Character Development Thread

[CWatson]

I agree with this. In fact, I think it's not an accident that characters are called, well, characters. They have character, that's what's interesting about them. In fact, unless physical attributes are central to the story I often think it work better leaving them out. As in snoops quote above. The reader really needs know other description than Mrs. Fezziwig is, one vast, substantial smile. Their imagination will fill in the rest of what they want Mrs. Fezziwig to look like.

Further, it can distance the reader from characters. For instance, I happen to be a guy attracted to smaller sized boobies. The fact that the majority of characters described in the stories have size D, DD, or even E boobs is a turn off when i visualize the character, one then reads on and realizes that the size of their boobs is quite irrelevant to anything having to do with the story.

Sometimes leaving physical characteristics vague allows the reader to abstract the person, or fill in what they find appealing.

To be constructive instead of critical, I'd actually like to throw out a theory I've had on this particular subject. (And yes, I was a little snippy before. I guess that wasn't appropriate.)

I think that, when we're establishing a character, our job is to make that character likeable, interesting and attractive. This doesn't mean the character has to be a nice person; Evil Is Cool, after all (witness the Draco In Leather Pants phenomenon). The point, though, is that the character has to appeal to The Reader in some way. By whatever means, The Reader has to say, "Ooh: I want to know more!"

How does this relate to the issuing of statistics on our favorite red-headed female protagonist? Well, I think this is why a lot of beginning writers turn to the 36-42-68D or whatever. They are trying to appeal to The Reader. They are trying to make the character attractive. And, obviously, a stunning physical specimen will go pretty far in that direction. A jerkass punk pilot with an attitude problem? Yeah, okay. Said pilot played by Tom Cruise? Much more interesting. (Said pilot played by Katee Sackhoff? Tom Cruise is left jumping on a couch. )

...At least, this would work in a visual medium, like a movie or television. But fiction, despite the fact that it is transmitted through sight, is not actually a visual medium. (What medium is it? Oh, God, don't get me started. Suffice to say, it's either enchantment, telepathy, mind control or some ungodly combination thereof.)

So where does this leave us? We can't give our character an appealing body, what's left? (I'm sure you can see where I'm going with this. )

And here's the thing: love really is blind. I'm sure many of us can relate a time when we met someone we didn't really find physically attractive... Only to fall in love with them, at which point the physical flaws are no longer an issue. Love is blind. And, perhaps more pertinently, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. When you look at someone you love, what do you see? Flaws? Imperfections? Distractingly terrible stuff? Nope, not hardly. Love gives that person a beauty that cannot be achieved even by a horde of editors with airbrushes and photoshops.

In real life, only one man ever sees a woman look that way all the time; a few others get to see her look that way once--just once--as she walks down the aisle. But in fiction, it can be bestowed any time, any day, on anyone.

And it should be.

We can't make a character beautiful in body, so instead we make them beautiful in heart. We make The Reader behold that character with beauty. And suddenly the physical aspects don't even matter. Suddenly we don't need to provide the details of her bust size or the way she walks; The Reader's eye will fill those in on its own. And, even more than that (as HDN correctly identified), this lets The Reader fill in what they find attractive. Personally, I'm a fan of the slimmer, younger body types, and women with "pendulous breasts" turn me off. Obviously, I'm in a minority, but regardless: If The Author can endow the character, not with boobs, but with beauty, then s/he don't even have to specify. I'll see a character who's beautiful to me, you'll see a character who's beautiful to you, and we'll both be enchanted even if the two versions of the character look nothing like each other (or, for that matter, like what The Author was intending!).

Besides, love is rather too powerful and broad a category to be invoked by something as minor as a cup size.

 

[KarennaC]

Henry Higgins.

Yes! Thank you! It fell into one of the holes in my brain.

Feel free to use the idea, anyone; I'm not sure I could pull it off. I've had erotica-writer's block for a few months now

I have to agree with CWatson about personality description trumping physical description. I'm a very visual person, but my personal preference is to not even have a physical description of the character, or have only a very basic one with maybe one or two details, because as a reader I'd rather form my own mental picture of the character than be locked into what the author says the character looks like. As an author, I prefer to let my readers see the characters the way they want to see them, unless there's a reason I need them to picture the character a certain way.

But please, don't just *tell* us about the character's personality by saying things like, "Susie was so nice. She made everyone feel welcome". *Show* what the character is like:

Susie looked around the crowded room. Several of her friends waved and beckoned to her, but her eyes were drawn to the man who stood alone by the food table. Why wasn't he mingling? Maybe he was just shy. Susie had never seen him before. Did he even know anyone here?
With a mission in mind, Susie headed toward the table, pausing every few steps to smile and acknowledge a "Hey, Susie", or an "It's so good to see you; it wouldn't be the same if you weren't here!" She didn't stop, though, until she was in front of the man. "Hello," she said. "I'm Susie."
He seemed surprised. "I'm Mike. It's nice to meet you. You're the first one who's said hello."
"Well, let's fix that." Susie took his hand and tugged him away from the table. "Come on, I'll introduce you around."

