#Characterization

[laurenkmoody]

I cannot remember where I heard it/who said it, but someone once described the difference between Sophie and Nate's grifting technique as "Sophie is so wonderful you would do anything to get her to stay, and Nate is so annoying you would do anything to get him to leave."

Sophie grifting: hot duchess. seductive investor. mysterious businesswoman.

Eliot grifting: ridiculously competent chef. hot athlete (any sport). heartthrob country musician.

Hardison grifting: overly-confident criminal. assertive FBI agent. heartthrob classical musician.

Nathan Ford grifting: goddamn piece of shit oily slimy scumbag ambulance-chaser untrustworthy con artist with a stupid fucking voice and a silly hat

the show is not doing Nate any favors in the likeability or attractiveness departments here

(Bonus mention: Parker grifting: autism creature)

[aestariiwilderness]

Crosshair, every season: *providing critical information or context waaaaaaay past when it would have made a difference in the game* This is a hilarious facet of his personality. Utterly aggravating. I love it. Hunter: "CrossHAIR!" Crosshair: "what" Hunter: "THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN GOOD TO KNOW LAST YEAR" Crosshair: "You didn't ask" Hunter, voice pitching up into glass-shattering levels of utter indignation: YES I DID. YOU WERE THERE CROSSHAIR. TECH HAS IT ON VIDEO CROSSHAIR If anybody had taught Crosshair to use his words at any point in his development...canon would have gone a lot differently. Just sayin'. P.S. This means him and Tech are absolutely two sides of the same coin, except Tech genuinely doesn't get -- like a lot of smart people -- when to assume people have the background information they need and when to assume he needs to explain things. Crosshair's just a drama queen who hates having to justify his bat-crap crazy decisions to anyone :D :D Either way and either brother...Hunter can never win :D.

Tech: I thought it was obvious Crosshair: You didn't ask Hunter: I hate you both

[artist-issues]

and another thing.

if every character that has a unique characterization in their thought process, or fictional perspective, MUST BE “autistic” or “neurodivergent-coded,” that character is no longer relatable to people who don’t self-diagnose, or identify with, or are not diagnosed with, autism or anything on the neurodivergent spectrum.

I mean honestly I see you guys out here telling me that Mulan is neurodivergent, that ROZ from the Wild Robot is neurodivergent and gee, so is Brightbill, that Hiccup is neurodivergent and Ariel is autistic.

Ariel. The “girl next door” princess.

The whole point of characters, especially main characters, especially main characters in children’s media, is to be believable and relatable, on some level. If they’re all ‘special brain-different,’ they’re only relatable to people who accept that label or are given that diagnosis.

AND. It does a huge disservice to the storytelling techniques.

A story is supposed to get under the mental guard of a person. You’re supposed to take your hands off the “thought” wheel and your feet off the “emotion” pedals, and let the story drive your brain and heart to a new place. Or an old place you haven’t been in a while, or were forgetting.

One of the best ways to do that is to create a character that, on the surface, seems special and unrelatable. Like a girl living in the Imperial Dynasty of China, or a literal non-human robot. You can’t, on the surface, relate to them as easily, so you naturally start to think, “what would it be like to be seeing the world through these new eyes?” And then you’ve given up the wheel and pedals of your mind to the movie. You find yourself relating to concepts like motherhood and protectiveness, which the robot character is experiencing, but you’re looking at those concepts through new eyes.

That is why the character is a robot. Not so that she can be an allegory for your “special-undefined-perspective-on-life which is sometimes called neurodivergence.” She’s not a robot for that reason. She’s a robot because a robot character flips the “what would it be like to learn everything over again?” switch in your brain, and then the story can show you it’s focus, (like motherhood and kindness in The Wild Robot) after the switch is flipped.

and it’s flipped for everybody, (“neurodivergent” and “neurotypical”) not just people who identify as the vague term “neurodivergent,” or have been diagnosed as autistic. Stop fitting everything into vague-enough-to-be-claimed, but named-enough-to-be-a-special-identity boxes. You’re ruining the universal, unifying value of it all.

