Plot vs Characters

[SamScribble]

Almost 40 years ago, I received a letter from someone who had heard one of my radio plays. It said: ‘I really loved the old woman: she really infuriated me.’ That same year, I received a letter that said: ‘Your play didn’t really have a story, did it? It was just a bunch of characters. But they were so believable. I really enjoyed it. I hope that it will be played again soon.’

Maybe ten years later, I tried my hand at writing short stories. In response to one of the first published, I received (via the magazine in which it was published) a note that said: ‘I’m still not sure that I know what it was all about, but I loved the characters. They so reminded me of people I know.’

And so it has continued. These days, people tend to praise my ‘character portrayal’, ‘character development’, ‘character growth’, and ‘character transition’ (whatever that is). But seldom do I get feedback (from here or from anywhere) that says ‘that was a great story’.

So, here’s my question: Does a great story with unconvincing characters win? Or can convincing, engaging characters carry the day?

 

[JKendallDane]

I think well developed characters that readers can identify with or become engaged with, can certainly save a mediocre tale from being just another also-ran. On the same hand, a character without any character can doom the best story.

Character growth and plot development are both critical building blocks in a story, but I think character edges out plot for having the most control as to how the story is thought of and remembered.

 

[ishtat]

Agatha Christie built an entire career on plot alone. She didn't have a clue how to develop character. Poirot and Miss Marple were caricatures not characters, everything they said or did was predictable, and entirely driven by the plot.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

99.99% of the people I've known are 1st rank villains, felonious morons, and lethally indolent. Did I forget cowards? Whats left are fools.

Plots are always the accidental mishaps people drop as they flee duty and responsibility.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Agatha Christie built an entire career on plot alone. She didn't have a clue how to develop character. Poirot and Miss Marple were caricatures not characters, everything they said or did was predictable, and entirely driven by the plot.

Yeah, most of her books that I've read left me with the impression that she figured out the howdunnit gimmick first and then fit the characters around that.

"The Mirror Crack'd from Side to Side" is a bit of an exception - that one's written around an unexpected motivation, but it's based very closely on the RL story of Gene Tierney so Christie didn't invent that aspect of the story.

 

[Hypoxia]

Plots can be (and are) constructed from tropes and bunnies by formula. Characters can be (and are) constructed from stereotypes. Is either approach less cartoonish? (And what is wrong with cartoons?) *Should* we prefer character- or plot-driven stories? (Yes, that's a loaded question. Everything has its place.)

A question about radio plays: Were listeners reacting more to the characters as they were written, or to the performances as voiced? Would the characters have been as memorable and involving if performed differently? I recall my reading (30+ years ago!) the wonderful tale FUP by Jim Dodge, and then hearing the brilliant reading by Jack Adams (Caedmon CP 2091 - the tapes are in my hands right now). The audible Granddaddy was IMHO a much fuller personality as voiced than what I 'heard' while reading.

 

[tomlitilia]

If we're talking erotic fiction, I'd say the character description is the most important thing. A sufficient plot can be "They fucked" as long as we get to find out who they are and what's going on in their heads while they do it. I lose interest every time I read a story where the main character is just some generic slut, but as soon as I get to know her, I'm very eager to hear how she feels with a cock in every orifice.

 

[GoldenCojones]

So, here’s my question: Does a great story with unconvincing characters win? Or can convincing, engaging characters carry the day?

IMHO neither "win." Both can make for better than average stories, but to be truly great you must achieve both. It sounds like you know how to develop characters. I suggest you work on plot development before you start writing. Make sure there is conflict in the story because without conflict of some kind you can't really have a story. Most importantly, know the story before you start writing. This way, when you write you can write like you always have. The characters will still be there and you can write the story you know has a good plot.

 

[TxRad]

If you take good characters and toss them out on a playing field, they will find a story to tell. Cardboard characters not so much. The best plot in the world stinks with bad characters.

 

[GoldenCojones]

99.99% of the people I've known are 1st rank villains, felonious morons, and lethally indolent. Did I forget cowards? Whats left are fools.

If that is true, then you have my pity. I know a lot of wonderful people. Some who would give a stranger the shirt off their backs. Some who go out and shovel their neighbor's sidewalk without expecting anything in return. Some who put their lives on the line for others in the name of duty. The bad people I know are in a minority. I guess I've been blessed to know so many good people.

 

[robertreams]

As Tx implied, I am not so sure the two can be so readily separated. Sometimes I create a character and they surprise me by doing something I hadn't planned. What they do is often determined by their character. How they behave depends on how we have created their ids and egos. How they behave together makes a plot, creates tension, voila, a story! I have never set out with a plot line, etc, to tel a story, except for "The light of God" which i wrote from a story a guy told me in a bar. In that case, I had the story first, but usually the interaction of my characters creates the story.

 

[elfin_odalisque]

99.99% of the people I've known are 1st rank villains, felonious morons, and lethally indolent. Did I forget cowards? Whats left are fools.

Plots are always the accidental mishaps people drop as they flee duty and responsibility.

Thank you for your magnanimous contribution to the thread. Can you come back next millennium?