Okay, so maybe that's a bit long (it was off the cuff), but you get the idea. Susie's nice, her friends all seem to like her, and she wants people to feel welcome. There's no indication of what she looks like, but there doesn't need to be; that's irrelevant at this point in the story, and may never be relevant.

 

[ThinkerLover]

Actual Story Ideas - Historical

I'm glad that we're all contributing, here. I think that it is entirely possible for us to use this subject as a story idea thread.

For example....

Nearly everyone on this thread agrees that the pace of the story should build gradually to the intimacy. I would like to add that it is this rising action segment where you can create conflict.

Here's are a couple of historical themes that I've come up with that have plent y of room to create some ascending conflict at the opening of the story. I'm excluding the one that I am working on currently.

General Howe's mistress - General Howe, commander of the Redcoat Army during the Revolutionary War, was known to spend pre-battle days with the wife of one of his subordinates. Imagine the opportunities for conflict: it's hard to imagine that the other commander doesn't know about it, is this what makes it appealling to Howe? What does this woman find attractive about General Howe, if she does at all? Is it a scheme to assassinate him? Each of these can set up a different story entirely.

The Golden Calf - Here's one with deep religious conflict. The worship of "The Golden Calf" by the children of Israel was an orgy rite that they learned from the Egyptians. Obviously, this was not the first time that they had participated in such activities. How did followers the first monotheist religion in the world first experiment in this heathen ritual and what would have driven them to it? Maybe it was Moses' brother Aaron, who was said in the Old Testament to have actually made the Golden Calf in the desert. What enromous responsibility must have been on his shoulders to lead others in their own native religion. But maybe he inwardly sought such escape from just such responsibility of bearing his brother's mantle?

To any idea-hunters, you're welcome!

 

[XXplorher]

...Well, yes... What's your point? (I mean, yes, a lot of stories on Lit lack that aspect; there's no challenge or build-up or anything. What do you have to say on the topic of struggle?)

Off topic: I can't get enough of the nipple on that AV, man. Jesus christ that's fantastic! Even she is in awe.

I'm desperate to feed on that perpetually. THAT is one hella compelling nipple.


Happy Thanksgiving

 

[snoopercharmbrights]

... At least, this would work in a visual medium, like a movie or television. But fiction, despite the fact that it is transmitted through sight, is not actually a visual medium. ...

Hence the oft quoted saying, "The pictures are so much better on radio than on TV."

 

[Cleophila]

I would definitely agree that a lot of the stories on this site are lacking in a certain something, something that would give the reader a deeper connection with the story. I first posted on here a while back with an idea that I had for an erotic story (an idea that I never developed, as it happens, part of the central premise became a plot point on Desperate Housewives and it suddenly seemed less innovative!), but one thing that I was always keen on was to produce an erotic story that would prove to be genuinely erotic by attempting to capture what is great about truly great sex, that it can be a beautiful, exciting moment of union between two souls, that it is a perfect physical expression of a deeper romantic feeling. Any good romantic, erotic story should ideally build fairly slowly up to this moment of exquisite climax. Sure, there can be sexual moments in the story before that, even actual sex, but this is all just to build towards the really great moment at the end. Definitely, what is needed to achieve this is for the characters and the story to go through some development to reach this ideal point.

I do disagree slightly with the original poster's seeming desire for tortured conflict between the lead characters, character development does not necessarily rely on characters hating each other but wanting each other and slowly learning to deal with that. There can be other obstacles that get in the way of your lovers without needing them to be antagonistic towards each other. Dependant on the style and genre of story you are writing then there are different kinds of hurdles that characters would have to get over. For example, in any story where the relationship is somehow taboo (whether that be a simple homosexual relationship or something like an incestuous one), then societal pressures can have more impact on the characters' behaviour than any conflict or antagonism between them. The character development can be a progress from insecurity about how the world would view your relationship to a contentment in being who you want to be and being with who you want to be.

I'm also not entirely sure I agree with some of the opinions expressed about readers not wanting the writer to describe the characters' physical appearance or attributes or that these kind of descriptions are not relevant. Firstly, I would suggest that a character's physical appearance and character are inextricably linked. How we look inevitably affects how we see ourselves and how we think the world sees us and thus has a strong influence on our personality. Imagine twin sisters, one is classically sexually attractive, with straight blonde hair, big breasts etc., while the other is skinny and pale with frizzy sort of hair. Both have come from the same background, with the same upbringing, but their different physical appearances will have made them develop very different personalities. Of course, this doesn't necessarily mean that in this situation it will always develop so the hot blonde has one particular personality (e.g. her good looks won't always mean she would behave like a stuck up bitch), but the fact that she is hot, blonde and big breasted and the way this makes people behave towards her is a relevant detail to understanding the person she is. Meanwhile, our appearance, how we dress, how we do our hair, how we move or walk, are all reflections of an interior self displayed through our physical appearance. Imagine instead if the sisters were identical twins but one dressed in short skirts and crop tops while the other prefered long, baggy sweaters. You are not just telling the reader that she wore short skirts because it's a sexy or titillating image, it also tells you something about the person who chooses to dress like that. The written word may not be a visual medium in the same way as TV is, but a simple physical description can still show and suggest a great deal about a character that otherwise would require unnecessary amounts of expositionary detail.

