Can you kill a character?

[Guest]

 

[CrimsonMaiden]

I don't think I've ever killed a character. I'm not sure if I could or not. I guess it depends on what kind of character it is.

 

[impressive]

I just finished a book where a pretty central character dies, and it upset me. Then I started thinking about authors killing their characters. The worst thing I've ever done to one of mine is maroon him under the dryer with a lovely and sexually voracious companion. I can't imagine writing a character for a long storyline and then killing her, I just can't!

Could you kill a character? If so, why did you do so? How did it feel?

I did ... in The Seven: Revisited

I cried while writing it, and I still can't read it without crying.

 

[BlackShanglan]

My major breakthrough last summer was that I would have to. I haven't had time to write it, but I know now where it must go. I wanted him to have a happy ending, but once the death scene came to me, I could see how actually insane it was to have ever imagined that "happily ever after" could be part of that story.

He wants to die.

He has to die.

*sigh*

Shanglan

(ETA: On a semi-related note, nearly every feedback on "Will" says or asks something about whether they live or die. I like them just as they are. The clearest image I have of them in my mind afterward makes no distinction as to whether they are alive or not. I can see them clearly, and I can see where they are, but I have no idea if it is on heaven or on earth. I don't think it matters.)

 

[rgraham666]

Yep.

But she was the villain of the piece. Story wouldn't have been nearly as good if she'd lived.

On the other hand, I've a story in my mind I haven't been able to work on because the protagonist dies, and not prettily either.

So, it depends.

 

[BlackSnake]

I think it would have to be a story leaning towards romance to roll like that...

The great lover dies in the end leaving the love interest joyful for the time they had together...

 

[cloudy]

I have a novel about halfway finished, and no further, because a character I absolutely love needs to die, and I just can't bring myself to do it.

She's not the main protag, but her grandmother, and I just can't bring myself to kill off this wise and canny woman that I've come to love. The story demands it, but I just haven't been able to follow through.

Maybe one of these days....

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Quality of life.

I had to kill the main character. It was simply what the piece demanded. If I was going to write it, she was going to die.

The last fuck goodbye. Again, the piece dmeanded it. To have done otherwise would have made writing it moot.

I can kill characters. I have. But I don't like doing it. the Furies would have been a more powerful piece, and more realistic if several of my characters didn't surrvive. But i don't write to bring people down. I write to entertain. There is a fine line there, between realism and depressing revelations.

I can't say any one way is right or wrong, but to me, killing off a character is a step that has to be taken with care. One that I have to have taken before I put the first word to paper. And one wehre I have to have some ovveriding reason he/she must die.

 

[3113]

Killing characters is tough in a lot of ways. It's not just hard because you may like the character or be having fun with them and not want to kill them off....it's hard also to know if it's right.

On the one hand, you don't want to create characters with bullseye's on them. Red-Shirts, they're call in Star Trek. Guys created just to die and everyone knows it. This includes too-good-to-be-true mothers or children that people can weep over when they die.

And, most insulting of all, ethinic character that are "just there to help" the white man--and so they die heroically so the white man can live

On the other hand, if the story really needs a character to die...well, they have to die and you have to find a way to do it. No matter how hard it is.

I'm actually more intersted in getting people to STOP killing characters for the sake of killing them than the other way around. I get so tired of reading a book and thinking, "I think this guy is gonna die. I hope the writer surprises me and he doesn't--ooops. Nope. There he goes!"

Some of the best shows on t.v. have surprised me and killed off characters for a very good reason--The Sheild for example, and The Sopranos. Unfortunately, they're more exception than rule. Too many writers kill off characters to either "stick it" to their readers (haha! Gottcha!) or get their readers weeping. They think it's a big surprise. All too often it's just annoying and predictable.

 

[Quiet_Cool]

I've killed characters. In fact, in one piece (I'm working on it now, but I doubt it will ever grace the site) nearly everyong dies. The truth is, if a character must die, then they must. Story comes before any individual character. The thing is, while character has a habit of influencing my stories (to an extent I cannot comprehend, nonetheless explain--although my Lit. stories haven't exactly shown that) the story must continue how the story insists on continuing.

In my personal opinion, a good writer understands the value of what must be, as opposed to what i might wish to be.

Q_C

 

[BlackShanglan]

On the one hand, you don't want to create characters with bullseye's on them. Red-Shirts, they're call in Star Trek. Guys created just to die and everyone knows it. This includes too-good-to-be-true mothers or children that people can weep over when they die.

