Beta Reader Group discussion
Writing Advice & Discussion
>
What is the difference between good and GREAT characterization?
date
newest »
newest »
the difference good and great is pure simple for good is generally when you do an act or write something that is satisfactory. While great elaborates on the definition of good and makes it better. like something unimaginable out of this world.
Great is a book that keeps you on your toes and you can't wait to see what else there is to read...
I'm a writer, not a beta. Are you asking about the characters in a story?
James wrote: "I'm a writer, not a beta. Are you asking about the characters in a story?"Yes, I'm asking about building characters in a story.
Steve wrote: "the difference good and great is pure simple for good is generally when you do an act or write something that is satisfactory. While great elaborates on the definition of good and makes it better. ..."Steve, thanks for your reply, but that is a bit vague.
Mod
If you want to say she has red hair or a bad dye job, that's cool. If you want to say she has freckles and red hair that's the result of a bad dye job, that's fine. More than that...can wait. Tell me in the next chapter that he's staring into her green eyes. Describing a character's appearance all at once is an info-dump for me.
Cassie wrote: "Great is a book that keeps you on your toes and you can't wait to see what else there is to read..."Agreed, but what about the characters? What is it about them that keeps you hooked? Do you want to know everything about them? How much is enough? How much is too much.? I know this is a tough question because it is so subjective, but I'm trying to tap into beta reader's expertise. They read a ton of books with a critical eye. I am sure there are some great lessons there that could help authors write better characters. If I'm like most people, if don't care about the characters in the book, I probably won't bother finishing the book.
Lena wrote: "I haven't beta read, but when reading a novel, I HATE HATE HATE when a character looks in the mirror and describes herself. I probably stop reading at that point, it's so cliche. Also, I don't real..."Hi Lena, Those are great points. I'll have to keep those on my "Avoid" list. The mirror thing is a deal breaker for you. I am willing to be it is also for a lot of other folks. I'm guessing that the mirror thing is common in romance novels? Stoping the action, and avoiding info dumping - I can see how those can be momentum killers. Good stuff, Thanks!
I've only beta read a couple of books but for me the things which make a character strong are:-believability: They have to act in a way that rings true with their backstory. They have to act how a real person would act. In a lot of drafts you can tell the writer has simply made them say or do something purely to move the plot forward. This instantly turns me off.
-consistency: I don't mean they don't change. I just mean that when they do it should be gradual and natural. They can't just suddenly start speaking in a different way or acting in a different way without a proper reason
-uniqueness: this is a very subjective thing. For me, as long as I haven't seen a 'type' of character before I enjoy reading about them more.
-their personal history: this is the key point for me. I love it when a character has a really interesting/unique backstory. Not only does it make the book easier to read but it allows you, the writer, to create a person who is very dynamic and unique. They won't act like everyone else around them, because their past hasn't been anything like the pasts of most people.
Does this make sense? I'm not sure.
Mod
Mod
On the other hand, vivid description that includes the character's interpretation, and a feeling a character really cares about something, will lift those characters off the page. Strong writing will let me feel what the character feels.
A bit of mystery doesn't go amiss, either - I don't need to know what he/she wants or why he/she wants it, I just need to feel the passion.
Adding to what Lin said, I need to feel empathy for a character. There has to be some trait in their character or situation that I can connect with. I think this is the most fundamental aspect. Without this empathy, I couldn't care less about what happens to a character, and with this empathy I am willing to forgive so many other shortcomings
Sarah wrote: "I've only beta read a couple of books but for me the things which make a character strong are:-believability: They have to act in a way that rings true with their backstory. They have to act how ..."
Sarah, Yes, it makes sense. I think it would benefit many writers, my self included, to take your advise. These are great observations. Thank you for taking the time to share them.
Lin wrote: "Sorry, hit wrong button on phone! I've read many stories where things happen and the main character drifts along reacting to them. If he/she doesn't seem to care, why should I? On the other hand,..."
Lin - Thanks for that golden nugget. "If the character doesn't seem to care, why should I?" That's worth printing and posting on my wall so that I can look at it as I write. Thanks again!
Here are reactions from a couple of beta reviewers regarding an upcoming publication that speak to the reaction a reader has when they can identify with/care about characters:“You know it’s a great book when you have to keep reminding yourself that the characters are not real people. I really cared about ____, and she gave me some bad moments. I desperately hoped her story would have a happy ending.”