Also, I would not really agree that giving a physical description is off putting to a reader as it contradicts their fantasies (the guy that said he preferred small breasted women feeling that if the story describes a D chested woman it turns him off). As far as I'm concerned, I like the thought that the character is a real three dimensional person, that the writer has him or her all worked out even if the writing itself only reveals so much. It doesn't matter to me if the character does not correspond with my ideal fantasy lover. The people that we really love in the real world, the people that we truly desire, are not simply our fantasies made flesh, but real, complex, unpredictable people with their own looks, traits, quirks and kinks. Therefore, the characters we fall in love with in fiction should feel like real people. It is the writer's job to bring out the charms and the flaws of the character and make it so the former enough outweighs the latter that we want to love them none the less. Equally, I do not agree with the person who said that first person narration puts them off as they can not relate if the character is a different age, gender or background. Surely the skill of good writing is to make you able to empathise with a character's dilemma even if it is not one you would likely find yourself in, we don't just read books about people just like us. An example would be the film Secretary, which I found one of the most romantic and sexy in recent years even though I do not have a particular tendency towards the whole bondage, dominance, submission thing. It worked because the writing (and the acting) was such that it created characters you could empathise with and that made it sexy even if you wouldn't directly put yourself in their place.

Another example to further illustrate some of my points would be to look at some of the great romantic stories. All sorts of readers down the years have fallen in love with Darcy and Lizzie from Pride and Prejudice, virtually none of those readers would be able to directly relate to being or marrying one of the wealthiest men in regency England, but they can empathise with the romance. The title of the novel pretty clearly states the characters' flaws but they just go to make them feel real. Equally, Austen does provide physical descriptions, not feeling that this will prevent her readers from projecting their own ideal onto Lizzie but rather wanting them to see her as a real person. So, Lizzie (like Jane Eyre or countless other romantic heroines) is rather plain to look at, but Darcy (whose own appearance is not quite conventionally handsome), and Austen's readers love her no less for that. Yes, the story is about showing the beauty of her mind and spirit, far finer than physical beauty, but it is not about ignoring her physical looks, as that is to lose a piece of what makes her her.

I hope some of that made sense. I've no desire to offend anyone by disagreeing with them, so I've tried to argue my point rather than just telling people I think they're wrong and that's made this end up as rather a long post. I am pleased that this thread exists, though, just to give the opportunity to show there are people out there who want deeper, more interesting and, in the end, more sexy stories. This is what I would like to read and, when I manage to get it together right, what I will try and write!

 

[ThinkerLover]

Cleophila,

Thank you very much for your post, you get a lot across in one entry - I like it.

Perhaps I can shed some light on topics that you bring up. I think that physical characteristics are tools for conflict insight.

For example, suppose the character does have D-cup breasts and a small waistline and perfectly shaped legs. What about that makes them attractive to the other person? If it is merely "Wow, she has a great body - I wanna hit that!" then I personally think it's cliché and boring. But if the opposite person has some conflict that draws them to that individual because of their particular looks, they become instantly more interesting. For example, a man who is married to a woman who has let herself go or let herself become so focused on her career that they have no intimacy anymore can look at such a woman through lusty eyes and yet be bound by his guilt over cheating on his wife. The conflict is what gives the characters depth.

Coincidentally, Bronte and Austen are excellent examples of conflict generated by the phenomenon of "opposites attract". You'll note that both Jane Eyre and also Elizabeth Bennet hated their eventual spouses at one point of the story. A conflict of classes was so primal during 19th century literature that they could have been writing about landing on Mars and the theme would still be "I love him but he represents everything that I don't want in a relationship." The authors then use the "plain Jane" descriptors to accentuate the difference between the characters' classes. While neither Rochester or Darcy are notably handsome men, they are well-received in society as well as women who are beautiful, such as Lizzie's sister - ironically named "Jane", because they are wealthy. This sets up further the difference in class, making Jane and Lizzie complete misfits for their lovers.

I think that you raise some excellent points. I would say that your story deserves another go, despite the conflicting plotline in Desperate Housewives. I find myself going old novel attempts frequently and doing a "Spring CLeaning" in which I will ask myself "What the hell was I thinking for this section? I think that this should take a new direction entirely.

Surprisingly, it can be very soul-searching to hit that delete key.

Anyway, thank you for contributing!

 

[Cleophila]

I might dig up my old story idea at some point, but I have moved on to a new idea that is a different genre but has some of the same interests. It's not exactly erotica, but it does build up to a climactic sex scene which is a moment of union between my two central characters, so I guess it could be something I post here.
My previous idea, in fact slightly relevant to what we were talking about with giving characters physical descriptions, involved a superficial man who judges entirely by appearance having an accident which blinds him and his wife teaching him how sensual sex can be when it is based on heightening the other senses, touch, sound, taste and smell, which eventually brings them closer to one another than they had ever been before. If anyone's interested, here is the thread where I first suggested it: http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=607093. As I said, the Desperate Housewives plot where Carlos is blinded and he and Gabrielle learn how to appreciate the multi-sensual experience of "blind sex" was a bit too similar and put me off going further with it.