*laugh* I love it. Nothing is worse than the plague of the Red Shirt.

And, most insulting of all, ethinic character that are "just there to help" the white man--and so they die heroically so the white man can live

Except that! Nasty, nasty!

Too many writers kill off characters to either "stick it" to their readers (haha! Gottcha!) or get their readers weeping. They think it's a big surprise or its deliberate manipulation. I find it annoying and predictable in most cases.

Excellent point. I think of killing off characters something like twist endings. It's only good if (1) It's well executed (including not being telegraphed from the beginning of the first cinema trailer) and (2) Intrinsically bound up in the meaning and effect of the work, so that the piece cannot have the same power and the same theme without it.

Many a decent author has stumbled over one or the other of those. Look at Dickens with Stephen Blackpool falling down a totally pointless mineshaft, lingering for a totally pointless several days, and dying a totally pointless death for obscure and totally pointless reasons. Dear God, that was a bad ending! Perhaps not as bad as little Nell, but damned close. At least Little Nell gave us:

One must have a heart of stone to read the death of little Nell without laughing. -- Oscar Wilde

 

[Belegon]

The story dictates. So far, it has not happened. But I can conceive of it...

 

[Recidiva]

I understand grief when it's used for a real reason, but to use it carelessly is something I can't enjoy in a setting that is essentially supposed to be entertainment.

As an audience, you know the author can choose, and I kind of hold it against them.

There's an author, David Wingrove, who repeatedly created great characters and killed them off all the time. I just couldn't read his stuff any more, too much shell shock. Too painful.

 

[CopyCarver]

I just finished a book where a pretty central character dies, and it upset me. Then I started thinking about authors killing their characters. The worst thing I've ever done to one of mine is maroon him under the dryer with a lovely and sexually voracious companion. I can't imagine writing a character for a long storyline and then killing her, I just can't!

Could you kill a character? If so, why did you do so? How did it feel?

Be thankful you're not writing Germanic/Norse mythology. Even the gods must be snuffed in the Götterdämmerung.

 

[Quiet_Cool]

I'm actually more intersted in getting people to STOP killing characters for the sake of killing them than the other way around. I get so tired of reading a book and thinking, "I think this guy is gonna die. I hope the writer surprises me and he doesn't--ooops. Nope. There he goes!"

I was watching a movie once. "Interview with a Vampire" in fact, and my mother was in the room. SHe had never seen it before, but she watched for a while, then went and took a nap after some time. When she returned, the movie was almost over. She looked at me and asked, "Did the little girl die yet?"

To my knowledge, she's never seen the whole movie yet, but I think this illustrates my point. Good writing, even good film-making, can predict well in advance who will live and who will die, so long as the viewer/reader understands the value of good story-telling.

Foreshadowing should, to a point, allow the viewer/reader to have some clue as to what will happen next, depending of course on the style and skill of the writer.

Q_C

 

[Selena_Kitt]

As an audience, you know the author can choose, and I kind of hold it against them.

Nope. Not true. Not entirely.

I've had characters just die. I didn't know it was going to happen, I didn't plan it... but it happened.

Authors don't always choose... it's not a conspiracy to create an unhappy ending, I swear it...

 

[ElizabethWest]

ICould you kill a character? If so, why did you do so? How did it feel?

Yes. I've done it before. I cried while I wrote it. No one else has ever read it.

 

[Recidiva]

Nope. Not true. Not entirely.

I've had characters just die. I didn't know it was going to happen, I didn't plan it... but it happened.

Authors don't always choose... it's not a conspiracy to create an unhappy ending, I swear it...

Hehe...I understand that.

They always get their own way. We can't help it if we're inspired by the suicidal, sickly and death-wishy.

Sometimes it simply must happen.

 

[3113]

but I think this illustrates my point. Good writing, even good film-making, can predict well in advance who will live and who will die, so long as the viewer/reader understands the value of good story-telling.

Um, well I think we might have a slight disagreement on whether either book or movie was "good" writing or storytelling. I think the little girl is a great character, but her death is predictable and I found it pretty boring and annoying, myself. As if the writer has wasted my time.

