Gburn Erotica with character names like Logen Ninefingers and Granny Weatherwax.
@@mageprometheus I don't even know how to process that 😂
I need this full interview!
Modular story structure solves all these things and merges them together.
This was more or less my take a while back, in the Writing Promts or Rules of a Novelist video! It believe that it'd greatly behoove this channel to open a Discord server or something similar. That'd be pretty stellar, yo!
I tried starting with worlbuiding, but it doesn't work as a story if it's not about someone i.e. the protagonist. Likewise, I find it difficult to start with a character if the world they inhabit is undefined as it would surely have shaped them into who they are. It seems like starting with a character, their want and need, motivation, while having a grasp on the setting and history and the overall theme, not to mention the character arc and/or change is necessary. I've tried creating world before character, or character before world, and neither works for me at least. I'm starting to realize how the need (not want) the theme and character arc are of even greater importance early on.
You CAN move your light above the eyeglass frame, right?
Tbf how would you know if a character is acting 'in character' for a given situation of you dont know who they are as the writer.
A man falls into a sink hole and spends all of Act 2 (the story) trying to get out. He broke his leg on the way down. He doesn’t have anything to eat or drink. Then it starts to rain and the hole starts to fill with water. The temperature is going to start dropping as night approaches. He hears wolves howling and then he sees one look down into the hole as if it’s thinking about jumping down. Now even if the man could climb back up, will he be attacked by the lurking wolf?
You might be curious to see if or how he gets out? But do you really care? Would you keep turning pages to find out?
What if you find out the man is a Father and the man’s baby is in the car at the top of the hole. Then the man is diabetic and his insulin is in the car. He’s claustrophobic and he has had nightmares before about being buried alive. If the man dies, so will the baby because no one knows where they are. His wife died a few months ago and the baby is all he has left of her.
Now how much more interested are you in the story? Characters introduce stakes and tension. Characters are who the Story matters to and that’s how the Story begins to matter to the reader. The characters are the readers way into the Story.
More importantly, we relate to the characters - not the things that happen to the characters. We learn from what the characters do and don’t do and from their fears snd misbeliefs that lead them to make their bad decisions all throughout Act 2😂.
If the video didn’t convince you my little comment won’t either and I know it was a weak premise but I was just trying to make a point.
Opinions vary and that’s fine!
Cheers!
That's not character. That's just stakes.
In my opinion, both ways story can evolve
If there is sea, you can create story about that standalone
If there is a big shark in that sea, you still can develop a story around that shark in that sea.
But, plot and character are like siemeas twins
I find it easier to start with a premise and then pick the characters to make the premise exciting.
I start with th characters and make the story around the.amd let it flow
Chicken and egg. Start however you want. Starting with theme or plot doesn't automatically mean you will have a passive protagonist. Maybe you don't even have a main protagonist? Try different methodologies and see what works for you. Better to just start working on your project than endlessly debating how/where to start. For some writers, character bios, or any kind of planning/prep is just a form of procrastination.
Great points Ruy!
Borrowing this from my favorite authortuber Abbie Emmons.
A man’s leg gets broken in a car crash. That’s a plot event. Maybe even inciting incident. It’s a bad thing. Nobody would want that to happen. We say ‘Oh that sucks. That’s going to be a pain.”
But what if the character is an aging runner who has qualified to be in the Olympics for the first time and the Olympics were just two weeks away? Are we still gonna just say “Oh. That sucks?” Or is it now a completely different reaction because of who the character is?
The plot now matters SO much MORE because of the character ‘s life goal and dreams, and now we tap into the tragedy of training your whole life for something just to lose out when you’re two weeks away. We feel the anguish and the enormity of disappointment. The character brings the emotion which immerses us in the story - not the plot. The plot is necessary obviously but it should not drive the story. I agree with this interviewer for sure.
In the example, Act 2 now becomes how will the character handle what has happened to him? What will he do to try to cope and why won’t it work? Etc. He will act and react in accordance to who he is which would best be figured out first before the plot and then let his organic reactions help you craft (retro engineer) the plot.
Alternatively, push the Olympics out several months from the crash instead of two weeks. Story becomes can the guy possibly heal and rehab in time to still go and compete? We’re rooting for him aren’t we? There are stakes tied to the character versus no stakes or much less stakes or ‘universal’ stakes for plug and play random Character X as in NO ONE would want to break their leg.
We don’t invest our time going to movies or reading about universal stakes that are the same for everybody. We want to know how a specific person fares against a plot that forces them to face their specific fears, fatal flaws, hang ups. That’s how we see their transformations.
That’s what makes stories matter to the characters and to us.
I’ve paraphrased this example but Abbie Emmons is both much more eloquent and detailed in how SHE explains it.
