Hi there, viewers! You can read an adapted text version of this video on Medium: medium.com/@quotidianwriter/writing-like-j-k-rowling-character-complexity-d86053e7c754
There's one aspect of Rowling's character development technique that I fundamentally disagree with. I call it "first impression syndrome", where (with a few rare exceptions), the protagonist has a first impression about a character, and they're almost always right. You can give your minor characters a lot of life just by omitting this.
I really hope this channel become bigger. Your content is amazing. Your narration is clear, direct and very informative. I was about to quit writing, but this channel lit my inspiration/motivation once again.
If you don't mind reading ^-^ I had this fantasy world in my head a long time ago. After a while trying to write alone, I begun co-writing with a friend (using my world as background), but it didin't work and we decided to go separated ways. During this time, a lot of what I imagined was forcebly adapted, losing the "original essence". I tried to rebuild the shattered little pieces of my story, but my mind became stuned because of how much everything changed and the plot lost sense. The cheer of writing kinda vanished. Personal problems and routine took my motivation away, and to concentrate became an impossible task. Last week I discovered your channel, and it reminded me how much I love my characters, my world. Lack of concentration is still an issue, but your content gave me both the basis and the motivation needed to start over again, and for that I'm grateful. By the way, "whatever you do, keep writing" is a great quote!
Of course I love reading! ;) Co-writing can be super productive, but it’s hard to find a dedicated long-term partner. Disorganization is a huge cause of writer’s block for me. For my main WIP, I had over fifty pages in miscellaneous notes-snippets of dialogue, world-building details, important plot points. While writing, I’d forget about all the things I wanted to add. It was a horrible mess. More recently, I’ve tried to organize my notes by chapter or category in One Note, and that has helped with mental clarity. To get the gears churning again, you could try summarizing. Set a timer for an hour and just start describing how your story opens in full sentences. Write as if you’re talking aloud and explaining the story to someone who has never read it, providing only the detail needed for your pretend listener to understand the characters and plot. If you’re editing a draft of the story itself, save the older versions of your work. Whenever I’m about to make major revisions to my draft or summary, I rename the file V1, V2, etc. That way, you can mercilessly cut things in the new version without worrying about actually losing anything. Remember that nothing in your story is ever set in stone. You have the power to change things and take other paths. In one spot of my WIP, I wrote and trashed at least seven completely different versions of a scene until I found the one that clicked into place. Pick a path and let yourself move forward with the knowledge that you’ll inevitably go back and remodel it. If you enjoy writing RUclips channels in general, I recommend Vivien Reis and Jenna Moreci’s channels. Their videos are great ways to start off a writing session, although sometimes they can lead to binge-watching and further procrastination, haha. Thank you again for watching. I wanted to have a catchy slogan, and some years ago I internalized a quote from Neil Gaiman: “You want to be a writer? Keep writing.”
I totally relate with having tons of world-building details. The idea of creating different versions for revision is something that I definetly will implement (it would've save me a lot of trouble in the past).
Thanks a lot for this .. I exaggerated with a minor character and ended up writing more about him than I had about the protagonist. Now I am going to summarize. Most of my writing is internal dialogue with not much speaking between characters but at least it reads well.
I love the Boa Constrictor. I wish it had shown up again, like maybe it followed Harry home and he hid it from the Dursleys and then took it to school with him as a pet. It would have been interesting to see Harry use Parseltougne for fun on occasion. And the snake could have eaten Aunt Marge's dog in book three.
My favorite background character so far in my plot is frank, an airline employee that assissts the antagonist, who is in a wheelchair, on board a plane in one scene. Frank makes breif conversation with the antagonist, asking where he's headed and for what purpose. In this short exchange, the antagonist eludes to his ultimate plans that unfold in the end of the story. His answer to Frank is different than the one he gives the protagonist, when she asks him the same questions. But the conversation with Frank is so vague and the situation plays out so fast, the reader should barely notice it, unless they remember Frank at the end, and think "WAIT A SECOND." At which point, that guy on that one page becomes the tool that foreshadowed tragedy, because of other verbal hints that the antagonist accidentally drops to other characters.
I really liked this video, you explained the different tiers really well, so even someone who hadn't read the books - like me - could understand what you were trying to say. And I think that's what a reader would see in a well written story. But as an author, I like to know as much of my characters as I possibly can - to be fair, my stories tend to be very character-driven - so I'll always portray them accurately and consistently, even if they're just minor characters. Maybe that's just me though... or maybe that's a strong indication, giving away my character-centric style of story-telling...
I personally prefer showing not explaining, instead of giving a whole chunk of info, I would sprinkle them but in many many ways, sometimes describing, sometimes the character lets something slip, sometimes how he is perceived, etc etc
Here's why, I googled this and found this explanation: Why was the title of the first Harry Potter film changed from "Philosopher's Stone" to "Sorcerer's Stone" for American viewers? (It makes sense to me. It's just marketing to a different audience.) The title of the movie was changed to "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" because the book's name was also changed to this. JK Rowling agreed to change the title of the book from "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone" to "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" because the publishers thought that American readers wouldn't pick up a book called "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone" because they would associate the word Philosopher with some old, boring guy and not with magic. The word Sorcerer brings magis to mind for American children.
Marcus Vee It also says that JK Rowling later regretted changing the name as she said that she should have stuck to her guns. Little did she know, in the beginning, how well loved her books would become, on a worldwide scale, and the title was really quite insignificant in hind sight.
Really appreciate this in depth study of a popular work! Your points are well stated and practical; I'd love to see more content like this from writers, as opposed to surface level criticism or needlessly complex obscurantism. You don't get bogged down in theory, but there's enough to give perspective. May I ask what tool you use to create the visual aids? I'm especially fond of them, and I've been looking for new styles to try out.
Great video - after a long break I have begun writing fiction again and needed something to jump-start my brain again, I have often avoided creative writing channels on youtube as I have found them a bit preachy, but yours I find very informative, clear and helpful where it needs to be and it has really helped me get back into the swing of things, so thank you for the great content!
Hmmm... I had hoped you would go a little more into detail about the difference between tropes (an immensely useful writing tool that saves you a lot of effort in creating interesting characters) and stereotypes (avoid at all costs). Interesting video though. I hope you do another video on this subject because it seems like there's a lot more to cover.
Rowan from A Stolen Throne. The story is about the King and the betrayal by his chief advisor. However, neither character could have come to their resolution had it not been for Rowan who counseled them both.
