2012-Mar-5 - About Characters...
I'm not quoting Shakespeare anywhere in this comparison simply due to the fact that .... well he's hard as fuck to read. Also though, because the authors/teachers which I'll be comparing most likely have already read enough of his work to make a sound decision about their storytelling preferences.
The authors I'll be comparing are as follows:
James Ryan
Lajos Egri
Robert Mckee
Syd Field
Will Dunne
David Trottier
Blake Snyder
Why? I had to stop at some point because there's too many chiefs in this tribe. I could include John Truby, Scott Myers, Joseph Campbell, and Christopher Vogler. Hell even Aristole. But lets be honest, if the above crowd doesn't teach us something about the different apporaches to Character, Plot, Conflict, Dialogue, and Structure, then we'll add in the other five. Maybe even Shakespeare too. Nah, fuck Shakespeare. Why? Because it's fun to say. Try it.
"Fuck Shakespeare."
Lets begin with Character:
I'll be using excerpts from each of their books to help round out what the, or if there is an, overall impression or agreed upon definition of the such.
James Ryan - Page 34, Screenwriting from the Heart
"Character is a dynamic -- ever-changing, complex, and full of surprises. It is all the traits and qualities of a person. A strong fictional character represents what it is to be human. And all humans have the potential to surprise us and themselves because so much of what they truly are and what they can be lies dormant, unexpressed."
Lajos Egri - Page 33 - 35, The Art of Dramatic Writing
"Every object has three dimensions: depth, height, width. Human beings have an additional three dimensions: physiology, sociology, psychology. Without a knowledge of these three dimensions we cannot appraise a human being....If we understand that these three dimensions can provide the reason for every phase of human conduct, it will be easy for us to write about any character and trace his motivation to its source."
Robert Mckee - Page 375, Story
"A character is no more a human being than the Venus de Milo is a real woman. A character is a work of art, a metaphor for human nature. We relate to characters as if they were real, but they're superior to reality. Their aspects are designed to be clear and knowable; whereas our fellow humans are difficult to understand if not enigmatic. We know characters better than we know our friends because a character is eternal and unchanging..."
~also~
Page 106, Story
"The function of character is to bring to the story the qualities of characterization necessary to convincingly act out choices."
Syd Field - Pages 36, Screenplay
"Character is a point of view...an attitude...personality...behavior...revelation...identification...action"
*My apologies for this as Syd spends more time asking the reader questions regarding their opinions as opposed to hand-holding with definitions. The above are seemingly the only words pertaining to the author's opinion.
Will Dunne - Page 3, The Dramatic Writer's Companion
"You won't understand what your story is about until you understand who your characters are...To know a character is to know the complex blend of physical, psychological, and social traits that make him or her unique."
*Same deal is Lajos above, bit asks relentless questions just like Syd.
David Trottier - Pages 43 - 58, The Screenwriter's Bible
Trottier simply has "Ten keys to creating captivating characters". As follows:
A goal and an opposition
Motivation
Backstory
The will to act
A point of view and attitudes
Room to grow
Believability
Details
A writer who cares
A strong supporting cast
Blake Snyder - Page 48 - 49, Save the Cat!
"The "who" is our way in. We, the audience, zero in on and project onto the "who" whether it's an epic motion picture or a commercial for Tide... the "who" gives us someone to identify with, because it's easier to communicate an idea when someone is standing there experiencing it for us... (whatever it is), the principle of involving us in the story is the same."
~also~
Page 62, Save the Cat!
"Tell me a story about a guy who...
I can identify with.
I can learn from.
I have compelling reason to follow.
I believe deserves to win and...
Has stakes that are primal and ring true for me."
So there you have it. Now lets start comparing and grouping.
The similarities between Lajos Egri, Syd Field, and Will Dunne are pretty evident. With their relentless questioning into all aspects of your character's socio, physio, and psycho-logical lives, it is to my belief that a character to each of these authors is an excessive amount of what Robert Mckee describes as "characterization", or (pg. 100) "the sum of all observable qualities of a human being."
