Blood on Paper

One writer famously said, “Writing is easy. All you do is stare at a blank sheet of paper until drops of blood form on your forehead.”

While this is not terribly practical advice, it is right in one respect: when you write a book – I mean, when you truly write a book, not when you're typing out escapist fiction – you are writing with your own blood.

In the Old Testament, blood is regarded as something sacred. Blood is, in some ways, the essence of who somebody is. Thus, when sin is paid for, it is paid for in blood; first by the sacrifice of a perfect lamb, and finally by the sacrifice of a perfect God.

And when we write novels, we pour ourselves into these characters. We pour our essence into them; we give our blood. Our blood is written on paper in the form of words. It is only when this happens that our stories really and truly come to life.

Before I started the Prophecies – or even after – I had the vague idea that I would write “something awesome”. Even as late as NaNo 2010 the goal of my writing was, in some ways, to glorify God; but my other objectives was just to make the story as cool as it could be.

It wasn't until I revised The War Horn and started work on Tornado C that I solidified my “writer's creed”: that my first and primary objective was to glorify God, and second to create something that would nourish the reader. In The War Horn, I glimpsed something of what a novel would be like when I had that “creed” as my primary purpose. The story was, and still is, the strongest of my tales in terms of theme. (Tornado C will challenge that position once I get to the climax, but that's a long way off.)

When I started outlining Tornado C, I was at a period of growth. I was learning how to further live with God at the center of my life, and how this plays out in another culture – and in my writing.

I discovered something incredible at that time: that all of my work was as straw if I didn't pour myself (and my beliefs) into them. “Writing what you know” doesn't just mean doing lots of research. It also means that the characters themselves won't have life unless you truly know them. And how will you know them?

I found out that if I put parts of myself into my characters, they took to the page in a way that none of my characters have ever done before.

Into the main character of Tornado C I poured the guilt I had before I had become a Christian, before I had discovered the wondrous theme of justification; into his companion, I put bitterness (which everyone knows to some extent), and the struggle with sin we all have; in another character, I put loneliness and, in some ways, embodied my adaption to a new culture and the differences I have with my own; in all of these, the frustration we have when God doesn't seem to hear when we speak to Him; in The Prophecy of Einarr, I have a character who realizes how dangerous surrender to God may be and the pride that holds them back, which I have taken from my own conversion; and in The Voice of God my main character will struggle with the ever-present question of why God does what He does, and why innocents often suffer more than the wicked.

As a result of this, my writing has come alive in new ways. I have often taken something that I wrestle with in my own life and embody it in the written word. If I write about struggles I have never had, will I help those who have them? Yet if I write about the things of life I know, won't the reader understand it better?

If I read a book about a missionary kid adapting in a new culture, I would deeply emphasize with them and their story. In America, I read about missionaries and their trials; now I understand them so much better. In the same way, if the characters of a novel have the same struggles that other people do, they will come alive to your reader.

Thus, writing what you know becomes pouring yourself into your novel. Bits and pieces of myself are found in all of my characters. Why? Because that is the only way I will truly know them, and know how to write them. My stories become my way of articulating my life and my faith.

So my advice to you is this: don't shirk back from becoming your characters and their stories. Pour yourself into them: your struggles, your faith, your experiences, your life, and your blood. Once your readers see your blood on paper, they'll recognize that the same blood flows in their own veins. And regardless of the number of sales you have or the amount of people that read your book, your readers will connect with your story in a way that they can't with the average penny-dreadful.

And that's a very good thing.

Creating Memorable Characters

How do you create memorable characters?

It's a question we all want answered. While creating depth and building the character is up to you, creating characters that aren't cardboard cutouts is actually quite simple. (Please note, however, that this post is not about creating characters with depth and meaning. This post is about a sub-division of character-building: making characters memorable. There's much more to character than this.)

In my own quest for memorable characters, I've encountered several ways you can help make your character "worthy of remembrance". One in particular stands out, however: the Defining Trait.