 

[robertreams]

Golden, I suspect that the difference between your view and JBJ's is in the eye of the beholder. Though I have been crapped on often, I still hold your view that people are inherently good, not the standard Judeo-Christian view that men are born evil and must rely on outside forces (the grace of a supreme being) to be "saved".

 

[Hypoxia]

If we're talking erotic fiction, I'd say the character description is the most important thing. A sufficient plot can be "They fucked" as long as we get to find out who they are and what's going on in their heads while they do it. I lose interest every time I read a story where the main character is just some generic slut, but as soon as I get to know her, I'm very eager to hear how she feels with a cock in every orifice.

Alas, whether it's "a lovely celebration of skankdom" (One Blade of Grass), or an exploration of a cheating slut's career (Right Under His Eyes), or the story of a mother's sacrifice of her fidelity (Substitute Pussy), my looks inside their heads get hammered in voting. My stories where actions outweigh motivations seem to be better received here. Maybe I need to write more cartoons.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

If that is true, then you have my pity. I know a lot of wonderful people. Some who would give a stranger the shirt off their backs. Some who go out and shovel their neighbor's sidewalk without expecting anything in return. Some who put their lives on the line for others in the name of duty. The bad people I know are in a minority. I guess I've been blessed to know so many good people.

THE ROAD TO HELL my friend, I WUZ JUST DOIN MUH JOB.

People are like snakes with full bellies, docile and calm.

It aint personal, yuh unnerstand, its bidness.

Said another way: SHOW ME A BEST SELLER WITH NICE FOLKS IN IT.

 

[elfin_odalisque]

Doesn't Agatha Christie just use her main characters, Poirot and Miss Marple, as a thread to give the characters time to display themselves.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Thank you for your magnanimous contribution to the thread. Can you come back next millennium?

Bite me, troll.

 

[GoldenCojones]

My mistake

THE ROAD TO HELL my friend, I WUZ JUST DOIN MUH JOB.

People are like snakes with full bellies, docile and calm.

It aint personal, yuh unnerstand, its bidness.

Said another way: SHOW ME A BEST SELLER WITH NICE FOLKS IN IT.

My mistake. I thought your post was about real-life people you knew, not characters in books.

If you want a best-seller with good people in it, read the "Wheel of Time" series by Robert Jordan. Several of his main characters are wonderful people as well as excellent characters. It's a long read, 14 very large books in the series but worth it. Another best-selling author that makes some of his main characters good people is Terry Goodkind. Yes, both series have bad people in them and the bad people outnumber the good people, but there are good people in their stories.

IMHO, it is the conflict between people that make a strong plot. The good people should not be universally good and the bad people should not be universally bad, otherwise you simply end up with flat one dimensional characters that don't feel completely real.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

My mistake. I thought your post was about real-life people you knew, not characters in books.

If you want a best-seller with good people in it, read the "Wheel of Time" series by Robert Jordan. Several of his main characters are wonderful people as well as excellent characters. It's a long read, 14 very large books in the series but worth it. Another best-selling author that makes some of his main characters good people is Terry Goodkind. Yes, both series have bad people in them and the bad people outnumber the good people, but there are good people in their stories.

IMHO, it is the conflict between people that make a strong plot. The good people should not be universally good and the bad people should not be universally bad, otherwise you simply end up with flat one dimensional characters that don't feel completely real.

You were right, I was speaking of real people. There are no good people, there are only snakes with full bellies.

 

[sr71plt]

I don't see "great story" being a battle between plot and character (and why leave out setting?). Using any proportion of those could work in the making the great story--and that's what makes fiction so vibrant and keeps readers reading.

 

[Handley_Page]

Originally Posted by JAMESBJOHNSON
THE ROAD TO HELL my friend, I WUZ JUST DOIN MUH JOB.
People are like snakes with full bellies, docile and calm.
It aint personal, yuh unnerstand, its bidness.
Said another way: SHOW ME A BEST SELLER WITH NICE FOLKS IN IT.


Almost any book by Terry Pratchett.

 

[sr71plt]

Originally Posted by JAMESBJOHNSON
THE ROAD TO HELL my friend, I WUZ JUST DOIN MUH JOB.
People are like snakes with full bellies, docile and calm.
It aint personal, yuh unnerstand, its bidness.
Said another way: SHOW ME A BEST SELLER WITH NICE FOLKS IN IT.


Almost any book by Terry Pratchett.

True. Anne Tyler too. But why bother even responding to this sort of idiocy that JBJ is prone to engage in just to get attention?

 

[Hypoxia]

But why bother even responding to this sort of idiocy... ?

IGNORE is our friend.

 

[legerdemer]

My two cents

So, here’s my question: Does a great story with unconvincing characters win? Or can convincing, engaging characters carry the day?

The greatest plot with wooden, unconvincing, and entirely unsympathetic characters will not keep me turning the pages. Interesting, growing characters going through life are much more compelling, though putting them in particularly interesting situations and having them get out of these creatively and engagingly will intrigue me more. I am an introvert fascinated by people and their foibles. Go figure...

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

True. Anne Tyler too. But why bother even responding to this sort of idiocy that JBJ is prone to engage in just to get attention?

But youre a troll according to the site owner.