Trottier's "10 Traits" are hard for me to latch on to because whenever I see "10 reasons, or top 10", it leads me to believe that the list was either stretched or compressed to included elements simply for psychological reasons. Like Carlin said, "...it's a psychologically satisfying number." You can see my point when comparing phrases like "The will to act" alongside "motivation", and "point of view" with "backstory". Hell even simply saying "details" feels to be a cop-out just to make the list requirements.
Nonetheless, Egri, Field, Dunne, and Trottier, all appear to have a sort of "formulaic" approach to the idea of what a character is. Even Snyder has the "they need these things" list. As if simply a list of do's and don'ts make a character work.
Mckee, Ryan, and also Synder, have more philosophical approaches to what a character is. It appears they see a character as some sort of "larger than life" phenomenon. Notice how Ryan's entry begins with "character", not "a character". These two refer to a character as a "complex" or "metaphor", not a specific person. Snyder chimes in with a character being the identifying factor to pull us into the story's world.
So we have a split here. List of Traits vs. an Essence of Purpose.
I can see the logical/emotional sides battling already. But what I believe we're noticing here is two different types of people.
On one hand, we have the questioners, the other, the listeners. My reason for using "listeners" is because those who listen, at least in my opinion, spend less time asking questions. They're not "fill-in-the-blank" people. They subconciously notice things like a persons color choice, types of activities they partake in, and what the person laughs at. These types simply get a stronger overall "vibe" from the people they meet.
You could say Questioners/List Makers are the more curious type, relying on the idea that certain things always inevitably matter, and to attempt to draw a character without considering the type of car they would drive is blasphemous. They could also be considered "Noticers" as well. Very retrospective people who take into all the elements into account of an event. The kind you would like as a witness to a hit-and-run. The type of people who, after you've told them about a vacation, ask, "So where have you all been?".
It's possible that the Listeners/Observers are the ones more in touch with how things "feel" as opposed to how things "are". While Questioners/Noticers are more "validity" seekers, believing that when something awful happens, it's because of "this, this, and this.", not because of an Observers excuse which would attribute the occurrence to an emotion such as "rage", or "passion".
What I believe this comparison shows is what type of mentor YOU are looking for. Do you find yourself thinking about a friend of yours, wondering "Josh is awesome because ...? I don't know, Josh is just awesome.", then you might be someone who needs a Questioner/Noticer type. Dunne and Lajos would be a great start for you, and may help bring out what makes your friends so awesome.
But if you're someone who "gets" why a person is awesome, knows what they have and why they do what they do, Ryan and Mckee might be a better start. Reason being that you'll probably be already attuned to the aspects of your friends life, but aren't sure which parts of them really bring their best sides out. Not in a listing way, but a philosophical one. These authors might give you a better insight as to why you "need" these people in your life, and what their roles are.
If you don't know where to start, start with Syd. He'll help bring his seven concepts, with comparisons onto your radar. Consider his comparisons about your own friends. To level up, read Dunne's book. This guy questions everything from what turns your character on, to how they're dealing with a car accident five years from now. It's pretty in depth.
On the flip side, read Ryan's book for you more "listing" types, it's shorter than Mckee's, and offers exercises too. Consider your emotions more when you're around certain people. Don't ask why you're feeling this way, ask yourself what it feels like. Learn to recognize what your emotions are and name them in your head when they occur.
Remember to not only question what you're readying, but consider the type of person writing it.
Cheers.
|
|
Comments (1) :: Post A Comment! :: Permanent Link
|
|
About Me
Insights and Ideas on the current world of Story. Theories about where it's going, what it used to be, and what the hell happened in the middle.
« May 2012 »
| Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat | Sun | | | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
| 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
| 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 |
| 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 |
| 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | |
Friends
|
