Why Do You Want to Read This Book?

 Last night I was reading an older Barbara Kingsolver book, High Tide In Tucson. a collection of essays. In one of the essays, “Jaberwocky”, Kingsolver notes that “a novel works its magic by putting a reader inside another person’s life ... The power of fiction is to create empathy.” As an example, she says that a newspaper will give you the facts of a situation, say a plane crash, but a novel will show you just how it felt to be one of those hundreds of people who were killed in the crash.

One of my basic beliefs about fiction is that you as the author have to figure out how to make your reader care about the people in your book. It seems to me that truly empathetic characters can even cover sins in the plotting and construction of your book. Think of how many bad plots or unbelievable situations you’ve read in really popular books, and yet, even as you were aware of the novel’s weakness, you still enjoyed it. How does an author manage that?

Jean Auel’s books are a great example. Her Earth’s Children series is spectacularly fascinating. Talk about being able to create a world! She manages to make a character in Ayla that millions of readers wanted to follow all across Ice Age Europe though five encyclopedia-sized tomes. And yet in Auel’s world, one woman is responsible for every technological innovation known to Stone Age man. Do we care?

Here’s an egregious example: ever see the movie Troy? I love The Iliad. When I was an English teacher, I taught The Iliad. I know it well. And yet - in the movie, the Trojan War lasted three days instead of ten years. Paris and Helen lived happily ever after. Menelaus got killed. Agamemnon met his fate somewhere other than his bathtub. However, when Brad Pitt stripped down and sluiced himself off after a battle, did I care?

It all depends on how successfully the author (or filmmaker) is able to pull you into her world and how willing you are to go along with her. In his book on writing, This Year You Write Your Novel, Walter Mosely said, “a novel is a collusion between the author and the reader.” The reader wants to walk in your character’s shoes, to believe in the world you’ve created, and you don’t want to let him down.

Too Many Characters?

 By Thomas Kies

How many characters in a book are too many?  I’m struggling with that because in the book I’m working on now, it just feels like there may be too many.

I found one opinion that 4-7 characters should be the number, except for an epic where 20 or more are acceptable. I found another opinion that set the number of characters as 8. Period.

I took a look around the internet and the consensus seems to be that there is no set number.  The number of characters is what it will take to tell the story. But there is agreement that each character should have their own identity.  They should stand out from the crowd somehow.  

Sometimes, that’s as simple as identifying their profession, like Joe is a cop or Mike is a chef or Clara is a Supreme Court judge.  Sometimes it is as simple as giving them a distinctive name, like Clara.

Maybe the distinction is in the physical description.  Ted is tall and built like a linebacker or Sally is petite, had dark hair and one eye is blue and one eye is brown.  

So, make the character vivid and memorable when they’re first introduced. 

One bit of advice I saw was avoid introducing a lot of characters all at once.  It’s like walking into a crowded room and your host tells you the name of everyone there.  I don’t know about you, but that’s information overload and more often than not, I don’t recall anyone’s name.

Speaking of names, don’t give the extras names.  If the pizza guy is delivering dinner, he’s just the pizza guy.  If the Uber driver is taking your protagonist to the airport, he’s just the Uber driver. Don’t confuse the reader with more names than they need to recall. 

Don’t give characters similar names.  In a book that was never published, I was admonished for using Jake, John, Jim, and Jack. All different characters but with names like that, who could keep them straight?

All of your characters should have some relevance to your story.  Why are they there? If they don’t add something to the storyline, kill your darlings.  

An example of that is in A Song in Ice and Fire by George R. R. Martin upon which the hit series Game of Thrones was based.  Just when you identify with one of his characters, he kills him or her off.  Most likely in the most gruesome manner imaginable. But in their death, that character has become more relevant.  It often becomes a reason for revenge.

I distracted myself with the Game of Thrones.  What I really mean, if the character doesn’t add something to the story, they shouldn’t be there in the first place. 