The concept you developed in this video was simple and insightful. Great for any aspiring writers. However, I always thought of Harry as a blank slate character -- one used so readers can put themselves in his shoes. I'd argue that Ron and Hermione are more complex characters. I'll elaborate: You have already mentioned Harry's struggles and backstory. These influence his actions and allow us to empathize with him. They also generate conflict and, therefore, tension in the story. Yet, all of these are never challenged by a character arc. Meaning that, by the end of the story in The Deathly Hallows, Harry is still the same character he was all the way back in The Philosopher's Stone. He grew up, sure. He has matured, yes. But, at the end of the day, have any of his struggles changed or shaped him in a different way? Does his decision-making differ from the first to the last novel? Except for some teenage tantrums along the way - which Rowling so accurately portrays -, the answer is no. (There are some inconsistencies I found jarring in book 7, but those is beyond the scope of this comment). Now let's compare it to Ron. His backstory and struggles are also simple. Enumerating them would be rather pointless since we only care about one; his insecurity. A flaw we see him carry on his shoulders throughout the saga until he finally confronts it, overcoming his flaw, and changing as a character. This makes Ron the more complex character because this flaw was getting in the way of his goals. Whereas Harry's struggles don't really hold him back from doing anything he sets out to. They are simply there as a requirement for the readers to empathize and relate to him, not to challenge him.
Thank you so much for your thoughtful comment! I agree with most of your analysis, but I would say that Harry's hero complex creates struggles for him throughout the series, mostly in the latter half. In _The Order of the Phoenix_, his desire to take control of the situation despite all warnings leads him to fall into one of Voldemort's traps and storm the Ministry of Magic. In _Half-Blood Prince_, he is similarly foolhardy in stalking Draco Malfoy. He possesses a heroism taken to the extreme at times, which lands him in sticky situations and contributes to his stubbornness. I don't think a character needs to overcome their flaws in order to be considered complex, but it's true that Harry's flaws aren't necessarily obstacles to his goals, although they do cause him to make mistakes.
A character being relatively static doesn't mean they lack complexity in my opinion. Other characters do have more dynamic arcs (Ron, Neville, Ginny, etc), but Harry's story simply didn't need it. I personally am very different from Harry as a person and always found myself begging him to think or listen or not be so hard on himself or say something/keep silent etc, he always shocked me with his sass, he had his own stance when it comes to personal conflict, he is a very complex character albeit subtly characterized.
Personally, my biggest problem as a writer is writing character personalities. What they do, what they say, how they say it. I tend to just blow it out of proportion until they’re walking cliches. The villains tend to be the only ones who don’t fall victim to this, and even then it’s not 100% full proof. Any advice would be appreciated.
Yes, it's hard not to turn characters in caricatures where they only have one defining quality. Adding a contradiction is a good way to make a character feel more three-dimensional. Fantasy author Brandon Sanderson has talked about how he's a bit of a contradiction as a Mormon who leans more to the left politically. You could try thinking about different people in your life and considering what makes them who they are. What are their professions, interests, and beliefs? How do they carry themselves? What is their default emotion? Does anything about them seem contradictory? While it's usually not a good idea to base characters on real-life people, you can always steal one or two specific qualities from those you know, to give your characters depth. It also might be helpful to write a few short scenes where you put your character in a conflict just for practice. Let them walk in on a drug deal, or run into their love interest at the worst possible time. It doesn't need to be a scene that goes into the story; it's simply a way for you to get to know them better. Keep writing! :)
I feel like Harry Potter is known for its simple trope-like characters with little depth because of so much focus on plot, but then again I’ve only watched the movies
The movies do an excellent job of making the world of HP come to life, and the music and visuals are stunning, but in regards to character and plot they fall short. The books achieve much more in those regards.
Its funny that according to the pyramid you used to illustrate character complexity the main character (Harry Potter) should be the most complex of all, but that's not really true. Most protagonists (especialy those of kids stories) are kinda the same, they're easy to understand. The most complex and intriguing characters usually are secondary (anti-heros like Severus Snape). I believe protagonists are more "flat" because the audience needs to get along and root for them, while secondary characters have more room for creative freedom as the author may take more risks since the audience isn't supposed to like them as much as the main hero.
Ellie bertanya kepada David "David kenapa anak-anak selalu menjadi korban penculikan?". Kata David "Itu karena anak-anak itu masih kecil dan mudah diancam dan diperlakukan oleh orang dewasa". Ellie kaget dan bilang "Wah.. itu berartinya menjadi anak itu tidak mudah dan tidak aman ya.., aku merasa kecewa david!". Lalu David berkata "Ellie.., itu tidak berartinya menjadi anak itu aman atau tidak aman. Semua itu terkandung dari lingkungan dan kondisi keamanan di setiap kota-kota masing-masing Ellie.., Kamu atau orang lain pun bisa melapor jika mereka punya masalah atau diserang oleh penjahat atau siapapun juga".
Requesting an update/follow-up/part 2 on this topic please, with another author as example? Pretty sure a lot of writers out there would appreciate it.
Harry a guy idolized by others who swings in mood an heroism, Hermione a girl who avoids conflict but capable of kicking ass while making them feel good about themselves and Ron a dude who downplays himself aspiring for another one's acceptance and impress them in the way. How else would've the story ended? Gosh. M.S Rowling knows what's up.
When I'm making characters, should I create them knowing how important to the story they will be? Do I essentially decide that I want X amount of major characters and Y amount of minor characters and so on? Because like... I have been trying to dive into the personal connections of any random guard or worker that my MC stubbles across in the story. It hasn't made many results yet mostly because I keep trying to force random information into the book about characters that don't really mean much to the story or plot in general.
Ask yourself; Does this character contribute any relevance to the story? Think of how you’ll introduce them. Think of it’ll be natural for them to leave the scene. If you’re trying to flesh out the security guard, I wouldn’t worry about adding characters onto the cast. If you are trying to connect the MC and Security Guard together by a mutual person, see if any of MC’s friends, family members, could of, and lump that trait and scene into that person’s POV. Otherwise, if these workers and security guards are not major plot builders- etc. minor characters, I would honestly say, don’t worry about their past. The reader does not care, as long as their dialogue and mannerisms is enjoyable or relatable to read. It hurts my heart to say that- especially when we writers spend forever making a backstory for all characters, but as readers we want the destination, not the small details for an unimportant character. Also- I don’t know much about cast building. If you need your scene to be spiced up or your outline needs something to happen and the other characters can’t do it, then I find it perfectly fine to throw in a new character, as long as they come in naturally and serve some use in the plot. Btw, the use doesn’t have to be astronomical. It could be legit- “Minor character trips and causes your character to meet their assassin, by causing your MC to look around.”