[uhhsnail]

I love a character raised to be a weapon as much as the next guy. But what really gets me is a character raised to be a shield. Who can’t fathom being needed—or even being wanted— beyond keeping others safe. Who believe they are alive only to insure someone doesn’t die. no matter the cost. Characters who self-sacrifice not because they think they deserve it, but because no one else does deserve it, and it’s their job to protect.

Characters who’ve been told that’s why your important. Your worth something because this other person/ thing is important, and you are here solely to keep them safe.

Bonus points if it’s not a legitimate job they’ve been given. Maybe at one point it was, but now that they are free from it, they haven’t given up that mentality. No one is forcing or asking them to do this, but they need to. They need to in order to be deserving.

[ukrainian-groove-metal]

I love the "came back wrong" trope but from the opposite side.

Imagine you are dead. And then you are RIPPED from the embrace of decay into the world of the living again. Your memories are hazy and you don't recognize any of these people, but they act like they're close to you? Like they love you? So you try to get your memories back, to act like you belong here, but everybody tries to forget you died. And you can't. It is omnipresent. And just trying to grapple with that fact pushes the people who "love" you away, and they're incapable of understanding, and they're so confused, what's wrong N̶̄̀O̶͛͗T̷̉́ ̷͋͝Y̴̎̌Ȍ̴̈U̸̓R NÄM̴̃͑E̵̾̇? And you just need them to understand, you aren't that person! You aren't! You don't know who that person is! You don't know why any of this is happening, but they're unwilling to bend, they keep insisting you are that person, your memories will come back, everything will be normal again, and you want to scream and cry and claw yourself open to show them you're different. Your existence as a being wholly separate from whoever you "used to be" is a sin unto itself. All you can do is scrabble for life and to them, you're killing whoever they loved to do it.

just. lots of fun in that concept, you know?

[elumish]

One way to build your writing skills--a way that I would argue is necessary if you ever want to write original fiction for publication--is to write from the point of view of, and with the focus on, a wide range of different characters.

it's really easy to fall into a rut when writing the same character or characters all the time, or even the same type of character all the time, where characterization tends to become muscle memory as much as anything else. You know what that character will do, so you know what characters of that type will do, so you know what characters will do, so that's what your characters do.

And when you don't have to think about it, you don't build--and can start to atrophy--those muscles required to do detailed, specific, engaging character building. What does it mean for this character, in this time, to do or experience this thing. What are the myriad of things that have built your character up to being who they are, and how do those things (individually and in aggregate) impact the choices that they make, the actions that they take, the reactions that they have, and the people that they engage with.

What can end up happening--and I see this all the time in published fiction--is that authors end up only being able to write 2-3 character types of each gender, and it all feels a bit samey.

Without opening a book by so many authors I have read, I can predict with a fair amount of accuracy what most of their characters will act like, because it's kind of the same across the board. Even when they start distinct, they end up drifting towards the same personality/character types like carcinization.

Writing from the point of view of/focusing on a range of characters (especially if they are different genders, of different backgrounds, with different wants and fears and habits and interests and personalities) forces you to actually be specific in your writing, if you want it to be any good.

Your 15-year-old B-student who really wants to spend their time playing rugby shouldn't sound like your 45-year-old businessman with a penchant for collecting Star Trek action figures who is trying to plan the perfect anniversary for his wife and neither of them should sound like the 23-year-old who spends their time going out at nightclubs and showing up a little bit hungover at work and worrying about finding a job that will let them move out of the apartment they're sharing with three other people.

Practice, and then practice some part, and then keep practicing. Write different characters, ask yourself if you're writing a character a certain way because you think they would be that way or because it's just habit, and be specific.

[opbackgrounds]

This scene with Sanji is one of his most important moments in the series, and in my opinion also one of the most difficult passages in the manga to interpret, because to completely understand it you have to look at the manga holistically rather than this scene by itself.

The big question that needs answered is why does Oda let Zoro "win" here by having him be the sacrifice instead of Sanji. Both are equally willing and both are identified much later on as the Wings of the Pirate King, implying that they have similar importance (although vastly different roles) within the Straw Hat crew.