If you think of your favorite characters in the stories you've read, you can probably think of a defining trait right away. Gandalf is rather mysterious and sometimes grumpy. Tibber the Fibber (from Bryan Davis's "Dragons of Starlight") is, well, rather cracked.

The defining trait doesn't even have to be a "kind" of character, i.e. crazy or grumpy or playful or sharp-tongued. It could just be a way of saying things. Another example from Bryan Davis's books would be Sir Barlow, who loves puns, idioms, and pithy sayings. In one of my short stories, I have a character that is constantly saying that she "abhors" things. For example:

"But—"

"No buts!" cried the Count. "No quotations! No repetitions! I abhor them."

and

"No statements!" said the Count. "No observances! No useless notations! I abhor them."

Another example of a defining trait can be found in the character of Danton Brownbarr in my short story, "The Reality Ring". (And as a side note, I just finished it today. It's about a hundred words longer than In Stasis. The consensus so far is that it's a good story, but not as good as In Stasis.)

Take a look at these two snippets:

--

"Director Brownbarr, sir!" The man burst into Brownbarr's office with the speed of a twentieth century cannonball. His hair was wild and his ASP badge—with his name, Jeremy Mothinghotch, just visible—was hanging on by a couple of threads from his shirt.

Danton Brownbarr, Director of the African Secret Police, glanced up from his desk.

"What is it, Mothinghotch?" he snapped. Brownbarr had only been here since eight in the morning, but he already knew that Mothinghotch had a knack for chaos and confusion, not to mention his barely-adequate form of the dress code. "This had better be good, or I'll have you charged with gross breach of conduct and strung from a street light by your toes."

--

"Halt the stream," Brownbarr said. "Vullerman hasn't been informed?"

"I thought you knew, sir—"

"Are you a blockhead, Mothinghotch, or do you simply have selective memory? I haven't been informed of anything on the Vullerman case yet. I was just transferred from the Ministry of Overseas Affairs."

"Sorry, sir. Mr. Vullerman hasn't been informed."

Brownbarr grunted. "So he's had four anonymous death threats and we also intercepted a hit man in his neighborhood last week—and we're still keeping it a secret?"

"It was the Director's orders, sir." Mothinghotch paused for a moment. "Well, the last director, that is. And how do you know so much about Vullerman's case when you said you haven't been informed?"

"I haven't been informed...officially. But I've worked with Vullerman before, so I keep myself updated."

--

Just from these two excerpts, you can get a pretty good idea of what kind of a guy Brownbarr is, even though you've only read a little bit about him. That's because he has a defining trait.

So to create a character that is memorable, the easiest and fastest way is to find some defining traits. However, make sure that the character is always "in character", so to speak. If the pessimistic character is commenting on how nice it is today, don't you think that would be a bit odd? In the same way, put yourself in the character's head and ask yourself what you would do if you were defined by those traits.

Now, a defining trait isn't all there is to creating memorable characters: things such as character-building, character change, and depth are up to you. But once you have a defining trait, you're on your way to creating a character that your reader will remember.

What about you? Are there any ways you can think of to build dynamic and memorable characters? Can you think of any good examples of memorable characters? Let us know!

To Begin a Novel

I'm preparing to begin my new work-in-progress, which I've codenamed Tornado C. (The actual novel has nothing to do with tornadoes.) I've especially spent a long time planning out the beginning.

But the question has to be asked: what does it take to begin a novel? How should it start out?

There are two ways to answer this: in the writing or in the revision. People like me write high-quality first drafts. Others write painfully rough drafts and edit them into perfection. However you write it, there are a few things you need to know about beginning a novel.

Novels need to start out at the place that begins the conflict of the entire novel. It's the first domino that falls, causing a chain effect until we reach the end of the novel, and there's no dominoes left standing. Daniel Schwabauer calls it "The Inciting Incident".

Once I have that worked out, I usually ask myself three questions. All of these questions need to be answered at one point or another, whether during the writing or during the revision.

1) How can I inform the reader of the main character's background without outright "telling" it?