I agree with primaverala's comments here. I think limiting yourself to a certain number of major characters is a good idea, but the rest will likely pop up organically, unplanned. As you're writing, the characters' level of importance will become clearer. If a guard is in a lot of scenes, you'll want to characterize them more, and you'll have more time to do so. If it's a short one-time interaction, they really only need a single defining quality, whether it's their booming voice or their clumsiness. The more you reveal about a character, the more important the reader assumes they'll be to the story. Rowling gives Winky the house elf lots of attention in "The Goblet of Fire," which underscores her importance to the plot; if she's taken out of the story, it no longer works. (This isn't true in the reverse, though, as you can characterize a person very little and have them be a key player later on, as with Dumbledore's brother.) Sometimes background characters reveal more about the *world* than they do the individual, like a guard blindly following orders (showing this is a totalitarian society where the government is always obeyed) or a worker assuming the protagonist is a thief (showing that region is prone to thieves and thus citizens are wary rather than welcoming of strangers). Hope that helps!
I think they can change over the creative process ☺ one of my characters started out basically as nothing more than the supportive friend and comic relief, but as I continued outlining and developing the story she's turned into the main antagonist in the last book 🤗❤ You never really know until the end (at least I dont, hehehe 😅😁)
i think this is a great video and it's got me thinking but I have to disagree about Harry himself. I think he's one of the blandest characters in the books. He has a very well developed backstory but being an orphan who misses his parents isn't personality, it's just background. What depth he does have comes from a) his occasional temper and moments of impulsivity b) when you realise there's a degree of truth to Malfoy's and Snape's suggestion that he's "saint potter" who strutts about the place, showing everyone else up and c) what you can either see as his arrogant righteousness to pry into others lives and meddle, or his sense of duty to try and prevent bad things happening to the school. Aside from that, he's quite lacking in personality, which isn't necessarily a criticism because Ron and Hermione fill that role perfectly with their ongoing rivalries of lazy slob vs uppity nerd: giving Harry a chance to take up the role of mediator between them
I've heard other readers say Harry feels bland to them as well, which is an interesting paradox to me. Everything you've outlined suggests to me that he DOES have a strong personality. His hero complex is his defining trait, both his greatest strength and greatest weakness. He's a highly active character in how he's gone off on the Dursleys on several occasions and driven the plot by sneaking around and diving into dangerous situations to save people. He has flaws in the form of his hero complex and his inability to think of intelligent solutions; he procrastinated on the second task in "The Goblet of Fire" and would've failed if someone else hadn't helped him. He's awkward around girls; he fights with Ron; he ignores Hermione's good advice. His achievements and mistakes give me a clear picture of a person. I wonder if that says something about our desire to read stories about people who aren't the "norm." I feel plenty of people in the real world lack personality, based on our standards for fictional characters. It's the idea that ordinary people don't make good protagonists because we want to follow someone who has bigger room for growth or who's going to react to a situation in a more emotional way (whereas Harry's emotional responses don't surprise us because they're often the most expected ones). I'm forever wrestling with that question of "What makes a character interesting?" I really appreciate your thought-provoking analysis!
@@QuotidianWriter well reading my comment again, and seeing what you've just put, I'm going to concede that you're probably right. It is an interesting dynamic to have a hero who struggles with a hero complex and if I think about his friendships with Ron and Hermione, you sort of see something in their of his struggle between wanting to enjoy his childhood/adolesence (Ron) and wanting to do well (Hermione). Nonetheless, he clearly felt bland to me until I thought more about it, so there must be somewhere that that feeling stems from and I think it's pretty much because the hero with dead parents is a bit of a cliché. I don't think it was a cliché at the time; Harry might not be the original but he is the iconic hero with dead parents, so maybe when I first read the books, I felt invested in that whole dynamic. Looking back now though, after it's been copied hundreds of times and formed into a cliché, it is harder to be invested. I might be wrong but I reckon that's why he can feel bland to me, which is a shame, because I think you're right: he isn't actually bland at all. The "what makes a character interesting" question is a good point too. I'd agree we probably do want characters outside the ordinarr life so have more space to grow. I guess one of the difficulties with reality is that a lot of us get stuck in its mundaneness and maybe become resistant to change or growth of any kind. I'd imagine having characters in stories that we can see grow offers a nice escape from our own monotony...maybe it reminds us/gives us hope that we too can grow and change as well? Equally though, I think we do want chatacters who are relatable and who have struggles we understand. Maybe the difference is that the hero overcomes the struggles whereas most of us are still in an incredibly long process of overcoming? I don't know if any of that's right, it's just a great question and that's my attempt at answering it.
@@blimeyjoe253 As I said before, a lot of other readers have felt Harry was bland, so you're not alone! There must be something causing that feeling. Maybe his dialogue isn't distinctive enough, or his thoughts seem straightforward and rarely contradictory, unlike in real life. Harry can be a quiet character at times, and dialogue is how we get to know characters better. That's true about the orphan archetype now feeling like a cliché, even if it wasn't too overdone when the book was published. I think you're onto something with that idea of us wanting to escape our own monotony. It could be that Harry's struggles are hard to understand, since not many of us have the burden of being too famous and feeling like we need to rescue everyone. Like you pointed out, Ron and Hermione's struggles are much more relatable and represent two extremes. Feeling inferior to others (particularly siblings) and caring more about school/social justice than most people are easier emotions to identify with than what Harry goes through.
"ABOUT JENNA" STORY : Jenna was kidnapped and forced to become an prostitue by the sex offenders and gangsters, which is Jenna feel so anxiety and concern. But she's also try to be brave, strong, and not scared of the sex offenders, because sex offenders knew that they are coward people. Most all of the victims are teenage girls and young female adults. Jenna is also socialized with the gangsters to find a way to escape from the prostitution place. But she's also wants to help, rescue, and free up the other prostitue girls at the bar, by doing something in the smart way. To distract, beat, and defend the gangsters.
Its sucks that JK went all crazy after the original seven. She eventually became the villain of her own writing. But her techniques in the originals were great. Great video, good study.
The Word of God pronunciation is "Voldemore," because it's French, but I don't think even Rowling herself pronounces it that way, haha. I just didn't want to get dinged for saying it with a "t"!