If we go back to Sanji's introduction on the Baratie, his big flaw was that he lacked the "spear of spirit" to pursue his dream. Since he's been a boy he's wanted to find the All Blue, but even when he had the opportunity to go after that dream he chose to stay on the Baratie out of a feeling of obligation to Zeff. Sanji put the continued existence of the restaurant over his own life, something Luffy rightfully called him out for at the time, and even at the end of the arc had to be pushed away by Zeff and the other chefs before he finally set sail for good.

On Drum, Sanji once again almost died protecting Nami and Luffy during the avalanche, resulting in a broken back that required surgury from Dr. Kureha. Luffy again calls him out (note the English translation here isn't entirely accurate, see here for a breakdown), and with his power there's a good chance Luffy could have gotten them all out of trouble without all the dramatics by Sanji.

Something similar happens on Skypiea, when Sanji puts himself in the way of Enel so that Usopp and Nami can be saved. This case is perhaps more justifiable given the extreme situation they were in, but nonetheless he was still quick to throw his life away.

Then on Enies Lobby Nami--while not criticizing his chivalry--calls out Sanji for simply not running away from Kalifa, instead just accepting that he's going to get the shit beat out of him, and possibly die.

So there's a pattern of self-destructive behavior. Sanji repeatedly puts his life on the line when he doesn't need to in order to preserve the lives and dreams of the people he loves. Even him constantly simping over Nami and Robin falls a little into this category, because if either of them told him to take a long walk off a short pier I have no doubt he'd comply. It's that same extreme willingness to sacrifice anything and everything for the people he cares for that we see in Baby 5, except Sanji was fortunate enough to not be surrounded by people that encourage these worst impulses of self-destructive behavior. As he says here in Thriller Bark, he's just the cook. Luffy can always just find someone else.

(The glory of Whole Cake Island being Sanji realizing, no, Luffy can't, and he won't).

And it is finally on WCI that get to the heart of why Sanji is like this with yet another episode of putting his own dreams and happiness aside for the sake of others, and not until Wano that we finally see him take the first steps toward asking others for help instead of passionately throwing his life away when he doesn’t need to.

When Zoro first offered his head to Kuma, the prominence of his dream was first and foremost. Notice that Sanji never mentions the All Blue. One Piece is a series that places the pursuit of one's own ambition above all else, even if that ambition is selfish. Sanji hasn't yet learned to be selfish, so Zoro knocks him out and ends up being the one to accept Luffy's pain. Sacrifice isn't sacrifice if the person doesn't value what they're giving up, and right now Sanji clearly doesn't value his own life compared to the rest of the crew.

Next chapter Oda will speak through Brook to confirm that Sanji's willingness to give himself up wasn't foolish or stupid. It's just that he's missing a piece of the puzzle, and that's not something he'll have for a long time yet.

[ahfrickenfrick]

i feel like duke would be seen as a mediator a lot for problems but he’s secretly creating some of them cause he’s bored/petty/vengeful

like oh, tim took too long getting into his suit resulting in condiment king spraying duke with ketchup, so suddenly his laptop was plucked of its stickers, he of course assumes it was jason or stephanie

or when dick knowingly came over when he knew he was sick, resulting in duke missing out on a field trip due to a 24 hour cold, so suddenly the patrol schedule never got to dick on time, making him think bruce was being prickly again, forcing him over to the manor more

one day when he’s bored he places clues and riddles all around the mansion all leading to either dead ends or starts to other riddles, just to see what they would do

i need more petty duke LMFAO

[raayllum]

1x09 / 4x04 / 6x04

[mylordshesacactus]

Random thought this morning:

When doing characterization questions to try to build a character's personality--whether that's for fiction, an RPG, whatever? "Favorite" is often meaningless compared to "average".

It's very possible your character has a favorite food! But for most characters, a "favorite" food is.....nebulous. It may or may not tell you anything about them--if it does tell you something, it's probably something you already knew, and if it doesn't, then it falls flat and the question fails to do its job of actually helping you get to know this character better and making them feel like a person.

