# Addicted to One Character A BIG Problem?



## Marthix2011 (Jan 3, 2015)

I am in the process of brainstorming a fascinating new story, probably novel length that may span into a trilogy.  The whole idea of this story spawned from this fantastic character I dreamt of one night.  This particular character is a rogue female (antiheroine) and everything about her fascinates me.  It's who she is that has me motivated and intrigued to write.  As far as the story goes, I will allow her to write the story and I will be there to enjoy (or write) the ride of her journey.  However, the BIG problem that I have is that given that my lead character is thrilling to write, I think I am concentrating TOO much on her; on a side note, I am a male and I always love a great female character as leader.  I am fascinated by who she is as a character first and foremost.  Very complex character because she goes through a lot to become the person she is.  But my fascination for her may make it seem as though the other main characters feel like cardboard characters.  How or what would be the best way to make the characters in her party and in the villain party seem more vivid and colorful?  How can I break my addiction to my lead character and become fascinated by my other main characters?  I think I will have characters grouped into four different factions so there will be cultural differences between the characters, that is for sure.  Backgrounds will be different for sure.  Any ideas or thoughts would be appreciated!


----------



## InstituteMan (Jan 3, 2015)

Write the story now and flesh out the supporting cast more in your second draft.


----------



## Folcro (Jan 3, 2015)

If your audience is half as fascinated by this character as you are, it doesn't seem that the focus should need to be anywhere else to create a market success. 

My prediction, though, is that naturally you will feel loneliness for your character; you will want to throw her into the fray of a larger conflict or at least the drama of a small community, perhaps a handful of people huddled up in a ruined home struggling to survive. No matter how great a single action figure is, you will want a home (or base) and family (or companions) for your avatar's adventures.

It will come naturally. Don't hinder your concentration by worrying about it now, especially if you don't want the perfection of these opening moments to slip away.


----------



## Marthix2011 (Jan 3, 2015)

Folcro said:


> If your audience is half as fascinated by this character as you are, it doesn't seem that the focus should need to be anywhere else to create a market success.
> 
> My prediction, though, is that naturally you will feel loneliness for your character; you will want to throw her into the fray of a larger conflict or at least the drama of a small community, perhaps a handful of people huddled up in a ruined home struggling to survive. No matter how great a single action figure is, you will want a home (or base) and family (or companions) for your avatar's adventures.
> 
> It will come naturally. Don't hinder your concentration by worrying about it now, especially if you don't want the perfection of these opening moments to slip away.



Thank you Folcro!  I will follow your advice as it definitely makes me realize where I should focus the story.  Yeah, loneliness would be an appropriate word to associate with my lead character.  She's endured a lot of struggle in her life and in the story she reveals a lot of that and also displays the fire to fight the people who are oppressing her and her people.  I keep dreaming or thinking about all of these scenarios she is in and they are engaging.  I suppose I should pen the story and let everything flow from there.  Start with my lead character and everyone else will follow and form their own storyline(s).

- - - Updated - - -

Another thing I also struggle with is whether to write in third-person or first-person.  Any advice there?  Should I write from my antiheroine's perspective in first-person or write from outside her via third-person?  How can I determine that?


----------



## Deafmute (Jan 3, 2015)

Writing in the third person give more flexibility allowing you to jump to different places and reveal things the heroine is not aware of. But first person narrative allows for greater immersion into the character and creates the illusion that your reader is actually living the main characters life. From the sound of it 1rst person would work just fine here, but just keep in mind the loss of flexibility.


----------



## Marthix2011 (Jan 4, 2015)

Deafmute said:


> Writing in the third person give more flexibility allowing you to jump to different places and reveal things the heroine is not aware of. But first person narrative allows for greater immersion into the character and creates the illusion that your reader is actually living the main characters life. From the sound of it 1rst person would work just fine here, but just keep in mind the loss of flexibility.



Given the story, I think it would be neat to jump around to different character's perspectives.  The antiheroine's party eventually get split up.  However, perhaps this is where my antiheroine's loneliness may shine via first-person perspective.  Perhaps that would be a great way for the reader to sympathize with my lead character.  She is human after all.  And given her actions, she will not be liked by everyone.  She can be very aggressive and destructive and those will serve as a couple of her biggest flaws.  I suppose being inside of her head will engage the reader as she is a very sophisticated character.


----------



## Jeko (Jan 4, 2015)

> Very complex character because she goes through a lot to become the person she is. But my fascination for her may make it seem as though the other main characters feel like cardboard characters.