Background is an important aspect to the story. We need to know who we're supposed to root for. If we don't know our main character, will we care if he breaks his neck?

Of course not. So we need to inform the reader who our main character is. But more importantly, we need to make the reader CARE about the protagonist.

BUT: we need to be very careful not to "tell". The background dump is one of the worst pits a writer could fall into. It slows down the story and alienates the reader, and kills the potential that the first scene might have had.

2) How can I hook the reader?

You don't have to have a murder scene right at the beginning to hook the reader. In fact, you only need one thing to get the reader interested in the story.

All beginnings have one thing in common: a question. If your reader is asking questions, then chances are, they'll want to keep reading. In Tornado C, for instance, the reader is asking questions like, "What did the protagonist do to be imprisoned? Why does everyone hate him? What's going on? What is this war that keeps cropping up?"

Withholding crucial information—such as the reason for my character's imprisionment—is a wonderful way to keep the reader turning the pages. However, the information must be told sometime, or the reader won't be happy. If my readers are wondering why there's a war going on, and I never tell them, question will eventually fizzle out and my reader will be left confused and rather angry.

3) How can I use the "inciting incident" to propel the reader into the rest of the novel?

Writing a fantastic first scene and then leaving the reader hanging is a big no-no. Your first scene must be part of the story unfolding. More than that, it should PROPEL the rest of the story. Like I said earlier, the beginning is the first domino. The first scene is the pebble that starts an avalanche. If you give the reader a promising novel in the first scene and then the first scene has nothing to do with the general plot, the reader feels cheated.

4) How can I connect the beginning to the end?

Jeff Gerke calls this method "circularity". If your beginning has nothing to do with your end, then it'll be pretty much meaningless. But connecting the beginning to the end is a powerful method to create emotion in your reader.

In The War Horn, I used this quite a bit. The final scene takes place in the same place as the first scene, at the same time. The place itself hadn't changed, but that makes my main character realize that HE was the one who had changed. In the last few paragraphs, I drew parallels from the beginning to the end that showed the character change that had happened within my protagonist.

From what I've heard from readers, this scene satisfied. It tied up the loose ends and gave the reader a chance to catch their breath and reflect on what had happened. And it moved them. The reader had gone in a full circle, and yet, things had changed, but in a good way, even though so many painful things had happened.

So, looking at the beginning scene, I always try to find a way to connect the end to the beginning. The beginning is the place where you sow the seeds of emotion that you'll reap at the end.

What sort of methods do you use in creating your beginning scene? Have you found anything in published novels that you find really works?

The Problem of Pacing

No, I don't mean the act of walking back and forth. (That's more of a solution than a problem, actually.) I'm talking about an important element of fiction: pacing. That is, how fast your novel is going and how you're propelling it.

Books like Andrew Klavan's "The Last Thing I Remember" have fast pacing. The Lord of the Rings is an example of slow pacing. (Lots of twentieth and nineteenth-century books are slow-paced, actually.) Determining the pace of your novel is a crucial element to keeping your readers interested.

Recently, though, I've been hearing more and more that books need to be fast-paced in order to be good. Today's reader is a busy person, so you NEED to catch their attention with something like a sudden murder or death by grizzly or some other plot device. (Daniel Schwabauer, in his One Year Adventure Novel curriculum, suggests dropping a body out of the ceiling when the goings get tough.)

At first glance, that seems true. If your novel isn't moving, people will get bored, right? Books like the popular Hunger Games are very fast-paced and thus lend to this myth.

Thing is, you sacrifice certain things when you focus on fast pacing. Here's a couple of examples.

1) Character-Building

Now, this isn't to say that you can't have good, round characters and a fast plot. But when your plot is going at the speed of sound, it's a LOT harder to build strong, believable characters. Some of the greatest character-building moments are when two characters are sitting around the fire and talking. And they're really not doing much at all during that time, are they?