Something that's often more helpful is: What is their default option?

Your character walks into an unfamiliar tavern. What's their "safe" order? What's their default drive-through option? How, on a normal day, would they take their coffee? If they go to a normal bar with their friends on an average night, what do they have to drink? What do their pajamas look like?

Nine times out of ten, "my character's favorite color" is a nonsense question, but is there a color that dominates a lot of their wardrobe? (Using me in real life as an example here: My favorite color is earth-tone gold, but the vast majority of my clothes have a black base because it's more convenient--black doesn't clash with anything.)

Yeah, absolutely, have fun designing what they'd wear for a fancy ball--that's also great characterization! But what do they wear on an average day? Because by definition, that's who they are under normal circumstances. The best characterization question I've ever heard, genuinely, was "describe your character's shoes on a normal weekday".

That baseline will often reveal to you that your character does have a "favorite," and much more organically! It's much more important, when it comes to portraying a character consistently, to know who they are by default--and when you know that, you can poke at them and find the...dissatisfaction points, for lack of a better term. The places where the default feels just fine vs the places where you feel your character would want something more when given the opportunity.

The "Well... she'd order venison stew and beer by default, because it's pretty hard to fuck that up and she's a pretty down-to-earth person, but I think she actually really enjoys delicate aromatic spices...when they're in big cities with real restaurants, she probably spends a decent amount of her personal funds on nice food when she has the opportunity" feeling often does a LOT more to spark an understanding of a nuanced character than going straight for trying to define a Favorite Food out of the blue.

[writingwithcolor]

What Makes an Ethnic Villain "Ethnic" or "Villainous?" How Do You Offset it?

anonymous asked:

Hello WWC! I have a question about the antagonist of my story. She is (currently) Japanese, and I want to make sure I’m writing her in a way that doesn’t associates [sic] her being Asian with being villainous.  The story is set in modern day USA, this character is effectively immortal. She was a samurai who lost loved ones due to failure in combat, and this becomes her character[sic] motivation (portrayed sympathetically to the audience). This story explores many different time periods and how women have shown valor throughout history. The age of the samurai (and the real and legendary female warriors from it) have interested me the most, which is why I want her to be from this period.  The outfit she wears while fighting is based on samurai armor, and she wears modern and traditional Japanese fashion depending on the occasion. She acts pretty similar to modern day people, though more cynical and obsessed with her loss. She’s been able to adapt with the times but still highly values and cherishes her past.  She is the only Asian main character, but I plan to make a supportive Japanese side character. She’s a history teacher who knows about the villain and gives the protagonists information to help them, but isn’t involved in the main plot otherwise.  Are the way I’m writing this villain and the inclusion of a non-antagonist Japanese character enough to prevent a harmful reading of the story, or is there more I should do?

Why Does Your Villain Exist?

This makes me feel old because David Anders plays a villain with this kind of backstory in the series Heroes starring Masi Oka. 

I think you want to think about what you mean when you say: 

Villainous (In what way? To whom? To what end?)

Harmful (What tropes, narratives and implications are present?)

I’m relatively infamous in the mod circle for not caring too much about dimensions of “harm”. The concept is relative and varies widely between people and cultures. I don’t see much value in framing motivations around “What is less harmful?” I think for me, what matters more is: 

“What is more true?” 

“Are characteristics viewed as intrinsic to background, or the product of experiences and personal autonomy?”

“Will your portrayal resonate with a large audience?”

“What will resonate with the members of the audience who share the backgrounds your characters have?” 

This post offers additional questions you could ask yourself instead of “is this okay/not okay/harmful.” 

You could write a story where your antagonist is sly, sadistic, violent and cold-blooded. It may not be an interpretation that will make many Japanese from combat backgrounds feel seen or heard, but it’s not without precedent. These tropes have been weaponized against people of Japanese descent (Like Nikkei Japanese interned during World War II), but Japan also brutalized a good chunk of Asia during World War II. See Herge’s Tintin and The Blue Lotus for an example of a comic that accurately showcases the brutality of Japan’s colonization of Manchuria, but also is racist in terms of how Japanese characters are portrayed (CW: genocide, war, imperialism, racism).