Here's something I discovered randomly during an English class; your characters are only as complex as other characters make them.

Think about how many stories there are where one character goes around on their own. I know some that do that in parts, but in those cases the settings and divisions of the character's psyche become like individual characters in order to continue developing the person we're following. 

It's the relationships between characters that make them more complex. We find Feste's darker side in _Twelfth Night _when he starts to tease Malvolio; we uncover Malvolio's libido when he thinks Lady Olivia is flirting with him; we get interested in Sir Andrew when he muses, vaguely, about his past in the ever reinterpreted line 'I was adored once too'.

Therefore, you won't be able to make your antiheroine successful unless you're using the other characters, and you won't be able to use them effectively unless you're treating them with as enough attention. So if you care about your MC, you have to care about the people who surround her and make her who she is.

The way I do it is by thinking of everyone as just people; some I know better, some I want to know better.


----------



## Morkonan (Jan 4, 2015)

Marthix2011 said:


> ....  Any ideas or thoughts would be appreciated!



It sounds like a "First Person" story.

Picture a "Philip Marlowe" sort of thing. What's this gumshoe detective going to say about a beautiful bombshell that walks into his office? That's worth writing, right? OK, what's he going to do when he gets blindsided by a thug's right hook? That's worth writing, right? Everything thing this guy does is worth writing about! And... not much that anyone else does is worth writing about.

If you have something like that, then your natural instinct is to go First Person. Draw the Reader into what it is that you are going to be writing about. You're not going to be writing about what other characters think, are you? Of course not! They're nowhere near as interesting as your main character! Probably... And, even if they are, your main character is just going to get amped up a bit and will be even more interestinger!

So, here's your story:

[video=youtube;Zzdl-js_mQ4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zzdl-js_mQ4[/video]

(Watch the whole scene.  )

Does that work for you? Does that sort of thing, a tight focus on First Person, work for the story you want to tell? Everything your awesome character does, including how they view the world, the hot dame with the partially revealing, yet subtle, gap in her robe, the way you stalk around the room, the moment of reflection where _you_ consider your options... Does that work? If so, then go forward without fear. 

Just be sure to present the other characters in the proper light. Don't go delving deeply into them. Don't bring up things just to make them "as interesting" as your main character. Sure, Tom Two-Fist may have gotten his arm blown off in the war, but they didn't call him Two-Fists 'cause he could fight well... Gretta might have been a spy in the war. Or, maybe not. Nobody really knows, but she mixes good drinks. Lucky the Snitch might be a mute, but his ears work damn well. Give your supporting cast "just enough" flavor, as interpreted by your main character, to be interesting, but not as interesting as your First Person narrator. The other characters in your story will be entirely created to support your Reader's interpretation of the main character. Your main character might even be biased, unfairly criticizing the decisions of other characters or choosing to overlook their obviously bad qualities. But, that's just because of the way the character interprets their surroundings and THAT sort of thing is only in the story to support the characterization of the main character - The other characters don't exist without passing through the filter of the main character's observations of them. 

You can write an excellent story with a wonderfully complex and interesting main character supported by a cast of other, almost as interesting, characters. Keep the focus where it needs to be and you'll do just fine.


----------



## Folcro (Jan 4, 2015)

Marthix2011 said:


> Another thing I also struggle with is whether to write in third-person or first-person.  Any advice there?  Should I write from my antiheroine's perspective in first-person or write from outside her via third-person?  How can I determine that?



That is a very big decision. Given the way your story seems to be going, I would lean toward yes (writing in first person). For a long time I had been stubbornly fixed on third, never realizing how enriching and empowering the first-person perspective can be. In the novel I'm working on now, everything is told in first-person, but the characters change. In my last novel, first person did not work all the time, as I would sometimes pan out and describe the world, but I did use first person to _introduce_ many of my characters (usually through a letter they have written to somebody; just be careful if you do that--- you don't want to make said letter look like it is being written to the audience: an easy and disastrous mistake). 

But third can still provide an outside perspective of course, especially if the narrator is a person who knew her, perhaps was in love with her, a character which you may be able to breathe life into very well.


----------



## Bishop (Jan 4, 2015)

Personally, I think a Doyle method might be in line here. Make it from the POV (first or third person limited) from a second character. Have them looking in and experiencing this main character as an outside viewpoint. It builds more mystery as to who she is and more wonder at the things she does. Obviously, it's not the most popular method, but one that I love. My best characters are often the ones not taking the reins.