Keep strong. Dont forget that despite the evil in this world, God is full of justice, mercy and love. Justice said we broke His perfect law - causing the world's previous perfection to be destroyed - and therefore we deserve Hell (like a punishment in any legal system but this is eternal as His perfect law is eternal too). Don't think you fit in that category? Ever done one of these?: lying, stealing - regardless of how small the object EVER, hating others - which is murder in God's perfect law, lusting (plus God sees our entire thought life). Justice says "the soul that sins shall die" - if we break one in thought/word/deed it's as if we're guilty of all of them. Quite simply, living by the law (which is doing everything perfectly) is impossible for sinful humans . The law shows us that 1. We will die in Hell if we fail to follow it and 2. We cannot save ourselves BUT, 3. God's perfect, immovable law points us to Christ, who followed and fulfilled the law in thought, word and deed perfectly in our place. He did what we couldn't and did it on our behalf. He was then sentenced to death on a cross, and took our personal punishment for our sin, paying our penalty (like paying our fine) completely FOR us, and has given us freedom. If we turn from the sins we have committed and repent (pursue the opposite direction of love through Christ) He will, overtime, recreate us into His image through The Holy Spirit which Jesus sends to all who accept Him as their personal Lord and Savior of their life. We cannot purify ourselves, but Christ lived that perfect sinless, pure life and then allotted it to our "account". That's where our righteousness comes from. Not from any good, works that you or I could do. It is not based on the amount of good works we do. God starts the changes, He carries it on, and He completes it in those who let Him. It's about letting Christ in to guide and teach you and obeying Him, again, through His power and instruction). He is our substitute in His life, death and resurrection. He essentially rewrote history in our place so that, if you believe in Him, it will be as if YOU had never sinned if you accept Christ's death as our own in our place. He is in Heaven right now preparing a place for us so that He can take His faithful, believing children home with Him when He returns. He will ressurrect us from death when He returns, giving mercy to those who accept His love, forgiveness, instruction and teachings in their life, and give justice to those who refuse it. He doesn't want ANY of us to go to Hell and die for continuing in evil and rejecting His way to life, thats why He died FOR us. Hes giving EVERYONE a chance, He wants everyone to take the free gift of salvation from Hell. He wants us to be His and begin to follow His life of love and service through His power and abiding (staying) with Him. So long as we keep our hearts near to Christ through His strength, strive to follow His will of perfect love revealed in the Bible, and let Him lead in the midst of (very certain) pitfalls and struggles, we will, in time, win the ultimate victory over sin, pain and DEATH through Christ. Even if you are willing to be made willing, pray for Jesus to come in and He will do what we can't. Give us The Holy Spirit who will guide us in the right way. NOTE: You are NEVER too sinful or messed up that God cannot turn your life around through Jesus. EVER If you have any questions let me know
*Ik I've written a para but I find it necessary to explain stuff to you, also either read this through and reply or don't reply at all* : Im sorry sir but what the heck do you mean? Have you read Tolkien? Have you read Harry Potter? What part did she copy? How old are you? If you reply with, Trolls, vampires, wizards etc know that these are elements of folklore that extend back centuries and were not created by tolkien. Harry Potter and Tolkiens books gave entirely different plots, characters etc and the descriptions in JKs works are far better (even die hard Tolkien fans would agree on this) There is not a single character that is similar in both books save perhaps Dumbledore and Gandalf and even THEN its just a basic similarity with both being wise and powerful and funny wizards. I request you kindly delete or edit your offensive comment as it insults not just The Wizarding World and Middle-Earth and the (post-mortem or otherwise) intellectual hard work and dedication of their respective authors AND this content creator. Have a good year =)
It's very easy to write like her. All you have to do is go to the Internet, find a book that was written MANY years ago and STEAL it as she did. Not too many people know that Harry Potter was originally a book printed back in the 40's called The Wizard's School. She stole it, renamed characters and changed a couple of things then called it Harry Potter. The family of the original author took her to court. They HAD the ORIGINAL manuscript to show the court but since she was doing the judge, he sided with her. She's a thief and a plagiarist.
Do you have any evidence? Name of the author? The book? If you're referring to Willy the Wizard, it was a 36 page manuscript, not 7 books and it wasn't about a boarding school. Does it have influences from the likes of T. H White, Sir Terry Pratchett, Ursula K Le Guin,J R R Tolkien, C. S Lewis, Tom Brown's school days, Neil Gaiman ? Yes However all the similarities are mostly superficial . It's not completely original of course,but referring it as a case of plagiarism given the evidence would be utterly ridiculous. Don't get me wrong,I don't like her since her Twittermania and unasked editions . And her recent behaviour has urged me never to financially promote or support her.. ever. She has 999999... 9 problems ,but writing ain't one of them . She is a good writer and her world building is fantastic, however she maybe in real life ,or whatever she has vocally openly become
Hi there, viewers! You can read an adapted text version of this video on Medium: medium.com/@quotidianwriter/writing-like-j-k-rowling-character-complexity-d86053e7c754
Excellent analysis! Thank you!!
The Flying Car in Harry potter and the Chamber of Secrets had some character
+++
true
There's one aspect of Rowling's character development technique that I fundamentally disagree with. I call it "first impression syndrome", where (with a few rare exceptions), the protagonist has a first impression about a character, and they're almost always right. You can give your minor characters a lot of life just by omitting this.
That's why Dumbledore and Snape are the best characters of the saga. They are the ones who break that rule.
Yeah, i really liked the beginning of The Good Doctor for this reason. They did a marvelous job of subverting expectations
@@cristobalsantelicesestades4096Ginny breaks this rule too. So does Hermione and Neville and Dudley.
10 points to Ravenclaw!
Nikhil Kannan Kutty 800 points apiece to SLITHERIN.
100000 points to Gryffindor 🤟😁
I really hope this channel become bigger. Your content is amazing. Your narration is clear, direct and very informative.
I was about to quit writing, but this channel lit my inspiration/motivation once again.
Thank you so much! Your kind words mean a lot to me. Why were you about to quit writing, if you don't mind me asking?
If you don't mind reading ^-^
I had this fantasy world in my head a long time ago. After a while trying to write alone, I begun co-writing with a friend (using my world as background), but it didin't work and we decided to go separated ways. During this time, a lot of what I imagined was forcebly adapted, losing the "original essence".
I tried to rebuild the shattered little pieces of my story, but my mind became stuned because of how much everything changed and the plot lost sense. The cheer of writing kinda vanished. Personal problems and routine took my motivation away, and to concentrate became an impossible task.
Last week I discovered your channel, and it reminded me how much I love my characters, my world. Lack of concentration is still an issue, but your content gave me both the basis and the motivation needed to start over again, and for that I'm grateful.
By the way, "whatever you do, keep writing" is a great quote!
Of course I love reading! ;) Co-writing can be super productive, but it’s hard to find a dedicated long-term partner. Disorganization is a huge cause of writer’s block for me. For my main WIP, I had over fifty pages in miscellaneous notes-snippets of dialogue, world-building details, important plot points. While writing, I’d forget about all the things I wanted to add. It was a horrible mess. More recently, I’ve tried to organize my notes by chapter or category in One Note, and that has helped with mental clarity.