You could also write a story where your character’s grief gives way to despair, and fuels their combat such that they are seen as calculating, frigid and deeply driven by revenge/ violence. This might make sense. It’s also been done to death for Japanese female warriors, though (See “Lady Snowblood” by Kazuo Koike and Kazuo Kamimura here, CW: sexual assault, violence, murder and a host of other dark things you’d expect in a revenge story). 

You could further write a story where your antagonist is not necessarily villainous, but the perceived harm comes from fetishizing/ exoticizing elements in how her appearance is presented or how she is sexualized, which is a common problem for Japanese female characters. 

My vote always goes to the most interesting story or character. I don’t see any benefit to writing from a defensive position. This is where I'll point out that, culturally, I can't picture a Japanese character viewing immortality as anything other than a curse. Many cultures in Japan are largely defined by transience and the understanding that many things naturally decay, die, and change form.

There are a lot of ways you could conceivably cause harm, but I’d rather hear about what the point of this character is given the dilemma of their position. 

What is her purpose for the plot? 

How is she designed to make the reader feel? 

What literary devices are relevant to her portrayal?

(Arbitrarily, you can always add more than 1 extra Japanese character. I think you might put less pressure on yourself with this character’s portrayal if you have more Japanese characters to practice with in general.) 

- Marika. 

When Off-Setting: Aim for Average

Seconding the above with regards to this villainess’s story and your motivations for this character, but regardless of her story I think it’s also important to look specifically at how the Japanese teacher character provides contrast. 

I agree with the choice to make her a regular person and not a superhero. Otherwise, your one Asian character is aggressively Asian-themed in a stereotypical Cool Japan way (particularly if her villain suit is samurai-themed & she wears wafu clothing every so often). Adding a chill person who happens to be Japanese and doesn’t have some kind of ninja or kitsune motif will be a breath of fresh air (well, more like a sigh of relief) for Japanese readers. 

A note on characterization—while our standard advice for “offset” characters is to give your offset character the opposite of the personality trait you’re trying to balance, in this case you might want to avoid opposites. You have a villainess who is a cold, tough “don’t need no man” type. Making the teacher mild-mannered, helpful, and accomodating would balance out the villainess’s traits, but you’ll end up swinging to the other side of the pendulum towards the Submissive Asian stereotype depending on execution. If avoiding stereotypes is a concern, I suggest picking something outside of that spectrum of gentleness to violence and making her really boring or really weird or really nerdy or a jock gym teacher or…something. You’re the author.

Similarly, while the villainess is very traditionally Japanese in her motifs and backstory, don’t make the teacher go aggressively in either direction—give her a nice balance of modern vs. traditional, Japanese vs. Western sensibilities as far as her looks, dress, interests, values, etc. Because at the end of the day, that’s most modern Japanese people. 

Sometimes, the most difficult representation of a character of color is making a character who is really average, typical, modern, and boring. 

- Rina

[whetstonefires]

The reason I keep banging the Jiang Fengmian drum so hard is not that he did nothing wrong--he's definitely in contention for best parenting in this book but that bar is in the ground--but because most of the takes I see about him are so extremely bad.

If you want to slag him off for trying to make choices that would hurt no one, and winding up properly protecting no one as a result, that's valid! That's an interesting and text-based critique, which opens into his parallels with Lan Xichen!

If you want to blame him for being weirdly over-invested in Wei Wuxian and Jiang Cheng being bffs, that's fair, that definitely contributed to the weirdness between them. If you want to say he was a poor communicator, that he fundamentally misunderstood his son, that he failed to be emotionally available in a way his kids could get much use out of, even that he should have figured out a way to stop Yu Ziyuan from creating such a hostile environment, all of that is fair game!

If you want to tackle how the worst thing he did to his kids was die I am so interested in how Wei Wuxian went on to abandon A-Yuan by going to his death, and how that might be tied to how his primary adult role model tied him to a boat and went off to a fight he knew he was going to lose.