Another beta had a similar reaction, but I am going to heavily edit and leave only a few keywords:
"...heartbreaking... _____ has been through a lot...I was easily able to identify and sympathize with the characters in the story. I could literally feel ______'s pain at... I hope we see more of ________ [in the next book]... devastated ..."
Sarah wrote: "Adding to what Lin said, I need to feel empathy for a character. There has to be some trait in their character or situation that I can connect with. I think this is the most fundamental aspect. Wit..."Great point, Sarah. This is particularly interesting if the book has religious overtones. The reader may not share any of the beliefs. Empathy for the character might not happen. Thanks for sharing.
P.D. wrote: "I'm going to be crass and quote one of the beta reviewers for my upcoming publication on this one:“You know it’s a great book when you have to keep reminding yourself that the characters are not ..."
P.D. Your comment is more about promoting your book than about the topic. This was not intended as a discussion for authors to plug their work.
Do you want me to delete it? My point was about caring for the characters.
Mod
I'll do a quick edit to knock out any names or reference to the fact it is my own book. Maybe that would be more appropriate.
My advice follows along the line of Lena's above. In addressing great characterization the motto should be, "Show. Don't tell."Show me the character throughout the course of what is going on. First person characterization can shift into inner-monologue, which is good when it advances the story, but not good when it is used by the narrator to tell us all about who he/she thinks he/she is. Third person point-of-view can do the same thing, only the narrator is not the character him/herself. Show me through character actions and others' reactions to the character who he/she is and what he/she cares about.
P.D. wrote: "Do you want me to delete it? My point was about caring for the characters."No, that's fine. I just want to make sure we don't get authors trying to push their work, by conveniently using it as a great example. I think there is a lot of expertise among the community of beta readers and would like to make sure folks stay on point.
Michelle wrote: "My advice follows along the line of Lena's above. In addressing great characterization the motto should be, "Show. Don't tell."Show me the character throughout the course of what is going on. Fir..."
Michelle wrote: "My advice follows along the line of Lena's above. In addressing great characterization the motto should be, "Show. Don't tell."
Show me the character throughout the course of what is going on. Fir..."
Great share - Thanks, Michelle!
Thanks Diogenes. I am new here and I don't want to step on any toes, so if I muff up, I appreciate being told!
Great characterization moves the emotions and makes you feel you can identify with the character.
P.D. wrote: "Thanks Diogenes. I am new here and I don't want to step on any toes, so if I muff up, I appreciate being told!"No problem - We've all done our share of muffing.
Jaspira wrote: "Great characterization moves the emotions and makes you feel you can identify with the character."Jaspira, thanks for your comment.
Sarah wrote: "Adding to what Lin said, I need to feel empathy for a character. There has to be some trait in their character or situation that I can connect with..."Although this is nice in certain types of books, I don't think it is necessary to define great characterization. Think Gone Girl. The characterization in this book is great, but completely unreliable and not evoking of sympathy. Yet the reader knows the characters fully and completely by the end of the book.
Yes, most readers do like to identify and/or empathize with their characters, but it is not necessary to define great characterization. I have read great books by the end of which I have hated one or more of the main characters.
I agree. Take Hanibal for example (Silence of the lamb). He's a great character. Do I identify with him? I sure hope not!
Sometimes the greatest compliment you can get from a reader is how much they hated a character. The best feedback I got from a creative writing teacher when he handed a short story back was a terse: "I hated the little b*****!"One of the betas on a current work says "I spent so much of the book trying to decide if I hated or liked (MC)"
Some great characters will be heroes, some will be villains. Some will be villain-turned-hero or fallen-hero. But you want the reader to care what happens to the character (whether they want them to succeed or want them to die... whichever...)
But you want the reader to care what happens to the character (whether they want them to succeed or want them to die... whichever...)"This is certainly important.
Michelle wrote: "But you want the reader to care what happens to the character (whether they want them to succeed or want them to die... whichever...)"This is certainly important."
You're right, Michelle. We love to love characters, and we love to hate them.
G.G., Hanibal is a great example.
P.D. wrote: "Sometimes the greatest compliment you can get from a reader is how much they hated a character. The best feedback I got from a creative writing teacher when he handed a short story back was a terse..."The statement by your beta, "I spent so much of the book trying to decide if I hated or liked (MC)" raises a question for me. If a reader has to spend a lot of time trying to decide whether they like or hate a character, isn't that a sign of a poorly written/ not well developed character?
Good question... Sometimes undecided means that the character is giving up mix vibes. He or she is not constant, which could be a sign of bad characterization. However, it could also mean that the MC feels real and well, who never felt like slapping someone for things they shouldn't have done...