 

[ThinkerLover]

I might dig up my old story idea at some point, but I have moved on to a new idea that is a different genre but has some of the same interests. It's not exactly erotica, but it does build up to a climactic sex scene which is a moment of union between my two central characters, so I guess it could be something I post here.
My previous idea, in fact slightly relevant to what we were talking about with giving characters physical descriptions, involved a superficial man who judges entirely by appearance having an accident which blinds him and his wife teaching him how sensual sex can be when it is based on heightening the other senses, touch, sound, taste and smell, which eventually brings them closer to one another than they had ever been before. If anyone's interested, here is the thread where I first suggested it: http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=607093. As I said, the Desperate Housewives plot where Carlos is blinded and he and Gabrielle learn how to appreciate the multi-sensual experience of "blind sex" was a bit too similar and put me off going further with it.

Sounds awesome. Keep us posted!

 

[CWatson]

Off topic: I can't get enough of the nipple on that AV, man. Jesus christ that's fantastic! Even she is in awe.

I'm desperate to feed on that perpetually. THAT is one hella compelling nipple.

Yeah, I thought the same when I stole it from the "Nipples" thread. I think it is a little classier than the stuff we men normally put up.

Cleo, you raise a lot of very good points, but--and please don't take this the wrong way--you're actually agreeing with me. First off, when I talk about the statistics and stuff, I am referring (I should have made this clear) to a practice among beginning porn writers to use physical descriptions in place of characterization. The assumption is that if they can convince The Reader of the character's physical attractiveness, they're done and can get to the sex; and, to be fair, this is true in visual pornography, which is probably where most of their experience as consumers comes from. But we are not filmographers; we're writers. And the rules are different here.

Your counter-argument about the twins--a very interesting idea, I might add--actually proves the concept, in that personality is still more important to understanding those characters than is physical appearance. Because, yes, physical appearance does affect personality, but the way it affects personality depends on, well, that personality. Stephen King puts it best: "As the whore said to the bashful sailor, 'It ain't how much you got, kid, it's all in how you use it.' " How is our less-attractive, frizzy-haired sister choosing to react to her more-limited physical assets? Is she going to be resentful and grumpy that she wasn't blessed the way her sister was? Probably; else there's no story. But hey, what if she isn't? What if we do that whole beautiful-on-the-inside thing and have the more-attractive twin be the one with the real self-esteem problems? After all, she is being constantly exposed to men who aren't talking with the big head, or talking to her head either; that's got to be demoralizing after a while. How are you going to play it? Because, no matter how informed-by-physical-appearances the person is, the person is still more important. =)

And, for heaven's sakes, girl: write that story! It sounds excellent!

 

[snoopercharmbrights]

I would definitely agree that a lot of the stories on this site are lacking in a certain something, something that would give the reader a deeper connection with the story. ...

yes - the usual shorthand for that is, "There's a lot of rubbish posted on Lit."

... an erotic story that would prove to be genuinely erotic by attempting to capture what is great about truly great sex, that it can be a beautiful, exciting moment of union between two souls, that it is a perfect physical expression of a deeper romantic feeling. Any good romantic, erotic story should ideally build fairly slowly up to this moment of exquisite climax.
...
I do disagree slightly with the original poster's seeming desire for tortured conflict between the lead characters, character development does not necessarily rely on characters hating each other but wanting each other and slowly learning to deal with that. ...

These two points are not antithetic. They simply describe two different sorts of story. Conflict above a trivial level has no place in an out-and-out romance, but romance has little place in a non-consent (ie, rape) story.

... I'm also not entirely sure I agree with some of the opinions expressed about readers not wanting the writer to describe the characters' physical appearance or attributes or that these kind of descriptions are not relevant. Firstly, I would suggest that a character's physical appearance and character are inextricably linked. ...

My original point was that a police pathology report needs facts like height, weight, bust-waist-hips measurements, colouring, etc, but that it is not intended to be erotic, and the effect is often quite the reverse. As to the link between appearance and personality, there I disagree. Over the years I have known jolly (glass half full) people who are fat, thin, tall, short, whatever. Similarly I have known morose (glass half empty) people of every type. Less common are the choleric, but they again they are not easily detected by body type.

 

[KarennaC]

I was taking physical description to mean the "She was a tall blonde with blue eyes, 36DD breasts, and a narrow waist" laundry list sort of things that show up in some of the stories here but don't really contribute to the story. Sometimes a tall blonde with 36DD, etc, is a raging bitch because she knows she's gorgeous, or is tortured inside because she knows everyone else thinks she's too gorgeous not to be a bitch, and that would contribute to characterization. But sometimes that type of description is given for the sole purpose of titillating the reader, and, as CWatson said, is the only attempt at characterization in the story.

As for conflict, to my mind conflict exists in nearly every plot, though it may not be obvious. In a sappy romance (no offense meant by that designation; that's how I describe my own romance stories), there may be no conflict at all between the main characters, but there may be conflict between those characters and nature (one gets trapped by a storm en route to see the other), or between one of the main characters and a secondary character, or between a character and society (she can't date him because he's rich and she's poor), or within one of the characters (how can he let himself love her with the past he has?) To me, conflict is what makes most stories interesting, and what keeps the story moving along to the climax and end.