To get the gears churning again, you could try summarizing. Set a timer for an hour and just start describing how your story opens in full sentences. Write as if you’re talking aloud and explaining the story to someone who has never read it, providing only the detail needed for your pretend listener to understand the characters and plot.
If you’re editing a draft of the story itself, save the older versions of your work. Whenever I’m about to make major revisions to my draft or summary, I rename the file V1, V2, etc. That way, you can mercilessly cut things in the new version without worrying about actually losing anything. Remember that nothing in your story is ever set in stone. You have the power to change things and take other paths. In one spot of my WIP, I wrote and trashed at least seven completely different versions of a scene until I found the one that clicked into place. Pick a path and let yourself move forward with the knowledge that you’ll inevitably go back and remodel it.
If you enjoy writing RUclips channels in general, I recommend Vivien Reis and Jenna Moreci’s channels. Their videos are great ways to start off a writing session, although sometimes they can lead to binge-watching and further procrastination, haha.
Thank you again for watching. I wanted to have a catchy slogan, and some years ago I internalized a quote from Neil Gaiman: “You want to be a writer? Keep writing.”
I totally relate with having tons of world-building details. The idea of creating different versions for revision is something that I definetly will implement (it would've save me a lot of trouble in the past).
Thanks a lot for this .. I exaggerated with a minor character and ended up writing more about him than I had about the protagonist. Now I am going to summarize. Most of my writing is internal dialogue with not much speaking between characters but at least it reads well.
I love the Boa Constrictor. I wish it had shown up again, like maybe it followed Harry home and he hid it from the Dursleys and then took it to school with him as a pet. It would have been interesting to see Harry use Parseltougne for fun on occasion. And the snake could have eaten Aunt Marge's dog in book three.
YES
i wish the Boa Constrictor was Harry’s pet along with Hedwidge.
@@tuopsy or his secret aid troughout the book, bc they have a deep equal to equal friendship relationship which would increase reader's attachment
I am so impressed how you pronounced Voldemorts name as Voldemor (like in French and as JK Rowling preferred) :) good video thanks so much!
I don't want to do anything Like Rowling so I'm pronouncing it Voldemort
@@bisexualblueberry LOL also why i mispronounce her name
My favorite background character so far in my plot is frank, an airline employee that assissts the antagonist, who is in a wheelchair, on board a plane in one scene. Frank makes breif conversation with the antagonist, asking where he's headed and for what purpose. In this short exchange, the antagonist eludes to his ultimate plans that unfold in the end of the story. His answer to Frank is different than the one he gives the protagonist, when she asks him the same questions. But the conversation with Frank is so vague and the situation plays out so fast, the reader should barely notice it, unless they remember Frank at the end, and think "WAIT A SECOND." At which point, that guy on that one page becomes the tool that foreshadowed tragedy, because of other verbal hints that the antagonist accidentally drops to other characters.
The scene at 3:25 with Dudley was soooo good in the book!! It makes me so mad they left it out!! This editing is really good!
How interesting to put this whole understanding in a triangle. It makes the whole thing surprisingly simple. I like that.
Your voice is soothing and makes me instantly relaxed. Thank you!!!
I really liked this video, you explained the different tiers really well, so even someone who hadn't read the books - like me - could understand what you were trying to say.
And I think that's what a reader would see in a well written story. But as an author, I like to know as much of my characters as I possibly can - to be fair, my stories tend to be very character-driven - so I'll always portray them accurately and consistently, even if they're just minor characters.
Maybe that's just me though... or maybe that's a strong indication, giving away my character-centric style of story-telling...
I admit, as an aspiring writer, I tend to write my books more character driven then plot driven.
I personally prefer showing not explaining, instead of giving a whole chunk of info, I would sprinkle them but in many many ways, sometimes describing, sometimes the character lets something slip, sometimes how he is perceived, etc etc
The different tiers concept really helps me contextualize character roles in my story. I appreciate the advice!
An American who calls the first HP book "The Philosopher's Stone"? Wow.
Yep, America is stupid and we fear "black magic" cause it's a bad influence on children or something. It happens with a lot of things.
Here's why, I googled this and found this explanation: Why was the title of the first Harry Potter film changed from "Philosopher's Stone" to "Sorcerer's Stone" for American viewers? (It makes sense to me. It's just marketing to a different audience.)
The title of the movie was changed to "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" because the book's name was also changed to this. JK Rowling agreed to change the title of the book from "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone" to "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" because the publishers thought that American readers wouldn't pick up a book called "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone" because they would associate the word Philosopher with some old, boring guy and not with magic. The word Sorcerer brings magis to mind for American children.
Marcus Vee It also says that JK Rowling later regretted changing the name as she said that she should have stuck to her guns. Little did she know, in the beginning, how well loved her books would become, on a worldwide scale, and the title was really quite insignificant in hind sight.
It actually was the "Philosopher's Stone" before the "Sorcerer's Stone"
Thassa me too 👌🏾
Really appreciate this in depth study of a popular work! Your points are well stated and practical; I'd love to see more content like this from writers, as opposed to surface level criticism or needlessly complex obscurantism. You don't get bogged down in theory, but there's enough to give perspective.
May I ask what tool you use to create the visual aids? I'm especially fond of them, and I've been looking for new styles to try out.
Thank you for your kind words! I use Apple Keynote, which has some nice animation and transition features that are very intuitive.
Great video - after a long break I have begun writing fiction again and needed something to jump-start my brain again, I have often avoided creative writing channels on youtube as I have found them a bit preachy, but yours I find very informative, clear and helpful where it needs to be and it has really helped me get back into the swing of things, so thank you for the great content!
Hmmm... I had hoped you would go a little more into detail about the difference between tropes (an immensely useful writing tool that saves you a lot of effort in creating interesting characters) and stereotypes (avoid at all costs). Interesting video though. I hope you do another video on this subject because it seems like there's a lot more to cover.
This deserves more attention. Great content!
Thank you so much for this! I have been struggling writing characters, but I think this helps! XD
Rowan from A Stolen Throne. The story is about the King and the betrayal by his chief advisor. However, neither character could have come to their resolution had it not been for Rowan who counseled them both.
What
My favourite background character is Seamus Finnigan
Great and informative 🙌🏾🙌🏾 definitely going over my story again to look at it like this
The vampire that Hagrid gets in a bar fight with in Minsk, or the witch from Bath who started reading a book and could never stop.
This is so interesting! So glad i stumbled upon this channel.
Thanks n have a great day.
Nice video the music alone made me think deeper
The concept you developed in this video was simple and insightful. Great for any aspiring writers. However, I always thought of Harry as a blank slate character -- one used so readers can put themselves in his shoes. I'd argue that Ron and Hermione are more complex characters.
