Characterization

From Kill Zone Blog: Characterization, using a biography of Teddy Roosevelt as an example.

As the crowd snakes its way into the room where Roosevelt is greeting them, Morris describes the president’s physical impact on the visitors. He quotes English statesman John Morley as saying, “Do you know the two most wonderful things I have seen in your country? Niagara Falls and the President of the United States.”

This is a good post, which points to, but does not really discuss, characterization by —

–directly describing the physical appearance of the character, and I’m surprised to see several comments saying that the author has some trouble remembering to even do this at all, because I do, but I didn’t think that was common.

–indicating character via dialogue.

–letting the character’s actions indicate who they are.

–having the reactions of other characters indicate what the character is like.

Teddy Roosevelt evidently inspired plenty of very strong reactions in practically everyone who met him! He sounds very larger-than-life, just from this post. No doubt he was.

Because of this fairly recent post about dialogue, I am particularly thinking of using dialogue to indicate character. For example, how about this, which I bet you’ll all recognize, though it isn’t SFF:

“It was my father’s last request to me,” replied her husband, “that I should assist his widow and daughters.”

“He did not know what he was talking of, I dare say; ten to one but he was light-headed at the time. Had he been in his right senses, he could not have thought of such a thing as begging you to give away half your fortune from your own child.”

“He did not stipulate for any particular sum, my dear Fanny; he only requested me, in general terms, to assist them, and make their situation more comfortable than it was in his power to do. Perhaps it would have been as well if he had left it wholly to myself. He could hardly suppose I should neglect them. But as he required the promise, I could not do less than give it: at least I thought so at the time. The promise, therefore, was given, and must be performed. Something must be done for them whenever they leave Norland and settle in a new home.”

“Well, then, let something be done for them; but that something need not be three thousand pounds.”

“Oh! beyond anything great! What brother on earth would do half so much for his sisters, even if really his sisters! And as it is—only half blood!—But you have such a generous spirit!”

“I would not wish to do any thing mean,” he replied. “One had rather, on such occasions, do too much than too little. No one, at least, can think I have not done enough for them: even themselves, they can hardly expect more.”

“There is no knowing what they may expect,” said the lady, “but we are not to think of their expectations: the question is, what you can afford to do.”

Sense and Sensibility was the first Jane Austen book I read, and I read it because I watched the linked movie, which was a revelation to me. I had never even glanced at Jane Austen’s books prior to seeing this movie. [English teachers who could not bring themselves to assign anything but grimly awful tragedies, I’m looking at you, here.] Obviously, I loved the movie, so I immediately read the book and then all Austen’s other books.

And I know the brother and his wife are not important characters as characters; they are just getting the plot underway. But wow, you do not need anything except the dialogue between them to get a VERY CLEAR idea of who they are as people, what they are like. She is grasping and selfish and petty. He is a wimp, unintelligent, easy to manipulate — at least to manipulate into behaving selfishly.

This is a scene that translates beautifully to the screen because everything important is contained in the dialogue. The author does not need to (a) describe them beyond the barest bones of description; (b) bring us into their heads; (c) have any other characters react to them; (c) have them actually do anything. These characters are just talking about doing something, or not doing something, but what they say is, all by itself, PLENTY to establish who they are.

This is a stellar example of characterization done purely through dialogue, and also it could be subtitled: How to Make the Viewer Despise Your Minor Characters in 30 Seconds of Dialogue, Boom! Honestly, grand evil is not as purely unpleasant as this sort of petty selfishness, at least not to me.

Please Feel Free to Share:

The post Characterization appeared first on Rachel Neumeier.