That isn't to say, however, that a conflict-less story can't be a good story with a decent plot, but the only examples I can think of are stories that are more of an interlude in the characters' lives (husband and wife spend a romantic evening with candles, bubblebath, and bed). Even in some of those stories that I've read, though, there is conflict, though it may be only alluded to in the story; for example, kids are at Grandma's (conflict is that they don't get enough romantic time because of the kids), or they've been working too hard and had to schedule this night to spend time together, or so on.

Dang, I used a lot of parentheses in this post...

 

[Cleophila]

Of course, I don't mean to say that physical description can take the place of other kinds of characterisation, but I do feel it is important to building up a fully rounded picture of a person. It has been suggested generally on this thread that it is worth leaving out physical descriptions entirely (or almost entirely), my argument was mostly against a writer doing this. Naturally, "a tall blonde with blue eyes, 36DD breasts, and a narrow waist" is not the best or most exciting way to describe a character's looks (I absolutely agree with the objection on this thread to descriptions that read like lists of statistics), but that doesn't mean an alternative description would be worthless. Nor is it true that the tall blonde with blue eyes, 36DD breasts, and a narrow waist would always have the same personality, but I still maintain her personality is linked to her looks. I think KarennaC and CWatson are totally right to explore how the character reacts to their own appearance, and to consider that to be the important thing, but without any physical description we would be totally lacking that insight into their personality.

Although I, like snoopercharmbrights have known people of a wide variety of dispositions and personalities, I could not say that any of them had personalities entirely independent of or removed from how they look. The way you look and the way people look at you is one of many different things that form your personality, along with how you are raised and the relationships you develop with those around you. And, as with all matters of personality, it is always in flux. One good example of character development can be a character coming to terms with their own appearance, if someone can love you or desire you with the looks that you previously thought made you ugly then you react to your own appearance in a new way, but it is still a way of developing your personality based on how you look. The character has grown and developed how he or she relates to their looks, a kind of progression that would be impossible if the story did not mention his or her appearance.

I'd also add another note on why I find physical description necessary to a good story. It is a great way to understand a character and a developing relationship to view the other character through their eyes, the way that one character reads the physical traits of another tells us so much about both individually and the way they relate in particular. In a good romantic story, the way one protagonist views the other's appearance often changes, obvious flaws and defects become transformed into the charms of personality and individuality. To return to a previous example, Charlotte Bronte is the master of this, look at the way Lucy Snowe describes the way M. Paul in the first part of Villette compared to the later stages. If she gave us no physical descriptions at all then we would not get to understand this development in the relationship and her character.

On the subject of conflict, I agree completely with what KarennaC just said. It is kind of one of the points that I was trying to make but made a bit more clearly and concisely. The original poster raised some interesting questions but was, I felt, a bit overly dwelling purely on conflict between the protagonists. As KarennaC points out, a good story could have a variety of obstacles (personal, societal, natural, potentially even supernatural) and conflict between protagonists is just one. And, as you say, you could have a story without obstacles or barriers but writing convincingly about a loving couple in a successful long term relationship and making it romantic or erotic is quite a skill, I feel. There are only a few examples I can think of in books, films or TV where a writer has created a convincing couple in a successful relationship and made their readers or audience root for them. Wash and Zoe from Joss Whedon's Firefly would be one and Nick and Nora Charles from Dashiell Hammett's The Thin Man another, but it doesn't come up very often.

With my own writing, I am still trying (and usually failing) to live up to the high standards I look for in what I like to read. However, as I mentioned, I have a new idea that you may hear more of if I can figure it out!

 

[KarennaC]

Cleo, I see your point about physical description informing the character's personality. I think, though, that if that's the author's intent in providing a description, the physical description shouldn't necessarily be the main focus, but should be part of a whole; whether the character is human, alien, hybrid, or a supernatural creature, I think the reader should be able to see that character as a real person. On the other hand, if the character is something other than human, more of a physical description would probably be necessary.

The "laundry list" description doesn't work well no matter what the reason for it, in my opinion. Using my previous "tall blonde" example, instead of the laundry list, one might say:

She tucked her long blonde hair behind her ears and tugged on the waistband of her new jeans. Why was it so hard for companies to make jeans long enough for tall women? The only ones she was ever able to find that were long enough needed a belt to keep them around her narrow waist.

That example gives the reader a physical description and also a glimpse of her personality: she's frustrated with her body because it's hard to find clothes that fit.

Some of this seems, in my opinion, to be personal preference; I prefer not to get bogged down with physical descriptions in either my reading or my writing, and others prefer to have the physical description. I can understand, however, that not having a physical description might be akin to not having an idea of the character's personality as far as making the character a fully realized person.

Cleo, I hope you figure out your idea; it sounds like it would be interesting to read!

