Self Image or Public Image

[artisticbiguy]

I find it interesting how so many people, including myself, have a truly dismorphic perception of themselves, physically-mentally-emotionally. The majority of the time, this dismorphia is turned towards our seeing flaws in ourselves, or magnifying small imperfections to garganutan proportions, that others do not see. In much fewer instances, we inflate our positive attributes, or focus on a specific one exclusively and totally discount our blantant limitations. There are also times where our physical appearance or social standing (gender, race, creed, orientation, etc.) is used as a straight jacket by society to pigeon hole us into lesser roles, discounting our talents or abilities as individuals.

This leads me to wonder, "what is more interesting in a story?"

1) Is it more interesting to have characters who do not see their own value and must struggle to overcome their self-imposed limitations...

or

2) is it more interesting to have people whose value is overlooked overcoming external limitations or judgements to attain their true potentials?

I can see the fun in both, but I wonder what other people think.

 

[LadyJeanne]

A person who doesn't necessarily see the full value of who they are can be quite endearing - the shy woman who doesn't realize how beautiful and sexy she is can be more attractive and fun than a woman who wields her beauty or sexuality like a weapon.

I can get a little irritated with that, though, if it's about seriously low self-esteem rather than an an unaffected or unconscious charm.

Taking the same example, if others don't see how sexy and beautiful a woman is because she is shy or doesn't put it out there - well, I'm a sucker for makeover stories, or stories where the main character 'wins' and surprises everyone by coming from behind, the dark horse, so to speak.

A story that blends both elements is exceptionally good.

 

[BlackShanglan]

I find it interesting how so many people, including myself, have a truly dismorphic perception of themselves, physically-mentally-emotionally.

Amen. For years I kept imagining that I had fingers and genitalia. Thank goodness I've put all of that behind me.

Shanglan

 

[entitled]

Amen. For years I kept imagining that I had fingers and genitalia. Thank goodness I've put all of that behind me.

Shanglan

But you have a tail, which is much more endearing.

 

[neonlyte]

This leads me to wonder, "what is more interesting in a story?"

1) Is it more interesting to have characters who do not see their own value and must struggle to overcome their self-imposed limitations...

or

2) is it more interesting to have people whose value is overlooked overcoming external limitations or judgements to attain their true potentials?

I can see the fun in both, but I wonder what other people think.

Both have their place. Unless one is writing from a single person perspective, the protag is always going to influenced by the other characters and whatever the writer lays on the protag through the other characters. I guess I write most about characters unlocking thier potential with the help of a second character, but then I'm far too interested in the chemistry of relationship than simply exploiting a characters, strengths, weakness or orediliction.

 

[chris 44]

magnifying small imperfections to garganutan proportions,

I fear it would take a microscope to magnify my small imperfection to gargantuan proportions

 

[garbage can]

1) Is it more interesting to have characters who do not see their own value and must struggle to overcome their self-imposed limitations...

Is it Ok, if there are no limitations, your values are not overlooked, there is nothing to overcome.....

You just work and establish a name for yourself, without recognizing potential limitations

 

[Aurora Black]

I'll have to get back to you on that, ABG. My brain is Jello at the moment.

 

[artisticbiguy]

Is it Ok, if there are no limitations, your values are not overlooked, there is nothing to overcome.....

You just work and establish a name for yourself, without recognizing potential limitations

interesting question. If you have no internal obstacles to overcome, would that not automatically mean that all obstacles must be external?

I have always thought that a story involved some form of conflict or obstacle to overcome, internal/external/both. I suppose one could write a story where there is nothing to overcome, where all is fine, good and wonderful... but I can't see it lasting as anything but possibly a short.

 

[3113]

Well, the old example of antigonistic forces in storytelling goes:

Man vs. Man
Man vs. Nature
Man vs. Himself

Man vs. Man means that the antagonistic force is equally human, either a rival guy/girl or man-made institutions. Fighting in a war, fighting against the government or evil empire, fighting against the bank that wants to forclose on his home. (Think The Fountainhead)

Man vs. Nature (or God) means the antagonistic force is something natural with no human pity or reason: tornado or earthquake, for example, but also being lost in the woods, hunting down a white whale, sailing around the world, or dealing with diseases. (Think The Old Man and The Sea)

Man vs. Himself is any battle we have within. A guy or girl fighting internal demons be they alcholism or a bad temper, phobias or neurosis, desires, pride, his dark side or, as you mention, his deepest insecurities. (Think Fight Club)

Obviously, the best novels contain all three (Think The Grapes of Wrath--our Oakies battle against nature, man and their own weaknesses). If, however, I had to pick just one for a story, I'd always go for Man vs. Himself. We are our own worst enemies, and our greatest victories are those where we overcome whatever is keeping us from being all we can be--whether it is a small insecurity or a large psychosis.

Just my humble opinion there.

 

[S-Des]

Both

We are our own worst enemies, and our greatest victories are those where we overcome whatever is keeping us from being all we can be--whether it is a small insecurity or a large psychosis.

Just my humble opinion there.

I like reading stories from both perspectives. My first three, and the two that are almost done, had strong men (some would say overly strong), so I started writing one that's exactly like what artisticbiguy was talking about. He's a geek in high school who never can see past his own self-image, even though he's become a successful adult. The challenge will be to make his growth something that will make readers like him (and make him worthy of the woman he loves). I think a lot of male writers have trouble writing a male character that's not an alpha male unless they're making him a wimp. Most of us are somewhere in between, so I think (hope) people will enjoy a story about an average guy getting by. Now the challenge is to finish it and make it good (because if it sucks, nobody's going to like it anyway). The author who go back and forth between types of characters are always my favorites.

 

[artisticbiguy]

I like reading stories from both perspectives. My first three, and the two that are almost done, had strong men (some would say overly strong), so I started writing one that's exactly like what artisticbiguy was talking about. He's a geek in high school who never can see past his own self-image, even though he's become a successful adult. The challenge will be to make his growth something that will make readers like him (and make him worthy of the woman he loves). I think a lot of male writers have trouble writing a male character that's not an alpha male unless they're making him a wimp. Most of us are somewhere in between, so I think (hope) people will enjoy a story about an average guy getting by. Now the challenge is to finish it and make it good (because if it sucks, nobody's going to like it anyway). The author who go back and forth between types of characters are always my favorites.

I prefer both as well, where the challenges are compounded by internal and external obstacles.

I must admit that I don't generally like stories of men who are "virtuous pilars of strength"... they bore me. I like characters who, though strong and/or virtuous, have some flaws they struggle with, compensate for, or stumble over. Perfection is boring to read about... I can't relate.

 

[Aurora Black]

I like them both, but I tend to use the first one (internal conflict) in my writing. I'm planning to give external conflict a try in the near future.