Is that boring? No, if you do it right. In fact, a conversation that's essential to the plot and the characters at the same time is MORE interesting than running for dear life through some random forest. We want to unravel each character's secrets and discover what they're really like behind their masks. But it's hard to have a meaningful conversation when you're running around all the time.

2) Description

One thing that the Christian fantasy author Bryan Davis noted about the Hunger Games was that there wasn't much description. That's very true: because in order to have a fast-paced scene, you have to have minimal description. Description slows things down. (I've especially encountered this in my revisions of The War Horn. It's HARD to balance the pacing of crucial scenes and the description needed.)

So what about this? Is description boring? I think it's a necessary element. (Some might say "necessary evil".) There's such a thing as over-describing, but I think far too many books UNDER-describe. Without description, the reader loses the beauty of immersing themselves in a new world, and it makes things harder to imagine. Sometimes we must sacrifice pacing in order to describe, and that's okay.

3) Theme

Things are going, going, going—there's a murder here, death attempt there, and pretty soon you're flying to the end of the book. You turn the last page, take a breath, and what happens? Not too much.

You can balance meaning and pacing. But it's hard. A truly beautiful theme may come out of a book that took the time (and cut the pacing) to expand that theme. The White Lion Chronicles comes to mind. Many readers may complain that the beginning of the series was painfully slow, but that background was essential to building the theme and the characters before diving into the fast-paced stuff.

Of course, it also depends on the novel. Lord of the Rings is an epic—the very word conjures images of thick, heavy books. Thrillers, however, are supposed to have fast pacing. Still, whatever kind of novel you're writing, you need to determine the balance of power between pacing and the other elements of story.

So here's my advice. If you've made a scene slow on purpose, then stick to it, even when someone criticizes it. Just say, "Psh tosh." (That's my favorite phrase right now. Does anyone else use favorite phrases?) Fast pacing is good, but NOT at the expense of the theme, the characters, and the description.

What do you think? What do you say about the problem of pacing?

Until another day.

Character and Plot; Which is More Important?

Before I start this post, I am going to say that this will not be an extremely long post; just in case you were wondering. :)

Just so you know, I wrote this in two segments, two different nights--so I may have a different outlook on some parts of the post than others.

Now, in this post there are two opposing arguments; Characters are Most Important, and Plots are Most Important. I will investigate each of these arguments, and then come to a conclusion. But the real question at stake is this; should stories be character driven, or plot driven? Whichever side may win takes the bacon. :)


Characters are Most Important

Characters are indeed important. Some of the most important parts of a story are contained here. But are they MOST important? Here's a couple of points that seems to point in that direction (no pun intended!).

1) A character may 'make or break' a book. Bad and poorly made characters drag the story in the dirt, while the opposite is true as well; great characters pull stories up and place them among the best stories of out time.

2) Good villains make or break a book. The villain is just as important as the other characters, more so in many cases.

3) Readers will care more about the story and recommend it to more people if the characters are done right. The character in LOTR are wonderful and real to us--and that is part of what makes so many LOTR fanatics in this world.

4) Characters narrate. If a character that you don't like (meaning a two-demensional, boring character) is narrating, the narration itself is flat. On the other hand, if your favorite character is narrating, the narration seems more alive to you.

So does this prove the supremacy of Characters? We'll see.


Plot is Most Important

Characters are well and good, and perfectly necessary for a successful story, but it is plot that is most important. Right?

1) Without a plot to back them up, the characters are useless. Who cares about the character development when your plot is so unoriginal and un-arresting that it turns off readers from the first whiff?

2) Plot is what keeps the readers going--not the characters.

Not very many points to back Plot up here, but the two I have are strong. Surely this will prove, once and for all, that Plot is clearly the better.


The Overview

In this part, I'll address each point.

C-1) "A character may 'make or break' a book. Bad and poorly made characters drag the story in the dirt, while the opposite is true as well; great characters pull stories up and place them among the best stories of out time." True or false? That may be up to the reader reading this, but in my view, this is mostly true. Sure, bad characters drag the story in the mud, but the stories can still limp on.