In this case, a possibly mentally ill character who behaves badly but is also possibly the victim of a plot against her...So do you hate her because of her often bizarre and negative behaviour? Like her because of her struggle against an oppressive authority figure? Pity her as she grieves over her lost love?
In this case, the reader is supposed to struggle with what to think/feel about the MC; whether to believe her delusions, excuse them because of the abuse, or just to want to slap some sense into her.
There are plenty of characters in well-written books that you don't know whether to hate or love. As a simplistic example, look at Hermione in the first Harry Potter book. A loud-mouthed, homely, insufferable know-it-all. But by the end of the book, and the series, a beloved, capable, trustworthy cohort.
Michelle wrote: "Sarah wrote: "Adding to what Lin said, I need to feel empathy for a character. There has to be some trait in their character or situation that I can connect with..."Although this is nice in certa..."
I think I might have phrased this wrong. For me, empathy doesn't necessarily mean I like a character it just means I can understand where they are coming from. Some of my favourite characters are absolute a**h**** (Cathy Ames in East of Eden), but the author (in this case, Steinbeck) had provided enough backstory to help me understand where the character was coming from.
But as much as I love evil characters I feel absolutely nothing if I don't care about the victims of their evil deeds. For me, that's the key to a powerful book. I have the strongest emotional response when bad things happen to good people.
Mod
What makes a great character will be different for different readers. It depends somewhat on what they read for. My brother loves gritty, in the muck of life types of books. I prefer heroic characters who rise above or pursue the virtue despite the muck.As an example, one of the first Stephen King books I read was "Thinner" and almost didn't read any more of his because I couldn't 'get behind' any of the characters. I didn't want the MC to win. I think King, btw, is one of the best authors I've read, so it wasn't writing style, it was the character that turned me off.
Sarah wrote: "Michelle wrote: "Sarah wrote: "Adding to what Lin said, I need to feel empathy for a character. There has to be some trait in their character or situation that I can connect with..."Although this..."
Good point, Sarah. If you don't care about the victim, there is no way tension between the characters will build. I find this tension keeps me engaged. It's like a magnet.
I just want to thank everyone for their comments and insights!
I coming in perhaps late on this discussion, but . . . Diogenes, you mentioned “craft” in the thread’s premise, and I think that is the key to your query. Craft implies tools and delicate work; hard work. You are the writers, the crafters; we are the readers, the appreciators of your art. A writer does not insult the reader with lazy words and bad connectors. And doesn’t hold the reader’s hand too hard. We’re pretty smart. Let us be clever. If you’re great, we’ll figure it out.As the posts above make clear, we don’t want info-dumps and mirror-gazing [LOL, Lena!]. We want [as Lena (again!) noted] to be shown and [as Sarah mentioned], empathise with the character. It’s all in what the character does and says - not what the narrative voice of the author tells us! So, does the writer give us something like: He looked angrily and frustratedly away because he didn’t want to look ever again at his father, who was so mean to his mom like he just was now with the comments about her housekeeping and bad fashion sense. And because he didn’t want to say anything, either, to his bastard father, ever again for the rest of his life because of all the years of mean comments like those, he said, bitterly and with much emphasis, “I'll call you, Mom.”
ROFL. No. After a concise and active demonstration of the family dynamic, without laborious expository background: He looked away. “I'll call you, Mom.”
While not the most literary of [fake] examples, hopefully it demonstrates my point. The reader will empathise with the character’s situation, and the simpler - almost parsimonious - phrases will better reveal the tension of the scene, the need for the character to maintain control and offer crumbs of respect to the better-loved parent while not escalating a volatile situation. The simpler form gives character to the, er, character, without the writer slapping lurid paint on it.
I’ve read characters I despised - because I was meant to despise them and the writing took me there! But I’ve despised characters that I know full well I was meant to like - the author constantly telling me what an awesome person this character was supposed to be! If you tell me that just once, you’re probably not a bad writer, and perhaps even good. If you never tell me it - and I get it - you’re great! Don’t ’splain to me! Let me parse out the character on my own through what you show me.
Roberta wrote: "I coming in perhaps late on this discussion, but . . . Diogenes, you mentioned “craft” in the thread’s premise, and I think that is the key to your query. Craft implies tools and delicate work; har..."Roberta - terrific comment! There's a great lesson in your last paragraph. Thanks for taking the time to post it.
If you are an author, please do not use this discussion to promote your book.
If you are a beta reader, please feel free to share how many books you have read as a beta, as well as any other advice that you care to share.