If you stick to this character as the main point of view, that's fine. The issues will arise if you other characters are cardboard. You'll get a mary sue moment when people realize she's the only fleshed out character. I'm not saying don't love her more than the rest, but let us experience the other characters enough to develop some love for them as well. And then wrench our hearts when conflict arises.


----------



## Marthix2011 (Jan 4, 2015)

Morkonan said:


> It sounds like a "First Person" story.
> 
> Picture a "Philip Marlowe" sort of thing. What's this gumshoe detective going to say about a beautiful bombshell that walks into his office? That's worth writing, right? OK, what's he going to do when he gets blindsided by a thug's right hook? That's worth writing, right? Everything thing this guy does is worth writing about! And... not much that anyone else does is worth writing about.
> 
> ...



Thank you for the very detailed response! Yes, I believe that perspective demonstrated in the video would work great with my lead antiheroine.  In a lot of stories I have written before this one, I have struggled with deciding whether to go first-person or third-person.  With this particular character I have in mind, I think it would be most engaging to be inside of her head and see the world through her eyes.  Though she is a rebel towards the natural order of society, I believe the reader may view her and her party as some sort of middle party...a third party between good guys and bad guys.  In a sense anyway. Gonna be really interesting to write from her perspective.  Any tips you could share when writing first-person? I know a lot of people who admit that writing first-person is harder than third-person.


----------



## Marthix2011 (Jan 4, 2015)

Folcro said:


> That is a very big decision. Given the way your story seems to be going, I would lean toward yes (writing in first person). For a long time I had been stubbornly fixed on third, never realizing how enriching and empowering the first-person perspective can be. In the novel I'm working on now, everything is told in first-person, but the characters change. In my last novel, first person did not work all the time, as I would sometimes pan out and describe the world, but I did use first person to _introduce_ many of my characters (usually through a letter they have written to somebody; just be careful if you do that--- you don't want to make said letter look like it is being written to the audience: an easy and disastrous mistake).
> 
> But third can still provide an outside perspective of course, especially if the narrator is a person who knew her, perhaps was in love with her, a character which you may be able to breathe life into very well.



Me too.  I have been fixed on third-person for a while.  With having Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings as huge inspirations to writing and reading, I have always held third-person as the go-to form of writing.  But when I read books like The Hunger Games series, I really liked that approach to writing.  Viewing the world through Katniss's eyes was thrilling!  I wonder though...is it possible to do a multiple first-person book?  Of course, my lead antiheroine will take center stage and get most of the book, but what if I were to do wander off to other characters' minds?  Like at the beginning of the chapter or section, I could indicate the name of the character whose perspective it is from.  I wouldn't do this a whole lot, only when necessary.  

Hmm....doing a third-person perspective that you suggest in your last sentence seems like a great opportunity to explore.  This antiheroine of mine is going to be a leader.  I see how having a narrator as a person who knows her would work out well.  In a way, kind of like Merlin viewing a brave and noble swordsman like King Arthur.  Merlin began as a nobody in society and he got the privilege to work under King Arthur...I could see how this perspective would work out well.

- - - Updated - - -



Bishop said:


> Personally, I think a Doyle method might be in line here. Make it from the POV (first or third person limited) from a second character. Have them looking in and experiencing this main character as an outside viewpoint. It builds more mystery as to who she is and more wonder at the things she does. Obviously, it's not the most popular method, but one that I love. My best characters are often the ones not taking the reins.
> 
> If you stick to this character as the main point of view, that's fine. The issues will arise if you other characters are cardboard. You'll get a mary sue moment when people realize she's the only fleshed out character. I'm not saying don't love her more than the rest, but let us experience the other characters enough to develop some love for them as well. And then wrench our hearts when conflict arises.



My main concern is to not get too obsessed with my antiheroine.  She's definitely an interesting character who has braved countless tasks and is very inspiring.  I just don't want to focus so much attention on her as to minimize the potential of the other characters.  But given that the main characters surrounding her will come from different backgrounds, I believe it will be fun and exhilarating to write of or about these characters too!


----------



## Bishop (Jan 4, 2015)

Marthix2011 said:


> My main concern is to not get too obsessed with my antiheroine.  She's definitely an interesting character who has braved countless tasks and is very inspiring.  I just don't want to focus so much attention on her as to minimize the potential of the other characters.  But given that the main characters surrounding her will come from different backgrounds, I believe it will be fun and exhilarating to write of or about these characters too!



Then don't. You're in charge of the pen/keyboard. With self control and mindful writing and editing, you can avoid this problem entirely. Waving a wand or some other trick won't make it work out that way. Write it the way it works best, flesh out the other characters and give due time to where time is due to each character.