A disadvantage to a bunch of characters, especially in the same scene, is the use of dialogue tags.  We all try to stay away from them as best we can, instead, showing some action and then the dialogue.  But when you have more than two characters in the same scene, sooner or later you’re going to have to write Roberto said- or Matilda argued- or Ludmilla shouted...

Giving your characters distinctive names helps the reader recognize the players more easily when they show up.  I hope that I do that in my mystery series.  Geneva Chase-a crime journalist, John Stillwater-ex-cop and now a private detective, Shana Neese-dominatrix and leader of an organization that fights human trafficking, and Nathaniel Ruben-owner of Lodestar Analytics, an open-source research company. 

Time to go back to my work in progress and see if I need to kill any of my darlings. 

Letting it fly

 I am at about page 75 of my next Amanda Doucette novel, and I'm at the point where everything is burgeoning. The story is expanding, subplots are developing, the complications that are at the heart of every good story are piling on. In the life of a pantser writer, it's a fun time of no-holds-barred creativity. Let 'er rip, as they say, and worry about if and how all these ideas fit together later on. 

In normal times, this is the stage when I would be travelling around the locations, taking notes and photos, and talking to people to try to get the feel for the setting and the culture. These trips spark sidetracks, unexpected characters, and deeper subplots. In fact my flight to Vancouver island was already booked for May, and the car rented. But unfortunately these are not normal times and I had to pull the plug on the trip. I hope to be able to go in September, by which time the book will probably be about half finished. Not nearly as good for stumbling upon fortuitous ideas that enrich, maybe even alter, the story.

So I am creating the story entirely within my own head, with the pale help of maps, books, and the internet, and I will have to adjust it after the fact. Some of the most enjoyable aspects of flying by the seat of your pants are the characters you create (or meet) along the way. I typically start the novel with a very small cast of characters, and as the story evolves, I add characters as needed. Sometimes they are just meant to be walk-ons, but I find myself needing them more and more often, until suddenly they become an integral part of the plot. I usually try to make even my walk-ons interesting, so that the brief scenes that they are in can sparkle, but once I realize I am bringing them back for a few more encores, I start giving them a real identity. That's so much fun. Who are they? What was their past? What do they do with their time? What do they think of Amanda? Etc.

For example, upon arrival in Tofino, where much of the book is set, Amanda grabs lunch at a coffee shop, and we meet the middle-aged, ex-hippie owner. But as Amanda has reason to go back to the coffee shop several times in the first 75 pages, I realize this character might play a more major part in the story. She is the keeper of the region's history, and its secrets. Another character who is evolving from a bit-player to a major one is the owner of the water taxi Amanda uses to get out to the islands. Who knows, I may even make him a suspect!

Kaylee, an ongoing character (actually my dog Eva)

Some writers know all the characters who are going to be in their stories and write extensive character sketches of the important ones before they start to write. Since I don't know where the story is going and what characters I'm going to need, I get to know them only as I meet them in scenes. This has the advantage that I can mold them into what I need for the story. Does the character need an edgier side? Easy to develop that as I go along. In the case of the water taxi owner, what would be his motive and how can I hint at that?

It does mean that characters change, sometimes beyond recognition, but that's a worry for rewrites. For now, I am having fun playing with all the possibilities. Letting the story fly.

Character mashups

In the past week on Type M, characters seem to have marched onto centre stage. There have been posts about creating them, describing them, trying to control them, and bringing them back from the dead.

I write three series and so have three separate casts of characters. Readers have their favourites; some only want to read about Inspector Green while others are happy to follow Amanda's adventures. At author events, people are always more interested in discussing characters than plot or setting, the two other pillars of the story. They want to know not only why they acted as they did in the book and what will they do in the next book, but they want to know about my relationship with my characters. Where do they come from, how do I keep track of them, and are they based on real people?