C-2) "Good villains make or break a book. The villain is just as important as the other characters, more so in many cases. " Basically, this is the same thing as the last point. I'm not sure why I even wrote this. :) But the same reply I gave above applies.

C-3) "Readers will care more about the story and recommend it to more people if the characters are done right. The character in LOTR are wonderful and real to us--and that is part of what makes so many LOTR fanatics in this world." This is absolutely true. The characters, not the plot, are usually what gives a story meaning. What the character does is what gives meaning to a story.

C-4) "Characters narrate. If a character that you don't like (meaning a two-dimensional, boring character) is narrating, the narration itself is flat. On the other hand, if your favorite character is narrating, the narration seems more alive to you." To an extent, this is true. But if the writer does his/her job right, we'll either forget who's narrating, or be greatly aware of the narrator and share his/her thoughts--which also takes a good writer, partially invalidating the point. You see, if the writer has enough skill to get the reader inside a character's mind skillfully, why can't s/he develop the characters well?

P-1) "Without a plot to back them up, the characters are useless. Who cares about the character development when your plot is so unoriginal and un-arresting that it turns off readers from the first whiff?" This is mostly true, in my opinion. What good are characters when the plot is bad? But it depends on the reader. Some readers really need to connect with characters in order to get into the story, while some are indifferent. This means that some readers won't mind the plot, while some will be quite put off by it--so it is partially a matter of opinion. However, there are certain points where you hold up your hands and say, "I can't take this plot anymore," and put the book down.

P-2) "Plot is what keeps the readers going--not the characters." The above answer/explanation/dissection I gave also applies to this. In a way, this is a matter of opinion. Some books, like "The Shadow and Night" by Chris Walley, rely on characters much more than plot to get the reader's interest, though the plot is intriguing as well. Others, like "Offworld" by Robin Parrish, rely on plot to keep the readers reading.

Conclusion

This is what the post is leading up to; did any of this help you with your novel? Not really. But here I'll try to capture the usefulness of this post.

So, which one was more important? Plot or Character?

Neither, believe it or not.

Inevitably, when in the business and bustle of writing--assuming you know other writers (I didn't until I made this blog in March!), you will hear about 'plot driven' books, and 'character driven' books. That discussion is for a whole 'nother blog post, but let us say that those are the two categories many books fall into. But what category should your book fall into?

Neither, believe it or not. You shouldn't focus on just characters, or just plot in your novel. If you're good at one thing, like characters, but bad on another, like plot, it may be good to focus on one or the other to 'balance' your novel out, but you shouldn't focus on just one aspect. Think of character and plot as a whole. They aren't opposing forces; character doesn't drive out plot! Or vice-versa!

"They are all part of," (to borrow a Bible verse) "one whole body." One does not work without the other! They are (or should be) intricately woven together until you can't tell where one began and the other ended; plot and character molded together gives you the best of both; the meaning that character brings, yet the suspense that plot can give. Each effects the other; if you successfully develop your character, you successfully develop your plot, and vice-versa. If you make your character meaningful, it makes his/her goal meaningful; the plot.

Hopefully I have showed you, in my past two posts, the potency of both character and plot alone. But together, woven into a compelling story, they can triple their strength and make your story all the better for it.

Characters; An Overview

NOTE; I just posted some excerpts from my novels on my other blog, in case you want to check them out!

Wow. Where to start? This is every inch as massive a task to write as the Plot post was. So, like the plot post, let's start at the beginning.

CHARACTER TYPE

Assuming you know what gender your characters are or are going to be (LOL), you must next find out or define what kind of character they are; what type. The problem lies in the amount. There are SO many different kinds of characters that I won't even bother going over half of them. Instead, I'll focus on the kinds of characters that most novels (fantasy novels especially) usually have.

1) The Protagonist

This post is not only about what kinds characters there are (although that helps) but also some tips on how to make them realistic and relatable. An unrelatable cardboard character doesn't do a novelist much good.