Character over plot can be summed up like this:
An earthquake hits in a largely populated City and the statistics start coming in every hour on the news. Thousands dead, thousands more unaccounted for. It’s a major event / plot / thing that happened.
We listen to the hard cold statistics and shake our heads about what a tragedy it is and then click over to another channel. Cynical I know but I’m just keeping it real.
An hour later, the next time we see the story on the news, we see a reporter talking to a woman just found in the rubble. She crawled under a sturdy table and somehow survived a two story building falling down all around her.
She says she almost panicked but she could hear a child crying nearby and that gave her the will to dig her way out from under the table - to keep fighting so she could get help for the child. The child stopped making noise she kept going, praying the child was still alive. When she finally got free she called out for help and people came running.
Two minutes later you the viewer are on the edge of your chair waiting because the reporter says that rescue personnel can see the child but she isn’t moving.
They reach the child and get her clear of the rubble. The woman runs over and they hold her back while they work on the child. Are you thinking about clicking over to watch Wheel of Fortune?
Cheers ring out when the child takes a breath and starts to cry. The woman bursts into tears of relief and joy. The reporter is visibly moved as she turns to the camera and repeats for those just tuning in that a woman and a small child have just been found alive among the rubble.
Earthquake = massive plot event. Property damage. Lives lost. Sad yes. Looking at the event from the perspectives of two specific people (two characters) out of the thousands affected and knowing what the personal stakes are for them - that’s compelling. The characters are what make us care about what’s happening to them, not the other way around.
Story isn’t what happens. Story is how and why what happens, matters to the characters and transforms them, changing their lives…and sometimes ours (the audience’s) too.
Your people didn't even get names or shapes hear -- but specific motion of event/sounDid. Therefore I'd say the flow of events is what matters (the ripple effect instead of stagnant pool surface)
@@kevinpruett6424 I think your keyboard messed up and I didn’t 100% follow your meaning…except I can tell that you are disagreeing with my comment. That’s fine.
I wasn’t doing a full blown draft of a story so no I didn’t give names to the woman and the child 😂😂. But the point is that they are not statistics anymore as soon as you single them out from the thousands.
You can tell a good story about an individual but you can’t tell as good a story about a statistic - no one cares about numbers and no one cares about plot happening to numbers. You can have big plot but if things happen to characters we don’t know or care about or relate to then we don’t enjoy the story as much.
That’s why I think you can have a weak plot but good characters and people will stay invested in the story but if the characters don’t pull you in all the plot in the world won’t engage the audience in a significant way. Maybe there are a few exceptions but by and large we stay for the characters and they should drive the story.
It’s fine if you disagree and think that plot should come first. Just like it’s fine if I think characters should come first. Whatever helps get the project going right? Good luck with your writing.
I like watching Deo LiCaprio movies.
In real life, think about how many boring plays, soccer games, and spectator events we sit through not because we like what we’re watching or because we care about what’s happening, but because we care about who it’s happening to!
We care about our kids, our friends, spouses and other family members and we will follow them and watch them navigate the events in their lives because we’re invested in them - not what’s happening TO them (plot).
We don’t have to like or care about what’s happening - but if we don’t care about the characters, we can take or leave plot events.
I'll watch sports without someone I deeply know involved...
@@kevinpruett6424 You’ll watch because you actually like the sport right?
Or do you mean you’ll go to a sporting event like tennis when you don’t like tennis and you’ll sit and watch it just to burn time and you don’t know anybody involved in the matches? Is that what you mean? 🤔
Because I’m talking about the scenario if for instance I hate football but I go to a football game that my nephew is going to play in - like that. I’ll sit through those two hours watching and waiting for the plays my nephew is in.
I’m there to see him even though I’m bored to tears by the game itself (plot) because I care to see what my nephew (the character) will do and how he will play and I’ll be on the edge of my seat praying he doesn’t get hurt. But I couldn’t care less about the actual football game (plot).
I would not go to a football game and just hang out unless I knew someone involved either playing or coaching or cheerleading etc.
The parallel is I’m not showing up for plot unless I’m invested in the characters and if I’m invested in the characters then I will forgive a weak plot / but not the other way around.
Can you tell me if the tennis example is what you would do / what you meant in your reply? Thanks for your comment.
Do you start with plot first? Just curious. Not trying to argue. It’s just interesting to me that people seem to feel strongly one way or the other and not many land in the middle…
@@nikkinewbie6014 I'm telling you I actually like sports (plot). To me if the plot is weak, the characters end up doing boring things. Personally I forge no more than the main character until I have some fairly firm goals in mind for what they will explore and examine. Granted, I have a mechanical, analytic sort of mind, and not a shoot the breeze kind of person. I bond through building/performing, not ordinary activities, not low stakes motives
@@nikkinewbie6014 and I have actually played a number of sports myself because I love the concentration and strategy: tennis, baseball, football, hockey, frisbee, basketball
@@kevinpruett6424 Ahh. Okay. Thanks for clarifying. I see that you feel strongly about your view as do I.