----------



## SwitchBack (Jan 5, 2015)

Maybe you could write out a chapter or something so we get a grasp as to your writing style & this antihero. 

There's a problem with focusing too much on one character and that's the fact that *you *think she is interesting, while to everyone else she might be boring and/or totally clichéd [as such boring].



People don't want to know the color of your antihero's underwear & if she's got dimples on her derriere. They want to know her world, her friends and enemies. 

You say it's about her fighting back against her oppressors. Then focus on those people. Focus on who helps her. Who doesn't. 


A well rounded book sells. A book too one character is something I personally wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole. I read one like that once, and only once, and had it not been a library book I may have just thrown in it the trash by chapter 3.


----------



## Bishop (Jan 5, 2015)

SwitchBack said:


> People don't want to know the color of your antihero's underwear & if she's got dimples on her derriere.



I disagree. I say MORE descriptions of shapely derrieres and the undies that contain them!


----------



## Morkonan (Jan 5, 2015)

Marthix2011 said:


> ... Any tips you could share when writing first-person? I know a lot of people who admit that writing first-person is harder than third-person.



Writing in First-Person is more difficult than writing in Third-Person. There's not much of an argument to substantiate otherwise. The difficulty is presented when one must attempt to obey the mechanics of good story-telling. First-Person locks you into a particular viewpoint. 

Your character/narrator will not be able to see the monster sneaking up on them.



That being said, I don't think the same difficulty is presented every time a writer writes in First-Person. It's simply that it takes some seasoning for a writer to be able to do what they need to do from such a limited perspective. The problem is that many new writers think that First-Person is a much more natural, and therefore much easier, style than any other. This is why, in my opinion, so many new writers get discouraged - They fall into a trap they're not yet prepared to deal with.

For advice, I'd say one thing you have to do is to never forget who's eyes you're using. For instance, let's say you're sticking with a standard First-Person, Restricted Omniscience Narrative Style. Essentially, your Narrator is your Main Character and you'll be following them around, recounting their experiences. That's very important! The first thing to remember, in my opinion, is that what the Reader is reading are the "experiences" of the Main Character. That is what the story is entirely about, no exceptions. (In that particular style. It's possible to do multiple first-person viewpoints, but complicated...)

So, let's say it's snowing in a scene. Your Main Character is "The Abominable Snowman." He's trudging through the snow, looking for something to eat. You end up writing "I was hungry and cold." Fine, right? Well... no. He's the Abominable Snowman! He's covered in three-hundred pounds of fur and insulated with a few hundred pounds of fat. He'd be more likely to be working up a sweat!

It's all about the "character's experience" of events. A mother might rush to rescue her child, not because she wanted to avoid injury to her child, but because that was the instinctive thing for her to do. Her child is a part of her and she could no more let it get run over by a car than she could refuse to jump out of the way of a car, herself. So, how do you recount that experience? Do you write is as an outsider, looking in, or as the character, _experiencing_ it? The latter, of course.

With First-Person, I would say that you also have to organize your story correctly. You have to pay attention to the mechanics you are going to use. First-Person stories usually involve a lot of travel for the main character. Why is that? Go ahead, spend some time chewing on why First-Person stories often involve many different modes of transportation and moving a character around to many different places... 

The reason is that you can't simply start a new chapter and introduce "A New Thing ™." That's why many, traditional, first-person stories seem to have main characters that love to walk around... In order for something new, like a critical plot-piece, to develop, either your character has to go to that mountain or that mountain must come to your character. This is one of the mechanical issues that frustrates a brand-new writer starting out with their beloved First-Person character. And, it's no wonder that many First-Person stories end up with characters who travel, by profession, or happen to do a heck of a lot of legwork.  (Or, sit in an arena and have the writer throw monsters at them all day.) Figuring out how you are going to tell the story, mechanically, and how the character will get from point A to B or how the necessary plot elements and characters are going to even _find_ the main character is a pretty big deal. Using Third-Person, this whole process is much less restrictive.

But, one of the best things about First-Person is that you are using a character's eyes and interpreting the world and everything that happens within it through the filter of their experience of it. The girl at the check-out counter may seem pleasant to the average Reader. But, to your character, a hopeless cynic, she's droll and obviously irritated, probably a bit hostile behind that obviously fake smile and droning on with her "Have a nice day" and all that crap.... You can color your character's glasses, their related experience, any way you want. You can purposefully make them an Unreliable Narrator without losing _one shred_ of the essence of your story. This is one reason why First Person is a wonderful style to use, especially when you're trying to focus on the personality of a character as being a strong story "hook." One can go overboard, though, in doing that. For the cynical character, we don't need them haranguing a wooden door or commenting on even every person they see on the street. But, they're sure to comment on their boss, their spouse, their so-called "friends" and any number of other subjects, all of which should help to rapidly build the Reader's impression of their character. If that character is interesting, has some interesting outlooks on life, and is generally entertaining, likeable or at least someone the Reader can feel sympathetic towards, you should not have any problems in engaging the Reader with that character.