The Protagonist. Basically the most important character there is in any story. The Hero(ine), the Good Guy (or Gal), whatever you want to call him/her. If you don't succeed on this character (at least partially), your novel will flop. Utterly.

2) The Companion (or Ally)

Since most of you have a plot type as a Heroic Quest, all quests must naturally have a companion. The Companion(s) is/are usually one of the more important characters in a novel, after the Antagonist. This character is one who believes in your Protagonist, encourages him/her, and accompanies him. In LOTR, the Companion is good old Sam; and I think you'll agree that he was developed well.

Conflict between the Companion and the Protagonist is sometimes a good idea, though rather depressing to write. In the movie version of LOTR, Frodo, after Sam asks if he can 'share' the Ring, tells Sam to go home. I dislike that part, but I have to admit it is good for character development; because Sam decides to go back and help Mr. Frodo.

There can be various types of Companions in a novel, however. The Boromir kind of Companion is different than the Sam kind of Companion. I'll call them the 'Companion' and the 'Ally' for this post; The Companion being Boromir, and the Ally being Sam.

3) The Antagonist (the Villain)

This is, after the Protagonist, the most important character. Good villains make good stories, as OYAN says.

I'll discuss this more in-depth later in this post, but there's one important thing I must note; make your Antagonist human, with human needs and desires. A human-like Antagonist is chilling because you recognize part of him in yourself.

4) The Mentor

This is the role of Obi-Wan Kenobi in Star-Wars. The Brom in Eragon. The Gandalf in LOTR. A story, on select occasions, does not always need a mentor, but it is best to have one. The Mentor is someone who the Protagonist can learn from about various things; the world, God (or whatever name he might go by in a Christian fantasy novel), etc.

5) The Minion

This character is in league with the Antagonist, or represents the Antagonist's 'morals' (evil). Good guys (or Gals) gone bad, betrayers, messengers, generals, etc. Examples of Minions from LOTR would be Smeágol, various Orcs (like the ones that had taken Merry and Pippin captive), etc.

6) The Supporting Cast

This is the sixth kind of characters, and it varies. Kings, innkeepers, various other people, etc. fall into this category, providing they are not traveling with your Protagonist, in which case s/he would become an Ally or Companion. This is a vast group, with a lot of different characters. To give some examples from LOTR; Bill Ferny, Glorfindel, Denethor, etc.

These are just some of the kinds of characters floating around in the world of literature.

THE ELEMENTS OF CHARACTER

Just like plot, there are certain elements that drive characters, especially Protagonists. What things make a character need the story goal? What force drives them through pain and disaster?

1) Morals

This is one of the things that makes your characters memorable. They have morals. Villains and Heroes (or Heroines), Antagonist and Protagonist alike have morals. Antagonists have bad, evil morals, whereas the Protagonist is the opposite. S/he represents a good moral; Kindness, forgiveness, humility, etc. An Antagonist represents hatred, bitterness, cruelty, etc.

So pick a specific moral, and have your Protagonist embody it; and have the Antagonist embody the opposite. The Protagonist is kind; the Antagonist is cruel. Better yet; have your Protagonist suffer from his/her morals. Because s/he is kind, s/he is ridiculed. This proves the Protagonist's willingness to suffer for what s/he believes, and readers admire that.

Morals drive a character. Frodo wants to destroy the Ring because it corrupts. To narrow it down, Frodo leaves the Fellowship at the end of The Fellowship of the Ring because he knows the Ring will slowly corrupt every one of the company, as it did Boromir.

2) Stakes

The stakes of the plot are one thing that drive the character to do what he does. Frodo not only takes the Ring upon him to get rid of it for himself; he wants to destroy the Ring to protect the Shire. As the stakes grow higher through the novel, the Protagonist feels an urgent need to finish the quest, because its no longer his quest; the quest is all that is stopping the Antagonist from prevailing.

3) Love

Love for a person may drive a Protagonist, but I'm talking about a broader form of love. Frodo loves the Shire so much that he will undertake a terrible quest to save it. How can a Protagonist just sit and watch the things he loves be destroyed? No, he has to complete the goal and save them.