I'll elaborate: You have already mentioned Harry's struggles and backstory. These influence his actions and allow us to empathize with him. They also generate conflict and, therefore, tension in the story. Yet, all of these are never challenged by a character arc. Meaning that, by the end of the story in The Deathly Hallows, Harry is still the same character he was all the way back in The Philosopher's Stone. He grew up, sure. He has matured, yes. But, at the end of the day, have any of his struggles changed or shaped him in a different way? Does his decision-making differ from the first to the last novel? Except for some teenage tantrums along the way - which Rowling so accurately portrays -, the answer is no. (There are some inconsistencies I found jarring in book 7, but those is beyond the scope of this comment).
Now let's compare it to Ron. His backstory and struggles are also simple. Enumerating them would be rather pointless since we only care about one; his insecurity. A flaw we see him carry on his shoulders throughout the saga until he finally confronts it, overcoming his flaw, and changing as a character.
This makes Ron the more complex character because this flaw was getting in the way of his goals. Whereas Harry's struggles don't really hold him back from doing anything he sets out to. They are simply there as a requirement for the readers to empathize and relate to him, not to challenge him.
Thank you so much for your thoughtful comment! I agree with most of your analysis, but I would say that Harry's hero complex creates struggles for him throughout the series, mostly in the latter half. In _The Order of the Phoenix_, his desire to take control of the situation despite all warnings leads him to fall into one of Voldemort's traps and storm the Ministry of Magic. In _Half-Blood Prince_, he is similarly foolhardy in stalking Draco Malfoy. He possesses a heroism taken to the extreme at times, which lands him in sticky situations and contributes to his stubbornness. I don't think a character needs to overcome their flaws in order to be considered complex, but it's true that Harry's flaws aren't necessarily obstacles to his goals, although they do cause him to make mistakes.
A character being relatively static doesn't mean they lack complexity in my opinion. Other characters do have more dynamic arcs (Ron, Neville, Ginny, etc), but Harry's story simply didn't need it. I personally am very different from Harry as a person and always found myself begging him to think or listen or not be so hard on himself or say something/keep silent etc, he always shocked me with his sass, he had his own stance when it comes to personal conflict, he is a very complex character albeit subtly characterized.
Very informative! Favorite minor character ~ Stan Shunpike.
You may not like the tree, Minister, but you can't deny it-the Whomping Willow IS a character.
I like the merchant at the beginning of Aladdin (1992)
Characters so complex they can change ethnicity at will.
lol
- chuckles -
A character so complex, they can do anything well, while still in their 20's.
Thank you for the video❤
This is such a fantastic channel. Thank you.
Personally, my biggest problem as a writer is writing character personalities. What they do, what they say, how they say it. I tend to just blow it out of proportion until they’re walking cliches. The villains tend to be the only ones who don’t fall victim to this, and even then it’s not 100% full proof. Any advice would be appreciated.
Yes, it's hard not to turn characters in caricatures where they only have one defining quality. Adding a contradiction is a good way to make a character feel more three-dimensional. Fantasy author Brandon Sanderson has talked about how he's a bit of a contradiction as a Mormon who leans more to the left politically.
You could try thinking about different people in your life and considering what makes them who they are. What are their professions, interests, and beliefs? How do they carry themselves? What is their default emotion? Does anything about them seem contradictory? While it's usually not a good idea to base characters on real-life people, you can always steal one or two specific qualities from those you know, to give your characters depth.
It also might be helpful to write a few short scenes where you put your character in a conflict just for practice. Let them walk in on a drug deal, or run into their love interest at the worst possible time. It doesn't need to be a scene that goes into the story; it's simply a way for you to get to know them better. Keep writing! :)
I need more videos like this please!!!!
Great content! Thank you.👍🏻😁😁📚📚📚📚
She really did that to Seamus 😭😂
your voice is sooooo relaxing oh my gosh
I feel like Harry Potter is known for its simple trope-like characters with little depth because of so much focus on plot, but then again I’ve only watched the movies
The movies do an excellent job of making the world of HP come to life, and the music and visuals are stunning, but in regards to character and plot they fall short. The books achieve much more in those regards.
Well that explains it. You only watched the movies. The books are very different and infinitely better.
I personally like the patil twins as background characters
Thank You.❤
Can you do this type of video for George RR Martin's Game of Thrones.
Great Video!
I think Percy weasley had a very interesting character arc for a minor character.
I love this video so much! 💙
Everything has a purpose in a story.
FACTS
Its funny that according to the pyramid you used to illustrate character complexity the main character (Harry Potter) should be the most complex of all, but that's not really true. Most protagonists (especialy those of kids stories) are kinda the same, they're easy to understand. The most complex and intriguing characters usually are secondary (anti-heros like Severus Snape).
I believe protagonists are more "flat" because the audience needs to get along and root for them, while secondary characters have more room for creative freedom as the author may take more risks since the audience isn't supposed to like them as much as the main hero.
Ellie bertanya kepada David
"David kenapa anak-anak selalu menjadi korban penculikan?".
Kata David "Itu karena anak-anak itu masih kecil dan mudah diancam dan diperlakukan oleh orang dewasa".
Ellie kaget dan bilang "Wah.. itu berartinya menjadi anak itu tidak mudah dan tidak aman ya.., aku merasa kecewa david!".
Lalu David berkata "Ellie.., itu tidak berartinya menjadi anak itu aman atau tidak aman. Semua itu terkandung dari lingkungan dan kondisi keamanan di setiap kota-kota masing-masing Ellie.., Kamu atau orang lain pun bisa melapor jika mereka punya masalah atau diserang oleh penjahat atau siapapun juga".
Requesting an update/follow-up/part 2 on this topic please, with another author as example? Pretty sure a lot of writers out there would appreciate it.
Harry a guy idolized by others who swings in mood an heroism, Hermione a girl who avoids conflict but capable of kicking ass while making them feel good about themselves and Ron a dude who downplays himself aspiring for another one's acceptance and impress them in the way.
How else would've the story ended? Gosh. M.S Rowling knows what's up.
When I'm making characters, should I create them knowing how important to the story they will be? Do I essentially decide that I want X amount of major characters and Y amount of minor characters and so on? Because like... I have been trying to dive into the personal connections of any random guard or worker that my MC stubbles across in the story. It hasn't made many results yet mostly because I keep trying to force random information into the book about characters that don't really mean much to the story or plot in general.
Ask yourself; Does this character contribute any relevance to the story? Think of how you’ll introduce them. Think of it’ll be natural for them to leave the scene. If you’re trying to flesh out the security guard, I wouldn’t worry about adding characters onto the cast. If you are trying to connect the MC and Security Guard together by a mutual person, see if any of MC’s friends, family members, could of, and lump that trait and scene into that person’s POV.