After his parents had already left him like that once before, presumably less intentionally.

But no, instead I keep seeing that Jiang Fengmian didn't care. That he never expressed affection. That he actively participated in Yu Ziyuan's fucky game of forcing proxy conflict onto the boys instead of constantly trying (and failing) to shut it down, or that he ignored her bad behavior because it didn't affect him, or that he fought with her constantly, or that he was too much of an unmanly coward to stand up to her when she wanted something.

All of which are directly in contradiction to every scene he's in, and several of which manage to invert or erase the actual conflicts between him and his wife that were the source of all that tension.

And which are really interesting, because some of the most intractable elements are ideological--Yu Ziyuan is fundamentally a conservative and Jiang Fengmian seems to want to be an egalitarian, which ofc matched poorly with his hereditary authority as patriarch of a large sect.

The fact that the bit where we get to actually see him failing to parent Jiang Cheng consists of him gently and firmly trying to correct Jiang Cheng's ethics when what was actually needed in that moment was reassurance for the well-founded insecurities that were causing him to be a little bitch, only for Yu Ziyuan to charge in and make everything fifty times worse, is so much more interesting than literally any version of this family dynamic I have seen in fic. It's to the point I'm relieved when writers kill Jiang Fengmian off, because it means they probably won't feel the need to character-assassinate him too badly.

The number of people I've seen come right out and say some variation of 'men can't be abused' is killing me here. No, Yu Ziyuan wanting to hurt her husband does not constitute sufficient proof that he abused her first and deserved it! That's not how anything works!

[jkl-fff]

Remember that time

Laois dealt with the projection of all his insecurities and disappointments with human society (his parents' uncomprehending disapproval of who he fundamentally was as a person, the schoolmates who bullied him for not fitting in, the colleagues who took advantage of his trusting nature, and the guy who he thought was his best friend turning out to be someone who just sorta tolerated him) by conjuring up a manifestation of his special interest (monsters) to literally crush them?

Certified and iconic Autistic Joy(TM) moment right there. Good for him and his swag.

[artist-issues]

Your story doesn't "have a message;" your story IS a message. The narrative and characters and setting and dialogue are just determining whether or not you delivered that message well.

[alvivaarts]

Writing Tips For You (as if I don’t currently have insane writer’s block)

-Can’t start a scene? Write the setting instead. What is the lighting like? Is this place comfortable? Is it familiar or not? What should you point out now so it doesn’t suddenly appear when it becomes important for the characters? SET! YOUR! STAGE!

-Everyone says “show, don’t tell”. I like to think of that as “what are your character’s physical reactions? What are they feeling?” You can say “Character looked dismayed”, or you can say “Character grimaced with dismay.” See the difference?

-Struggling with dialogue? Talk to yourself while you’re writing. You might be blocking yourself if you subconsciously think some dialogue feels unnatural.

-Context, context, context! This applies to everything from the small interactions to the big plots. Every force has an equal and opposite reaction, allow interactions and events to grow as such.

-Context, context, context pt 2! But worldbuilding! If your character is performing an act, how does that fit into the physical reality they already exist in? How is it possible? Can you imply (imply, not explain) that these things are commonplace or why they wouldn’t be?

-Build the action. (Stealing this from theater class like twelve years ago.) You can’t just put a character into the scene and say ‘they made a sandwhich’. What has to happen for the sandwhich to be made? Your character has to walk into the kitchen, open the cupboard, get out a plate, get out the jam and peanut butter, get out the knives, open the fridge, get out the bread, close the fridge, open the bread bag, lay down two slices of bread on the plate, close the bag, open the first jar, pick up the first knife, scoop up the jam, slather it on the bread, put the knife down, close the first jar- and so on and so forth. Every small step is necessary for you to understand, and to engage your readers. You don’t have to go into ridiculous detail like I just did, but even understanding that for yourself helps remember the ‘state’ of your scene at any given moment.

-See above, but it’s not a scene and a sandwhich. The scene is your whole story and the sandwhich is your plot. What small steps MUST happen to reach the climax? Does changing one of those small steps change the result? How?