But make sure that you define why your Protagonist does what s/he does. It deepens the understanding the reader has for your character, understanding that the reader can relate to. When your reader can relate to your Protagonist in a way that makes them care about him/her, then you've done your job.

There are other things that drive a character, but these are the main ones, some of the ones the others flow from.

THE CHARACTERS; A-Z

So how exactly does one create believeable and relatable characters? Is there some secret formula that develops a character? Not exactly, but I'll try to show you what I know about character development.

1) Choices

Choices. Choices are the things that define your character. By the Protagonist's choices, you can tell what kind of a person they are, and that creates understanding--which, as you know, creates relateable characters, someone the reader can care about.

What kind of choices should I use to create development? you may ask. Here's a couple;

1. Difficult choices. This is the most important kind of choice; between two negative outcomes. The choice your Protagonist makes defines who he or she is. The choice between rotting fish or raw rabbit. ;) Sorry if I grossed you out there. Anyway, your character must make that choice--and pay the price. To use an example used in OYAN (it's a great example), in Spiderman, Spidey has to make a choice; his love, or a bus full of children. This is a wonderful opprotunity to reveal what kind of character Spiderman really is. Unfortunately, he does the thing that no writer should ever, ever do. He did both. He saved the love, and he saved the children. Never do something like that; you lose an opprotunity to reveal your Protagonist's character and give your character distance from the reader.

2. On what to do. Have the character make wise choices with disastrous outcomes. Sure, the way through the forest seemed easier than the way through the marshes--certainly wiser--but how was the Protagonist supposed to know the forest was filled with killer monkeys? Wise choices, disastrous consequences. You never want your character do to the less-wise thing; even if it turns out to be disastrous later. The only exception is if the Protagonist was warned against the killer-monkey-road. :)

3. Chances to go back. Frodo, so many times, was offered the chance to give up the Quest and go back to the Shire; but he didn't. Like the wise Sam Gamgee said in the Two Towers; "Those people had a plenty chances of going back, only they didn't. Those were the stories that meant something, Mr. Frodo." If your character is offered a chance to go back, and s/he rejects it, it resonates within the reader, and, (guess what?) creates understanding. And we know what that creates!

2) Suffering

I touched on this in my earlier post, because it is very important; what your character is willing to suffer, and how s/he reacts to it reveals character.

As I said before, "An item is worth however much the buyer is willing to pay for it." If the Protagonist has to pay a high price--loss of a friend, loss of his old life, wounds, etc.--then it proves just how much the goal is worth to him.

What is the Protagonist's reaction? Does s/he bathe him/herself in self-pity? Or does s/he accept that price and stand strong? If s/he does accept the price, it creates admiration in a reader, which creates...

And one more thing, one that I said in my last post that seems necessary to put in here; The fulfillment of the story goal may need to have a lasting price to make it all the more worthwhile. In LOTR, Frodo can no longer go back to his own life; the Ring and the Ringwraiths have wounded him for life, and the power of the Three Rings fade, making most Elves sail over the Sea into the West, along with Frodo. The lasting price can help make the ending more meaningful and sad.

3) Action

What your Protagonist does also creates development. This is closely related to the Protagonist's choices, but there is one thing that is different and stands out; in real life, it can be fairly easy at times to decide what to do. The real challenge is in doing it; it takes courage, just like when Frodo made the hard choice to leave the Fellowship. As it says in the LOTR; "I know what I have to do, only, I'm afraid to do it." When the Protagonist does what s/he had decided to do, it creates admiration in the reader. They know first-hand how hard it can be to do the right things. Which brings me to one more point; if the Protagonist does the right thing, it also creates admiration; doing the right thing can be hard. And admiration creates...

With this, I wrap up my post. Not quite as lengthy, perhaps, as my Plot post, but I hoped it helped you out. :) Feel free to comment if you felt I missed a certain point. I can make another Character post again, sometime soon.

Oh, and as for trivia; what does admiration and understanding create? :D