Curiosity may claim the life of the occasional unlucky cat, but so far it’s never steered me wrong. Which is why even though I’ve been writing and editing across genres and pen names for a while now, I still love to be a student whenever I can be. So imagine my delight when I found out about the LSF Replay series going on right now. It’s an amazing opportunity to find inspiration and tangible strategies for dealing with writing issues. (Check out the lineup and register now!)
The first replay session focused on problems writers might encounter when it comes to characters. “Trial by Fire: Getting Your Characters Out of Their Comfort Zone” re-aired Mar 20 over Streamyard, and it was led by the charismatic and knowledgeable Gemma Mushington. Before we get into my three favourite takeaways, it’s important to understand the premise of her talk.
Identifying Your Character Issues
Vagueness is no one’s friend. And yet we writers often get a note along the lines of “this character just isn’t working for me” or “there’s something missing” or “they just feel flat.” So Mushington helpfully opened the session by identifying four common issues writers might have when it comes to creating (or evolving) their characters.
- They are stuck where they are
- They are too similar to one another
- They don’t meld well together
- They know too much
This is of course not an exhaustive list, and a nice set of bullet points won’t necessarily tell you which of the problems you are facing yourself. But I found that when she read off the list I immediately thought of times when I was writing or giving notes to someone and one or more of these issues was at the heart of their woe. Of course, it’s always easier to see someone else’s problems than figure out our own.
Thankfully Mushington goes on to demonstrate a series of “trials” to put our characters through and how they can help us figure out the “note behind the note” when it comes to character issues. (Although I might say it’s really the writer being put through their paces rather than the characters.)
Would They or Wouldn’t They?
Our characters and their actions will have different types of restraints. When it comes to genre, “stabbing a friend in the back” is going to be a fundamentally different situation depending on if you find yourself in a slow-burn family drama vs. a teen slasher flick. Then alongside genre you also have the tone. Is this a slapstick comedy with pratfalls or a highly cerebral, deadpan delivery type of comedy? Character actions and responses to situations all must fit within these kinds of world parameters, otherwise it can leave us feeling unmoored and unsure how the characters fit into their own world. We can’t tell who is following the “rules” and who isn’t, and there’s a lot you can learn about a character just by knowing how they approach the “rules” of the society you plonked them into.
Mushington encourages writers to brainstorm actions and ask themselves if a character would do it, or even juicier, ask what would have to happen for them to do it. For example, Miranda Priestly (Meryl Streep) from The Devil Wears Prada would never take the subway willingly. So what would it take to get here down those stairs and onto the train? She encourages writers to engage with even outlandish scenarios like eating a chair just as much as ones that are likely to happen because you never know what insights might shake loose.
You can definitely do this exercise for starting points. However, it’s also a great way to think about things that a character would or wouldn’t do in Act 1 but are willing (or even happy) to do after they’ve grown and changed by Act 3. If the answer is they wouldn’t change a thing, then you are probably looking at a character who meets Mushington’s first character issue criteria: they are stuck. We don’t need our characters to do a complete 180, but we do need to see them evolve because of the things they experience. It’s how we get not only a deeper connection to them and their stories, but also a better understanding of ourselves in the process.
Character Similarities and Differences
If you’re like me, you love a good infographic or map. Wrangling information into a visual representation can be an amazing way to organize and interrogate that information, which can lead to insight. Mushington introduces the use of Venn diagrams to better understand not only individual characters, but how they relate to each other. She used The Bear as an example:
Center of diagram:
If it turns out way too many of your attributes end up in the center, you may have characters who are too much alike. Mushington said one source of this could be too much writer self-insertion, but it can come from a variety of conscious or unconscious biases. You could have a “type” you gravitate to or could (eek!) be falling back on stereotypes. Too little overlap and it can be difficult to find enough common ground for characters to build a relationship.
Don’t forget, having things in common isn’t necessarily a recipe for a conflict-free existence. Oftentimes we clash with people precisely because we are very similar. The key is balancing the similarities and differences in a way that makes each character still feel distinct. That can be really hard with only a list of attributes and a little backstory pre-writing. Instead, Mushington invites us to put our characters right into the action.
The Escape Room
I have always felt like I learn the most about my characters by putting them in dialogue with each other, so this one really appeals to me. Imagine your characters have been locked in an escape room (or put in some other scenario with a goal and ticking clock), and you’re bound to squeeze good character juice out of what happens. Leaders can rise or fall, wallflowers can bloom or wilt, and someone’s bound to break something. Even though the scenario will probably never make it into your script, the process of thinking through who would do what and how they would bounce off one another can still inform your story. Reactions to stress, reactions to each other, and reactions to being in the scenario in the first place can all offer insights.
She gave a few other options for an escape room type prompt that I really liked:
- There’s only 1 slice of cake
- The toilet breaks
- They find themselves at a funeral for one of the characters
You Survived The Trials. Now What?
One of Mushington’s final and I think vital recommendations is to remember that these things are fluid. No matter where you are in the process, characters can (and should) evolve and your understanding of them will deepen the more you interrogate who they are and how they can come together to tell your story the best way possible. Whether you are at the logline phase, have a treatment in hand, or a totally finished trilogy of space operas, we have to remain open to what our characters may reveal about themselves…or the writer.
Are you a lifelong learner like me? Maybe I’ll see you at the next LSF Replay session, Deepening Character Relationships Through Attachment Theory with Kira-Anne Pelican, coming up on March 27! Check out the whole lineup and register here.
Want to connect with Alison? You can find her on X (@A_Weaverdyck), Instagram (@alisonweaverdyck) or visit www.Alisonweaverdyck.com and her Coverfly account is HERE.