-Emotions are best portrayed when you have experienced them or can get insight from those who have experienced them. Let yourself get emotional in a scene. Allow yourself to be empathetic and vicariously experience what your characters are.

-Reread your own work! Your writing style and characterizations can change over time, but if you feel like you’re losing them, don’t be afraid to look at where you started to ground yourself!

-Proofread your own work 2-12 hours after you finish a section! Not while you’re writing! Don’t let yourself get carried away with writing things ‘right’, just get the ideas out.

-Have a friend or volunteer proofread for you too! This can help pick out things you repeatedly say, words you might misuse, grammar and punctuation that might need correction, and phrases that are hard to digest or don’t make sense.

-Make sure you’re making an effort to use regionally/era specific words and slang both in dialogue and in your writing. There are plenty of websites and videos online that list and discuss regional and era slang worldwide. Not to mention, we can connect with people all over the world using the web just to ask! Using incorrect phrases can really break immersion and make characters feel- well, out of character! I.E. an 80s jock saying ‘dope bruh’, American characters (generally) saying ‘lift’ instead of ‘elevator’, so on and so forth.

-Research research research! Research bloodloss limits, research how laws and jobs operate in different regions and countries, research weirdly specific myths and biblical themes, research as much as you can! You can only build a richer environment to write in!

-If you actively want to implement themes, allow them to reflect the experiences of your character. Example character is an Italian American who was orphaned at 13 after his orthodox Catholic parents died, he has been in and out of foster care his whole life, and the moment he got out his military job became strict and he allowed himself to be blackmailed to protect a child in a similar position. This has plenty of fun themes and symbolisms, like sacrifice, fate, lack of control, love, losing autonomy, etc, all of which can be framed under the impactful history of his Catholic childhood. This evokes the imagery of farm animals, servitude, animal tags/dog tags, holy spaces being used for other purposes. Play with it!

-Build three base playlists! One for your overarching story, one for songs that remind you of the main character and their story arc, and one for how you feel when you’re writing/songs that weirdly remind you of your story. You can cycle through these to help get into your mood.

-Consume other media! If all you do is focus on writing, you WILL lose steam and inspiration. Don’t be afraid to watch new shows, read new books, look at more artwork, read more poems, listen to more music. You might get a flicker of inspiration for themes, motives and ideas, and you’ll continue to fill yourself instead of dumping your focus out on your writing.

-Understand how each major character thinks and instinctively reacts to things. Some characters can stay calm, but others might instinctively react to things ‘angrily’, others might try to run away. This is an easy way to figure out character flaws and impliment easy conflicts.

And last but not least:

-Take breaks! Don’t worry about forcing yourself to keep a posting schedule (unless you’re being paid. I’m not. I’m doing this shit for free and for funsies) if all you do is spend all your time worrying about your writing, you won’t be able to relax your brain. Spend time with friends, play games, go outside!

I hope this helps!

[tlbodine]

Let's talk about character motivation for a minute.

This is something that's super duper important and also gets misunderstood a lot.

Characters in your stories should have motivation for their actions. They should want something, and have a reason for doing stuff that exists beyond, "If they didn't do this, the story couldn't progress."

This does NOT mean that the character's ambition needs to drive the story -- not every story is an epic quest! Sometimes the thing the character wants is go have a nice pleasant nap and people keep bothering them and that is frankly a very relatable conflict. But they gotta want something.

Likewise, your character's motivation does not need to make logical sense as in, "This is a smart thing to do." It just needs to make believable emotional sense for the character you've introduced. Humans do things that are illogical all the time. We self-sabotage, make short-sighted decisions, ignore consequences, etc., usually because it fulfills an emotional need in the moment. Characters are like that, too. But the reader needs to be able to believe those emotions, which means you need to convey them clearly and compellingly.

So, remember, here's the formula:

1 - What does your character want?

2 - What's on the line if they do/don't get it?

3 - What's stopping them from getting what they want?

You gotta keep these questions front-and-center in your mind as you develop your character for your story, to make sure that they match the plot you're trying to work out.