Otherwise, if these workers and security guards are not major plot builders- etc. minor characters, I would honestly say, don’t worry about their past. The reader does not care, as long as their dialogue and mannerisms is enjoyable or relatable to read. It hurts my heart to say that- especially when we writers spend forever making a backstory for all characters, but as readers we want the destination, not the small details for an unimportant character.
Also- I don’t know much about cast building. If you need your scene to be spiced up or your outline needs something to happen and the other characters can’t do it, then I find it perfectly fine to throw in a new character, as long as they come in naturally and serve some use in the plot.
Btw, the use doesn’t have to be astronomical. It could be legit- “Minor character trips and causes your character to meet their assassin, by causing your MC to look around.”
I agree with primaverala's comments here. I think limiting yourself to a certain number of major characters is a good idea, but the rest will likely pop up organically, unplanned. As you're writing, the characters' level of importance will become clearer. If a guard is in a lot of scenes, you'll want to characterize them more, and you'll have more time to do so. If it's a short one-time interaction, they really only need a single defining quality, whether it's their booming voice or their clumsiness.
The more you reveal about a character, the more important the reader assumes they'll be to the story. Rowling gives Winky the house elf lots of attention in "The Goblet of Fire," which underscores her importance to the plot; if she's taken out of the story, it no longer works. (This isn't true in the reverse, though, as you can characterize a person very little and have them be a key player later on, as with Dumbledore's brother.)
Sometimes background characters reveal more about the *world* than they do the individual, like a guard blindly following orders (showing this is a totalitarian society where the government is always obeyed) or a worker assuming the protagonist is a thief (showing that region is prone to thieves and thus citizens are wary rather than welcoming of strangers). Hope that helps!
I think they can change over the creative process ☺ one of my characters started out basically as nothing more than the supportive friend and comic relief, but as I continued outlining and developing the story she's turned into the main antagonist in the last book 🤗❤
You never really know until the end (at least I dont, hehehe 😅😁)
i think this is a great video and it's got me thinking but I have to disagree about Harry himself. I think he's one of the blandest characters in the books. He has a very well developed backstory but being an orphan who misses his parents isn't personality, it's just background. What depth he does have comes from a) his occasional temper and moments of impulsivity b) when you realise there's a degree of truth to Malfoy's and Snape's suggestion that he's "saint potter" who strutts about the place, showing everyone else up and c) what you can either see as his arrogant righteousness to pry into others lives and meddle, or his sense of duty to try and prevent bad things happening to the school.
Aside from that, he's quite lacking in personality, which isn't necessarily a criticism because Ron and Hermione fill that role perfectly with their ongoing rivalries of lazy slob vs uppity nerd: giving Harry a chance to take up the role of mediator between them
I've heard other readers say Harry feels bland to them as well, which is an interesting paradox to me. Everything you've outlined suggests to me that he DOES have a strong personality. His hero complex is his defining trait, both his greatest strength and greatest weakness. He's a highly active character in how he's gone off on the Dursleys on several occasions and driven the plot by sneaking around and diving into dangerous situations to save people. He has flaws in the form of his hero complex and his inability to think of intelligent solutions; he procrastinated on the second task in "The Goblet of Fire" and would've failed if someone else hadn't helped him. He's awkward around girls; he fights with Ron; he ignores Hermione's good advice. His achievements and mistakes give me a clear picture of a person.
I wonder if that says something about our desire to read stories about people who aren't the "norm." I feel plenty of people in the real world lack personality, based on our standards for fictional characters. It's the idea that ordinary people don't make good protagonists because we want to follow someone who has bigger room for growth or who's going to react to a situation in a more emotional way (whereas Harry's emotional responses don't surprise us because they're often the most expected ones). I'm forever wrestling with that question of "What makes a character interesting?" I really appreciate your thought-provoking analysis!
@@QuotidianWriter well reading my comment again, and seeing what you've just put, I'm going to concede that you're probably right. It is an interesting dynamic to have a hero who struggles with a hero complex and if I think about his friendships with Ron and Hermione, you sort of see something in their of his struggle between wanting to enjoy his childhood/adolesence (Ron) and wanting to do well (Hermione).
Nonetheless, he clearly felt bland to me until I thought more about it, so there must be somewhere that that feeling stems from and I think it's pretty much because the hero with dead parents is a bit of a cliché. I don't think it was a cliché at the time; Harry might not be the original but he is the iconic hero with dead parents, so maybe when I first read the books, I felt invested in that whole dynamic. Looking back now though, after it's been copied hundreds of times and formed into a cliché, it is harder to be invested. I might be wrong but I reckon that's why he can feel bland to me, which is a shame, because I think you're right: he isn't actually bland at all.
The "what makes a character interesting" question is a good point too. I'd agree we probably do want characters outside the ordinarr life so have more space to grow. I guess one of the difficulties with reality is that a lot of us get stuck in its mundaneness and maybe become resistant to change or growth of any kind. I'd imagine having characters in stories that we can see grow offers a nice escape from our own monotony...maybe it reminds us/gives us hope that we too can grow and change as well?
Equally though, I think we do want chatacters who are relatable and who have struggles we understand. Maybe the difference is that the hero overcomes the struggles whereas most of us are still in an incredibly long process of overcoming? I don't know if any of that's right, it's just a great question and that's my attempt at answering it.
@@blimeyjoe253 As I said before, a lot of other readers have felt Harry was bland, so you're not alone! There must be something causing that feeling. Maybe his dialogue isn't distinctive enough, or his thoughts seem straightforward and rarely contradictory, unlike in real life. Harry can be a quiet character at times, and dialogue is how we get to know characters better. That's true about the orphan archetype now feeling like a cliché, even if it wasn't too overdone when the book was published.
I think you're onto something with that idea of us wanting to escape our own monotony. It could be that Harry's struggles are hard to understand, since not many of us have the burden of being too famous and feeling like we need to rescue everyone. Like you pointed out, Ron and Hermione's struggles are much more relatable and represent two extremes. Feeling inferior to others (particularly siblings) and caring more about school/social justice than most people are easier emotions to identify with than what Harry goes through.
you pronouncing Voldemort the way it was meant to be was so soothing.
"ABOUT JENNA" STORY :
Jenna was kidnapped and forced to become an prostitue by the sex offenders and gangsters, which is Jenna feel so anxiety and concern. But she's also try to be brave, strong, and not scared of the sex offenders, because sex offenders knew that they are coward people. Most all of the victims are teenage girls and young female adults. Jenna is also socialized with the gangsters to find a way to escape from the prostitution place. But she's also wants to help, rescue, and free up the other prostitue girls at the bar, by doing something in the smart way. To distract, beat, and defend the gangsters.