As for foreshadowing...there's a real difference between foreshadowing and predictablity. If we're talking good writing, then I would offer The Sopranos last season, where they killed off Adrianna. I think most viewers would say that even if they didn't want it, and hoped it wouldn't happen, that they felt it was going to happen. There really was no other way out for her. Yet when it did, it happened in a way they hadn't expected and it was powerful and horrible and gut-wrenching.

The BEST foreshadowing is stuff that the reader "forgets." It's there, and they know it, but as they get caught up in the book, they forget about it (as it were). When it shows up at the end, they go, "Damn! I forgot about that!" Very powerful because it's not coming out of left-field, it's not unexpected...and yet it's still something of a surprise.

That's very different from predicting that someone is going to die from the minute you see them on screen or in the book...and you spend the rest of the time just glancing at your watch wishing they'd just get it over with and move on with the story.

 

[BlackShanglan]

Be thankful you're not writing Germanic/Norse mythology. Even the gods must be snuffed in the Götterdämmerung.

That's my problem. I am. *grumble*

 

[hugo_sam]

While I would not want to contradict any here who have said it is undesireable, I have killed a main chacter. In fact the only present character in the story. In many ways the death was the story and it demanded that it happen. That story went over generaly well, however when I went back and did the follow up from the SO's POV after the fact(several months), I was panned about why the character died. Since it was a follow up to the original story, the character that died was already dead at the time of the second story. Not really sure what to draw from that.

I have another with the diametric opposite problem. Bring a dead character back to life. A whole different perspective. We'll see.

JMHO

Hugo

 

[3113]

That's my problem. I am. *grumble*

Better you than me, Shanglan. I hope you can find a way around it. I can barely stand to read those stories let alone try to write them. The "everyone's-gonna-die-and-it's-all-gonna-end-horribly" myths and tales.

Even Shakespeare tries to have someone there at the end to give a gilmmer of hope to his tragedies.

And the "predicted" tragedies are the worst. The gods said it was going to happen...and so it's going to happen. Too bad you've go no choice, no chance and no way out.

Oh. Joy. Just what I wanted to read.

 

[Quiet_Cool]

Um, well I think we might have a slight disagreement on whether either book or movie was "good" writing or storytelling. I think the little girl is a great character, but her death is predictable and I found it pretty boring and annoying, myself. As if the writer has wasted my time.

The BEST foreshadowing is stuff that the reader "forgets." It's there, and they know it, but as they get caught up in the book, they forget about it (as it were). When it shows up at the end, they go, "Damn! I forgot about that!" Very powerful because it's not coming out of left-field, it's not unexpected...and yet it's still something of a surprise.

That's very different from predicting that someone is going to die from the minute you see them on screen or in the book...and you spend the rest of the time just glancing at your watch wishing they'd just get it over with and move on with the story.

Here's a very good point concerning the difference (perhaps the difference in our opinions, admittedly). In Interview, I didn't see the little girl's death as predictable, simply because of the viscious nature she showed in slitting Lestat's throat earlier in the movie. Had she maintained some level of innocence, i would agree entirely.

When I read the Dark Tower books, I wasn't the slightest bit surprised about who was going to die when they did, because of the foreshadowing involved (whether King himself was aware he was doing that is a different story) but when I read through those parts, there was no surprise, and I did, as you put it, "forget" about the subtle hints as they were laid out. I merely understood when the scene came that it was time, that it was what was naturally intended to happen.

Perhaps the amount of detail the writer dedicates to each sentence or action is what determines that.

Q_C

 

[3113]

I have another with the diametric opposite problem. Bring a dead character back to life.

Equally messy problem. Comic books have lost all credibility in that respect. How much in danger can the superhero be when we all know they're never going to die? Or if they do...that they'll get better?

 

[TheEarl]

Equally messy problem. Comic books have lost all credibility in that respect. How much in danger can the superhero be when we all know they're never going to die? Or if they do...that they'll get better?

I think that was one of the great things about Joss Whedon's television writing. It was possible for people to come back to life, but it was few and far between and a lot of the most painful deaths aren't caused by a big fight scene or a dramatic moment, but bad, fucking luck. Watching 'The Body' is a guaranteed way to make me cry.

I've killed characters before. In fact, I do it with great relish when the story needs it. I take great pleasure in inflicting pain on my characters cause the pain makes them far more interesting. However, I have also had a character resist her fate. She'd been going to die for the entirety of the novel and yet, when I got to the crunch, I realised that she couldn't. There was no ending without her and the entire story would've been voided. So she escaped. Just.

The Earl