 

[snoopercharmbrights]

In the twelve Kobekistan novels I have never put a description of the main character, the Emir (previously David Ransome). As an interesting exercise I will try asking some of my readers to do a "laundry list" description of his physical appearance and see what they say. I'll report back what they say.

 

[KarennaC]

Snooper, great idea. It would be interesting to see how many different views of the same character you get.

 

[ThinkerLover]

Yes, Snooper, please do!

 

[HardNightDay]

None of my stories can be classified as wanker stories and it's a shame so many authors are under the impression that they need to please the masses and weave a story to support the discriptive sexual acts.

Though HardNightDay tries to find the middle ground my opinion is I wish more authors would strive for a much lower percentage of sex in their stories.

Strive for Literature of an adult nature rather than erotica with a touch of literature.

I suspect more of my writing in the future will be of this type. However, I'm skeptical it will get much interest on Literotica itself. Sex is to erotica what ray guns are to sci-fi. I am quite interested in high quality "hybrid" stories though. I'm playing around with very sophisticated plots that include some highly graphic sex.

 

[HardNightDay]

Two important aspects: Consistency and staying true to the character's "personality".

If you aren't consistent with your character, then you may as well not develop them at all if you're just going to toss it all out the window by the second paragraph.

Stay true to your characters, and DEVELOP them over time - there's nothing erotic about a woman becoming a total whore by page two after you've painted them as a saintly figure. Do it slowly(Slower?), stay true to the personality you've set up and have them, along with the reader, pondering these changes they are feeling if you're going to drastically change them.

One of the goals of good erotica should be to connect the reader and the characters, and being inconsistent and having people rapidly changing personality traits(Unless explained why) can easily destroy that connection.

This is very true. I'm struggling right now with a chapter in which I seem to be stuck on an erotic scene. Why can't I write a simple erotic scene, I ask myself. It should be simple to visualize and write such a scene. After contemplating my writers block for about a week, I realized it was because the characters, through what has gone on earlier in the story, had changed, at least in my mind. However, I couldn't describe the change because I hadn't written enough of the background story. After writing two additional scenes to show the development of their relationship the scene I was struggling with wrote itself. To not have the characters grow as a result of what was happening in the story seemed contrived.

 

[HardNightDay]

Of course, I don't mean to say that physical description can take the place of other kinds of characterisation, but I do feel it is important to building up a fully rounded picture of a person. It has been suggested generally on this thread that it is worth leaving out physical descriptions entirely (or almost entirely)...

Hi Cleophila,

I think if you'll look back, what I was suggesting is not that physical descriptions were not relevant, but that what the writer chooses to say physically about the person is important and that, to a point, the less said about what's isn't important, the better. To describe a woman as 36-24-36 with DD breasts really says so little about her. As you say, with measurements like that she might be quite attractive and thus relate to the world full of self-confidence. On the other hand, I have known women who are quite the opposite. They are so overwhelmed with attention they become quite self-conscious and even shy. The description is, itself, very incomplete and without other proper characterization the reader can easily draw different conclusions about the character. I know this part you agree with.

I think another way to approach it is to use emotionally more engaging terms like full-chested, buxom, cleavage for the ages, or look at the gams on that tall drink of water. Things that either say what the person thinks or feels, or what a character thinks or feels about the person.

Part of my point is that when parts of the puzzle are left incomplete the imagination of the reader will fill it in, so, as writers, we struggle with how to say a lot, how to say what's important about a character, in relatively small spaces. The trick of course is to decide which parts to provide and which parts to let the reader fill in. There's no perfect answer and if there was, what on earth would the literary critics do with their free time.

As a little aside and to give folks an idea of what physical characteristics I work with, I'm working on a story about a woman, a lesbian feminist actually. In my mind I have formed something of an image of her. She's tallish, with somewhat broad shoulders and a body that is toned by years of working on her ranch. Her hair is black, like the raven, and sometimes nearly as wild, though she often wears it pulled back or braided. Her eyes are a blueish grey, at once clear and cool, like a cloudless winters morning. She wears a battered hat and loose fitting clothes that conceal her buxom womanly shape. Her face, once youthful, is now browned by the sun and small wrinkles crease her eyes when she smiles. Still, many would consider her a beautiful woman and she stands proudly confident, yet at ease.

It's off the top of my head and very, very raw, but those are the things I would like to reveal about her. I have two scenes in which I expect to reveal something about what Anne looks like. The first is when a young woman, who idolizes Anne, meets her for the first time. During this scene I intend to describe Anne's size, confident presence and overall beauty and contrast that with her rather battered, drab, utilitarian choice of wardrobe, all seen and processed through the eyes of the young woman. In the second scene, the two will be working in the field, where the young woman will again notice Anne's beauty, but this time will notice the tanned skin, the wrinkles, and a warm smile, revealing that the image of the idol is fading and being replaced with a real person.

Anyway, I blather....

 

[Cleophila]

Hi Cleophila,

I think if you'll look back, what I was suggesting is not that physical descriptions were not relevant, but that what the writer chooses to say physically about the person is important and that, to a point, the less said about what's isn't important, the better. To describe a woman as 36-24-36 with DD breasts really says so little about her. As you say, with measurements like that she might be quite attractive and thus relate to the world full of self-confidence. On the other hand, I have known women who are quite the opposite. They are so overwhelmed with attention they become quite self-conscious and even shy. The description is, itself, very incomplete and without other proper characterization the reader can easily draw different conclusions about the character. I know this part you agree with.