I just can’t imagine sitting through a sports event (plot) when I’m not somehow invested in a participant (character) because I wouldn’t care who won or lost and there would be no stakes to keep me interested.
But if I understand, you’re saying that if you go to a game you are going for the sake of watching the game itself (the plot). The game is most important and you don’t have to know anybody connected to either team and you don’t have go care about one team more than the other to have an enjoyable experience. (Good read)…if the game is being played well (strong plot) you’re all in.
But would you still be invested in watching the game (plot) if the score is 54 to 3 at halftime (really weak plot)? Would you stick around until the last play anyway (finish the movie or book) even though you don’t have a connection to anyone who is playing or coaching (character)? You said no because weak plot equals boring actions by the characters.
To finish out the comparison, my nephew (character) can be the worst player on the team or the best. Either way I care about him.
His team can be winning or losing the game (plot). Either way, I will stay until after the last play until he walks off the field and we will connect when he waves at me up in the stands. I will wonder how disappointed he is if he didn’t get to play. Or I’ll be overjoyed for him that he scored the winning touchdown.
I will care about how he FEELS about the outcome of the game and how he would be changed by the outcome. I will tolerate the game (the plot) to see what my nephew learns from it. I’ll sit through the game (plot) and be relieved he didn’t get hurt and be ready to continue to root for him the next week until the season is done (book over). 😂😂.
What I won’t do - is sit through the entirety of a blowout game (bad plot) when I don’t care about anybody who is playing (character). That would be a waste of my time…there would be no point for me.
By contrast investing in emotional connection - even in spite of a weak plot - and learning something about characters and human nature - whether in real life or through Story - is always a worthy use of my time.
Give me a compelling character with a great voice done well and I’ll follow him into a bad plot. Give me a weak, flat, unrealistic poorly written character and I will not follow him for very long - even if it is into the best plot ever crafted because I won’t care about what happens to him.
As for characters acting in boring ways there’s an old saying: “if you’re bored, you are probably boring.” Well developed characters with clearly defined story goals couched in solid premises for stories shouldn’t ever be perceived as being passive or boring and I don’t think they are the cause of bad plot.
In fact, to my point, characters developed first can be shown to be changing in response to a plot that’s been crafted especially for them - to put them in the ring with their worst fears and deepest misbeliefs. Then they can and should be shown actively overcoming them. (Good plot).
If characters are shown to be fighting obstacles and setbacks and opposers / villains they shouldn’t be coming across as acting in boring ways - but if they are it’s not the characters’ faults. 😂😂😂.
At the end of the day, everyone has their own process. Whatever works.
Thanks for your comment!
In most movies today characters are one-dimensional and are used to convey a message (eg wokeness)
Films tend to blow because the donors have the strongest say, rather than the artists themselves. But of course, every aura is trying to transfer significance and purpose, or inspire another character to contemplate/adapt. And that in turn stimulates us on some levels
"The Care-Actor"
Just statistically most women start with the characters first while most male writers start plot first. If you are an exception to the statistic you’re still good.
That’s an interesting statistic! Could you provide the source?
In honesty I can't. I was merely passing third hand observable bias. I've listened to A lot of interviews from writers so i could not even give the video or podcast that would back up the claim.
A needle in a hay stack. 1 in 1000 plus podcasts@@dudhman
conventional wisdom that states how to do anything in any industry... is a big mistake. There are plenty of great stories where the lead character has no arc. When it comes to story, you have to do it all. Great plot, great lead character, sub plots, secondary characters. This is why it becomes so difficult, because all of the pieces have to work together in a satisfying way for that particular story and voice of the writer. Everyone wants the simple 'trick'. Nothing original comes from this.
Plot took characters so plot first , according to me.
I disagree. For me it’s better to write plot before writing character. I can have the greatest character, but I don’t care if nothing is happening with the character. I want a plot, first. I want to see, hear; write a great story….”Once upon a time,…..and they lived happily ever after, the end”.
Disagree. The story is everything. The setting and characters make it interesting, that is all. Too many people start with a character looking for a story. Or a setting that they created then somehow find a story to take place in the setting. Good stories can be told with different characters and in different setting, but you have to know what you are trying to tell.
Well no, story is not everything and neither is character. Obviously a character needs to be in a situation, and the way in which they navigate that situation is the story. So she's right in the sense that a well-defined character will help determine the developments in a story. Many prolific writers have used that precise method: define a character and put them in a difficult situation...then write the rest from there.
Word salad. Plot is character. Backstory is irrelevant and characterisations are just contrived idiosyncrasies. No one cares how a character likes their eggs in the morning.
Doesn’t make sense. It all comes at the same time. This is a great way to have no story