How to unflatten a pancake character (reprised and revised)

How to unflatten a pancake character (reprised and revised)

This is a revision of this blog entry. It first appeared in May 2015. I've learned more since then, so I've chosen not to mark the changes. You can consider this an edit of an earlier version of what I thought was a completed manuscript. If that doesn't ring a bell with you, hop in your "way-back machine" with Mr. Peabody from Rocky and Bullwinkle--or just scroll through my blog posts--until you arrive at Editing. Lessons learned the hard way (2/2/16).  A clever soul might just click on the link...

Unless your novel takes place in the two-dimensional world of Flatland, you don’t want characters that lack multiple dimensions.

I remember re-tweeted a tweet about an author arguing with her main character about something she had planned to include in her story arc.

I’ve been thinking about that since then.
Do you argue with your characters?
If so, why? 
If not, why not?
Seriously.

Each character, even a "walk on," should be capable of being fleshed out into a minor character. In fact, I'm sure there are books in print where the main character was once nothing more than a role-player in an earlier book by that author.

Here's the situation I wrote myself into that triggered this blog. Other situations have inspired the revision.

I once collaborated on what my co-author and I hoped would be a series of books. The book series idea had morphed from a single book concept. We discussed an antagonist who would be involved in at least the first two books in that series. The antagonist was originally a cold-hearted, cold-blooded criminal. That characterization seemed to work pretty well for a single book. 

However, as I was outlining the second book and writing chunks of both, I realized two things.

• First. I’d written a really bad person.
• Second.  I did not want to continue writing about this particular individual because there was no direction to go but deeper into the pit of badness.

So, I had a choice to make. You can speculate on what my options were. Here’s a quote to kickstart your thinking. 

“No character should be all good or all bad--that is not believable.  Characters are people and they are three-dimensional.  The way to flesh out characters effectively is to have some good in the bad, some bad in the good.  Showing a character's soft side gives understanding to the reader. They might still hate the character but it allows them to understand the character.  All bad or good is boring and only works in fairy tales with good princesses and bad queens.”

– Sherry Frazier

Go ahead, I’ll wait…

I’m not going to give you what I thought my options were. I don’t think that’s particularly relevant to this blog. Bad news: you can’t compare your ideas for options to mine. Good news: because I didn’t share, your options can’t be wrong.

What I decided to do was mellow the character out. I started by having his mother telepathically communicate to the character. You should know that he'is euthanizing his mother at the time of this extrasensory transmission:

This gesture is both unexpected and welcomed. It indicates a side of a personality I never manifested. It suits you well. Do not abandon it.

Hold that thought.

As I progressed along the storyline, Antagonist became, well not genial, but, at least, quasi-likable. That was fine… up to a point.

One of the key plot points in book two involves the Antagonist doing something he could never have done without the added depth of compassion.

So, I had to reverse course.

1. I could have deleted all I’d written about his morph from all bad to not so bad.
2. I could have changed the plot point in book 2.
3. I could have generated an incident that caused Antagonist to revert backward into his former self. Not all the way back, because that would have been counter-productive and a big waste of time and energy.

I chose #3.

It appears as though the collaboration with my co-author has dissolved--on good terms. I still plan on producing a series of books with a Protagonist like the one in the current first manuscript. It might be that Protagonist. Book 1 might even be all of what's been written so far with a change in the career choice of the Protagonist. I'm considering adding a failed college romance in lieu of the marriage currently in the draft as well.

I feel certain that the Antagonist will resonate with more readers in book 1. I know he'll still be able to pull off his dastardly deed in future books without moving out of character. And, I now have a variety of ways to complete the dastardly deed planned in book 2 from which to choose.

You’ll have to wait until book 1 of the yet untitled series is available to see if you agree that I “did good” with my choice. But, you’ll have to wait until book 2 is out, to see if I really did what I think/hope I did with my pancake character.

Your goal needs to be 3-D characterization. Unless, of course, you live in Flatland.

Write on!

Next blog: What's in a Name? How do you title a book?
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CRDowningAuthor

My website is: www.crdowning.com

Feedback is always appreciated. You might post a comment or email me at: chuckdowningauthor@gmail.com