I think another way to approach it is to use emotionally more engaging terms like full-chested, buxom, cleavage for the ages, or look at the gams on that tall drink of water. Things that either say what the person thinks or feels, or what a character thinks or feels about the person.

Part of my point is that when parts of the puzzle are left incomplete the imagination of the reader will fill it in, so, as writers, we struggle with how to say a lot, how to say what's important about a character, in relatively small spaces. The trick of course is to decide which parts to provide and which parts to let the reader fill in. There's no perfect answer and if there was, what on earth would the literary critics do with their free time.

Maybe it is just a matter of personal preference, but I like to see mention of even aspects of a character's look or personality that don't seem that important as it serves to create a complete person, without a notion of his or her physical appearance than that illusion of reality is lacking. It wasn't disagreeing with you about physical appearance mattering. I just didn't agree with when you said:

It can distance the reader from characters. For instance, I happen to be a guy attracted to smaller sized boobies. The fact that the majority of characters described in the stories have size D, DD, or even E boobs is a turn off when i visualize the character, one then reads on and realizes that the size of their boobs is quite irrelevant to anything having to do with the story. Sometimes leaving physical characteristics vague allows the reader to abstract the person, or fill in what they find appealing.

I feel that the reader doesn't have to project his or her fantasies completely onto the character, the character doesn't have to have their ideal body type for him or her to be a good character and one that the reader can relate to or find attractive. Presumably, even though you prefer smaller breasts, a real woman with a larger chest would not be such a turn off to the real you that you would completely lose interest in her. So it should be with the character. He or she should feel like a real person and not be the reader's ultimate fantasy object. A fuller description gives you what the reader might perceive to be flaws in the characters appearance but doesn't make the character a less interesting or desirable one.

Anyway, like I said, this is mainly I guess a matter of taste and quite a minor disagreement as we both seem to be in agreement about some broader points. In particular, I feel that this is spot on:

As a little aside and to give folks an idea of what physical characteristics I work with, I'm working on a story about a woman, a lesbian feminist actually. In my mind I have formed something of an image of her. She's tallish, with somewhat broad shoulders and a body that is toned by years of working on her ranch. Her hair is black, like the raven, and sometimes nearly as wild, though she often wears it pulled back or braided. Her eyes are a blueish grey, at once clear and cool, like a cloudless winters morning. She wears a battered hat and loose fitting clothes that conceal her buxom womanly shape. Her face, once youthful, is now browned by the sun and small wrinkles crease her eyes when she smiles. Still, many would consider her a beautiful woman and she stands proudly confident, yet at ease.

It's off the top of my head and very, very raw, but those are the things I would like to reveal about her. I have two scenes in which I expect to reveal something about what Anne looks like. The first is when a young woman, who idolizes Anne, meets her for the first time. During this scene I intend to describe Anne's size, confident presence and overall beauty and contrast that with her rather battered, drab, utilitarian choice of wardrobe, all seen and processed through the eyes of the young woman. In the second scene, the two will be working in the field, where the young woman will again notice Anne's beauty, but this time will notice the tanned skin, the wrinkles, and a warm smile, revealing that the image of the idol is fading and being replaced with a real person.

This is just how I feel physical description should work. In a short paragraph on the way that Anne looks and dresses, you have created a stronger image of the woman as a real person in the reader's mind and have suggested aspects of her life, her background and her personality that would take significantly longer to do if you were to go into detail about these aspects of her character. Also, like I said in my last post, it can tell you so much about a relationship and how it develops to describe how one character views another physically, as you do here in having your protagonist's view of Anne's appearance grow and develop as a sign of how their personal relationship grows too, those real flaws and the genuine character traits come out.

Ironically, I too am attempting a new story featuring a character who is a lesbian feminist and a lot of the early relationship between her and the male protagonist is based on such physical judgements. The male character is a photographer and first notices her in a photo that he has taken and therefore develops a whole character for her in his head based solely on what her appearance in the photo could tell him about her (which also tells us a lot about his character as the kind of man who would prefer to hide behind the lens of a camera or study women in photographs and imagine their personalities rather than interract with them). As the story unfolds, some of his judgements prove correct but others are way off, but whatever happens next is formed by those early judgements. Such it is with most of us in every relationship we form. Our first port of call in terms of making and forming impressions is the visual and physical, therefore it should be the first thing that allows one character to form an opinion on another. Using my photograph device, I am just developing this so the protagonist can form a lot of opinions looking at the other character long before having to meet her.

 

[SweetWitch]

I blame the voting system.

If good votes are what you, the author, want above all else, then the little miss perfect saint turns into a nymphomaniac begging for a multiple penetration gang-bang about five past midnight on her eighteenth birthday, or preferably four minutes earlier. It will also help if she looks like a fourteen year old.

This is fine somewhere like Lit, but it doesn't work quite so well when the punters are paying for their kicks. All the e-book publishers will tell you that paying customers demand a little more character in their stories.