We writers relate to our characters as if they are real people in our lives. They are often on our minds when we should be doing other things like emptying the dishwasher. We argue with them, worry about them, revel in their triumphs and laugh at their follies. It's delightful to discover that readers care about them in the same way.

Because I write more than one series, people also ask me how I keep the characters separate. Do I have to finish with one series and one set of characters before I can start the other? I don't like writing more than one book at a time, mainly because I have to get immersed in the flow of the story and I lose that momentum each time I switch from one to the other. The characters, however, seem to inhabit different rooms or houses in my head, and when I switch books, it feels as if I've walked through a curtain into a different place. The two worlds do not meet.

This brings to another question readers sometimes ask me at author events. Would I ever write a story in which Inspector Green and Amanda Doucette work together. I admit it's fun for about two minutes to contemplate how that would work (badly) and I can see the appeal for readers of watching two smart, strong characters they enjoy duking it out over who would resolve the case first. But purely from a story-telling standpoint, the combination wouldn't work. Both these characters are used to being the centre of attention. They are the heroes of the piece, and making them work as an ensemble would fundamentally alter not only their characters but also the style of the story. I'm pretty sure one of them would be forced into a subordinate role, and although the ensuing sparks might be entertaining, I don't think it suits either of their characters. I don't think I'd enjoy the experience, and ultimately, I don't think readers would either.

Another reason it wouldn't work is that in an ensemble story, the members of the team typically complement each other. One funny and the other serious. One impulsive and the other cautious. This is the reason why sidekicks are almost always a contrast to the hero. The story just feels balanced and right this way. Green and Doucette are not a complementary team. They are both alphas, too similar to provide balance in the story.

But the main reason I think it wouldn't work is that I'm not sure I could tear down the curtain that separates the two worlds, and walk freely from Inspector Green's world to Amanda's.

I'm interested to know whether any of the writers have thought of doing this with their series leads and whether readers think the idea would work. Thoughts, anyone?

Creating Interesting Characters

I’m in the beginning stages of the next book in the Aurora Anderson mystery series so I’ve been thinking a lot lately about creating characters. As a writer, I want to create characters that are memorable enough that readers will keep coming back to my books. But what makes a character interesting or memorable?

I’ve read a lot of writing books that talk about creating well-rounded and interesting characters. In one of them (don’t ask me which one, I’ve read a bazillion of them), the author talked about giving a character an “obsession” like loving chocolate ice cream. They also noted that whatever interest you give them, it should be there for some reason. e.g. she loves ice cream because she has fond memories of eating it with her mother when she was growing up.

The shredder

Most people have some sort of obsession. It might be as small as loving ice cream or it might creep into the realm of stalkerville. I’ve talked before on Type M about my love for the Great British Bake Off and may also have alluded to a slight obsession with Celtic Thunder. Even our cats had their own little quirks. The oldest loved shredding paper with her claws. Any piece of paper that landed on the floor was fair game. Leave paper too long and she’d methodically rip it to shreds. The other cat loved tearing down towels from the bathroom towel racks. He would systematically move around the house, from bathroom to bathroom, reach up and bring down every single towel with his claws. He wasn’t satisfied until they were all on the floor. Then he’d just walk away. He didn’t do anything with them. For some reason, he wanted them all on the floor. After awhile, I just left them there and he eventually grew out of that obsession. I adored my cats. Their quirks made them more interesting to me.

The towel puller

The same goes with characters in stories, I think. As an added bonus, you can use those obsessions for and against them. In an episode of the TV show “Rosewood”, the detective knew someone was lying because of her love of a particular brand of pretzel. Because of it, she knew exactly where in the local mall the store was located, which told her the person she was talking to was lying. On the “Big Bang Theory”, Sheldon loves trains. Besides showing a different side of him, it’s also been fun for the writers to work with. I can also see a character using another character’s obsession against them, perhaps to lure them into a trap.

So, Type M readers, what makes a character stand out to you? Do you find it interesting when a writer gives them an obsession?