Dudley Dursley decided to learn to play chess after regretted for bullying Harry
Golden comment.
Some people think that the snake he released was nagini
I've heard that theory, too! I'm not sure if the timelines match up, though.
Voldemort made that horcrux in the goblet of fire after killing Bertha jorkins or whatever her name was.
And yes it was that snake only
Carrie Kalumbula JKR has confirmed that since some time 😊
Its sucks that JK went all crazy after the original seven. She eventually became the villain of her own writing. But her techniques in the originals were great. Great video, good study.
Hat
💯
DVDs Movies and Fiction Books
💓💓💓💓💓
Don't forget to retcon stuff that isn't necessary years after the series has ended
Hey, could you read my work? Or you don't normally read screenplays from random people?
I wanna actually write my main character well, though.
LOL. "Write Better Than J.K. Rowling."
The Hippogriff🙂
eriseD|Desire
poor snake, she/he was rather put into captivity again or shoot it down u.u
At least he had a taste of freedom.
this is great but you do know its VoldemorT right? Not Voldemore
It's VoldemorE. Ask j.k
The Word of God pronunciation is "Voldemore," because it's French, but I don't think even Rowling herself pronounces it that way, haha. I just didn't want to get dinged for saying it with a "t"!
You do know, Ryan, Voldemort is a french word right? Therefore you don't pronounce the "t" at the end . . . Diane is absolutely right . . .
Clickbait, they're not gay
Albus Dumbledore
No, just the main ones.
Keep strong. Dont forget that despite the evil in this world, God is full of justice, mercy and love.
Justice said we broke His perfect law - causing the world's previous perfection to be destroyed - and therefore we deserve Hell (like a punishment in any legal system but this is eternal as His perfect law is eternal too). Don't think you fit in that category? Ever done one of these?: lying, stealing - regardless of how small the object EVER, hating others - which is murder in God's perfect law, lusting (plus God sees our entire thought life). Justice says "the soul that sins shall die" - if we break one in thought/word/deed it's as if we're guilty of all of them. Quite simply, living by the law (which is doing everything perfectly) is impossible for sinful humans
. The law shows us that 1. We will die in Hell if we fail to follow it and 2. We cannot save ourselves BUT, 3. God's perfect, immovable law points us to Christ, who followed and fulfilled the law in thought, word and deed perfectly in our place. He did what we couldn't and did it on our behalf. He was then sentenced to death on a cross, and took our personal punishment for our sin, paying our penalty (like paying our fine) completely FOR us, and has given us freedom.
If we turn from the sins we have committed and repent (pursue the opposite direction of love through Christ) He will, overtime, recreate us into His image through The Holy Spirit which Jesus sends to all who accept Him as their personal Lord and Savior of their life. We cannot purify ourselves, but Christ lived that perfect sinless, pure life and then allotted it to our "account".
That's where our righteousness comes from. Not from any good, works that you or I could do.
It is not based on the amount of good works we do. God starts the changes, He carries it on, and He completes it in those who let Him.
It's about letting Christ in to guide and teach you and obeying Him, again, through His power and instruction).
He is our substitute in His life, death and resurrection. He essentially rewrote history in our place so that, if you believe in Him, it will be as if YOU had never sinned if you accept Christ's death as our own in our place.
He is in Heaven right now preparing a place for us so that He can take His faithful, believing children home with Him when He returns. He will ressurrect us from death when He returns, giving mercy to those who accept His love, forgiveness, instruction and teachings in their life, and give justice to those who refuse it.
He doesn't want ANY of us to go to Hell and die for continuing in evil and rejecting His way to life, thats why He died FOR us. Hes giving EVERYONE a chance, He wants everyone to take the free gift of salvation from Hell. He wants us to be His and begin to follow His life of love and service through His power and abiding (staying) with Him. So long as we keep our hearts near to Christ through His strength, strive to follow His will of perfect love revealed in the Bible, and let Him lead in the midst of (very certain) pitfalls and struggles, we will, in time, win the ultimate victory over sin, pain and DEATH through Christ. Even if you are willing to be made willing, pray for Jesus to come in and He will do what we can't. Give us The Holy Spirit who will guide us in the right way.
NOTE: You are NEVER too sinful or messed up that God cannot turn your life around through Jesus. EVER
If you have any questions let me know
Cough*copied half her shit from Tolkien*cough.
*Ik I've written a para but I find it necessary to explain stuff to you, also either read this through and reply or don't reply at all* :
Im sorry sir but what the heck do you mean? Have you read Tolkien? Have you read Harry Potter? What part did she copy? How old are you? If you reply with, Trolls, vampires, wizards etc know that these are elements of folklore that extend back centuries and were not created by tolkien. Harry Potter and Tolkiens books gave entirely different plots, characters etc and the descriptions in JKs works are far better (even die hard Tolkien fans would agree on this) There is not a single character that is similar in both books save perhaps Dumbledore and Gandalf and even THEN its just a basic similarity with both being wise and powerful and funny wizards. I request you kindly delete or edit your offensive comment as it insults not just The Wizarding World and Middle-Earth and the (post-mortem or otherwise) intellectual hard work and dedication of their respective authors AND this content creator.
Have a good year =)
I thought the only requirement for a Harry Potter character was for them to be gay🤔🤔
That was before that. She made a mistake
>jk rowling
>character complexity
what
Hahaha no
this aged so badly
It's very easy to write like her. All you have to do is go to the Internet, find a book that was written MANY years ago and STEAL it as she did. Not too many people know that Harry Potter was originally a book printed back in the 40's called The Wizard's School. She stole it, renamed characters and changed a couple of things then called it Harry Potter. The family of the original author took her to court. They HAD the ORIGINAL manuscript to show the court but since she was doing the judge, he sided with her. She's a thief and a plagiarist.
Do you have any evidence? Name of the author? The book?
If you're referring to Willy the Wizard, it was a 36 page manuscript, not 7 books and it wasn't about a boarding school.
Does it have influences from the likes of T. H White, Sir Terry Pratchett, Ursula K Le Guin,J R R Tolkien, C. S Lewis, Tom Brown's school days, Neil Gaiman ? Yes
However all the similarities are mostly superficial . It's not completely original of course,but referring it as a case of plagiarism given the evidence would be utterly ridiculous.
Don't get me wrong,I don't like her since her Twittermania and unasked editions . And her recent behaviour has urged me never to financially promote or support her.. ever. She has 999999... 9 problems ,but writing ain't one of them .
She is a good writer and her world building is fantastic, however she maybe in real life ,or whatever she has vocally openly become
Love J.K. 💙🖤