I have to interject. Sorry, I know you don't think highly of me as the author of The Naked Party thread, but I disagree with the highlighted text above.

I don't put a lot of sex into my stories, and some of them have no sex at all. Eroticism doesn't require a sloppy, slippery accounting of how tab A fits into slot B any more than a good vote depends on same. There are a great many here who consistently write without sex, and they get consistently high votes and readership.

Now, that having been said, we get back to the subject of the thread: Character Development. All these "high-voted" non-sex stories have one major thing in common -- well-thought-out character development. Add to that an interesting plot line and action that is well-written, and you have a winner.

 

[snoopercharmbrights]

... Sorry, I know you don't think highly of me as the author of The Naked Party thread, ...

If you recall, I said that the thread was currently pointless rubbish, and as such belonged on the GB, not cluttering up the AH. I don't think the less of you starting the thread; I just wish you, and the starters of the other threads like it, had put them in the right place, instead of making the AH unusable for its intended purpose which is "A place for writers and readers to socialize and discuss the craft of writing". Hence this discussion of the craft of writing is on Story Ideas, and when SI is full of "Who do you want to fuck" type threads, then I suppose serious writers will gravitate somewhere else, driven out by the drivel.

... I disagree with ...

If good votes are what you, the author, want above all else, then the little miss perfect saint turns into a nymphomaniac begging for a multiple penetration gang-bang about five past midnight on her eighteenth birthday, or preferably four minutes earlier. It will also help if she looks like a fourteen year old.

I don't put a lot of sex into my stories, and some of them have no sex at all. Eroticism doesn't require a sloppy, slippery accounting of how tab A fits into slot B any more than a good vote depends on same. There are a great many here who consistently write without sex, and they get consistently high votes and readership. ...

I'm sorry, but while I agree that eroticism does not need detailed physical description for me, and I assume for you, the fact remains that if you read the top ten stories on here by vote attracting success, without exception they are chapters of long stories which are dotted throughout with tab A and slot B episodes, and most with violent versions thereof.

 

[SweetWitch]

If you recall, I said that the thread was currently pointless rubbish, and as such belonged on the GB, not cluttering up the AH. I don't think the less of you starting the thread; I just wish you, and the starters of the other threads like it, had put them in the right place, instead of making the AH unusable for its intended purpose which is "A place for writers and readers to socialize and discuss the craft of writing". Hence this discussion of the craft of writing is on Story Ideas, and when SI is full of "Who do you want to fuck" type threads, then I suppose serious writers will gravitate somewhere else, driven out by the drivel.



I'm sorry, but while I agree that eroticism does not need detailed physical description for me, and I assume for you, the fact remains that if you read the top ten stories on here by vote attracting success, without exception they are chapters of long stories which are dotted throughout with tab A and slot B episodes, and most with violent versions thereof.

You should take some time to look Naked over. It is, essentially, a place where several of us "hang out" and discuss many things -- writing not being the least of those subjects. We support each other, offer assistance, toss around ideas and help one another through minor blocks. Yes, there is a lot of flirting and silliness, but that will happen among any group of friends.

And make no mistake, we are friends there. Many of us have met face-to-face and get together when we can. Those people, in the center of what you call rubbish, have gone a long way toward helping me through some of the worst tragedy that anyone should every have to survive, and have gotten me back to my writing. The thread, populated by writers, does not belong on the GB.

Now, as far as the highest readership goes, it speaks for itself. There are droves of anonymous persons out there who are looking for something to titillate, something taboo that they can't get anywhere else. Of course those types of stories will get the highest amounts of readers.

Some of us, though, don't look at that. If you could have seen my novels, before I took them down, you would have seen a huge readership. They had some of the highest votes on the site and one chapter won the monthly -- a chapter that had no sex at all in it. That particular book has now been published.

It's not the voting system. It's what the readers choose and want. Still, there are many of them out there that look only for quality. It's for those individuals that many of us practice our craft on this site.

 

[KarennaC]

So how do people develop the characters in their stories? Do you know at the outset what your characters are like, or do you learn more about them as you write? Do you brainstorm a description before you start the story?

For me, it varies from story to story. I usually have some basic ideas about the characters when I start, mostly their ages and maybe what type of person they are (shy, aggressive, etc.) In the "stroke" stories I've written, that's usually all I have, with possibly some physical characteristics since I'm more likely to include those in stroke than in more developed stories. In my more developed stories, I'm more likely to have a fully formed idea of their personality (though sometimes that changes as I write), as well as some background info about the character so I understand why they act the way they do. Sometimes their backstory makes it into the story, sometimes not.

I have, however, written some stories where the only thing I've determined about the characters before I started writing were their ages and genders. In my "Shelter in the Storm" series, all I knew about the characters when I started the first story were their names, the fact that they were both men, and the fact that they'd been lovers in the past. I learned more about them as I wrote- I swear sometimes when I'm writing, I'm just taking dictation from the characters- and I think they ended up being well-developed characters. It was fun for me seeing them develop as I wrote, because I was never sure what I'd find out about them next.