----------



## NineShadowEyes (Jan 5, 2015)

I don't think your fascination with your character is a bad thing. In fact, I think it's awesome. I'm not really sure why you think it's bad, but I would encourage you to stay in love with her. I think that can only be a good thing. Go with it, nurture it, see where it goes. I think maybe as this character develops you'll start exploring her relationships and thoughts about the other characters and learn about them that way.

And I agree about using first person. For most of my life i avoided it, but when I tried it it felt like a totally natural and effective way to get in the character's head and feel them out.


----------



## Bishop (Jan 5, 2015)

Morkonan said:


> Writing in First-Person is more difficult than writing in Third-Person. There's not much of an argument to substantiate otherwise. The difficulty is presented when one must attempt to obey the mechanics of good story-telling. First-Person locks you into a particular viewpoint.
> 
> Your character/narrator will not be able to see the monster sneaking up on them.



Disagree here, Mork. You can, in fact, add great tension by giving the sense that the narrator is telling the story from a future date...
_
I walked along, all the while not knowing what was behind me.

_There's also ways to push ineffable feelings to increase the tension, or even inject knowledge to the character, but not have them react.

_I could feel it, something wrong in that silence. It was behind me, I knew it, or maybe I didn't... but I felt it. My fears confirmed when I saw its glowing eyes reflected in the window across the street. Still, sprinting down the alleyway would only let it know I knew. Knowing, at that moment, was all I had.

_Cheesiness aside from my example, it can be done. I don't mean to be that guy, but what might be difficult for you, might not be difficult for others. I've read many great, suspenseful tales in first person, with one of my favorite novels of all time being such a book--and history agrees that there are novels written in first person that defy time and storytelling itself.


----------



## Marthix2011 (Jan 5, 2015)

NineShadowEyes said:


> I don't think your fascination with your character is a bad thing. In fact, I think it's awesome. I'm not really sure why you think it's bad, but I would encourage you to stay in love with her. I think that can only be a good thing. Go with it, nurture it, see where it goes. I think maybe as this character develops you'll start exploring her relationships and thoughts about the other characters and learn about them that way.
> 
> And I agree about using first person. For most of my life i avoided it, but when I tried it it felt like a totally natural and effective way to get in the character's head and feel them out.



I have to admit that I definitely love my antiheroine.  I am proud of who she is and the determination she has to fulfill her ultimate mission.  I dream of all the scenarios where she will step into the spotlight and rise to the occassion.  She isn't perfect as she will have a handful of flaws which will make her human and vulnerable.  

I don't know how far she will go with it.  Her mission.  Will she be willing to sacrifice her life to carry out what she believes is her life's purpose?  I don't know everything about her, so I will allow her to be in the driver's seat and I will enjoy the ride and get to know her even better. And get to know her allies and opponents.  In any scenario where she gets hurt or damaged, then I will feel or express those feelings in the writing since I will see the world through her lens.  I'm really looking forward to the writing!


----------



## Lyra Laurant (Jan 6, 2015)

Marthix2011 said:


> I have to admit that I definitely love my antiheroine.  I am proud of who she is and the determination she has to fulfill her ultimate mission.  I dream of all the scenarios where she will step into the spotlight and rise to the occassion.  She isn't perfect as she will have a handful of flaws which will make her human and vulnerable.
> 
> I don't know how far she will go with it.  Her mission.  Will she be willing to sacrifice her life to carry out what she believes is her life's purpose?  I don't know everything about her, so I will allow her to be in the driver's seat and I will enjoy the ride and get to know her even better. And get to know her allies and opponents.  In any scenario where she gets hurt or damaged, then I will feel or express those feelings in the writing since I will see the world through her lens.  I'm really looking forward to the writing!



Look at the passion with which you talk about your character! I can't see why this should be a problem 
I think you should use her full potential, without worring too much about outshining the other characters. You can always write a second draft in which you work more on the characters you didn't develop much in the first.


----------



## Morkonan (Jan 6, 2015)

Bishop said:


> Disagree here, Mork. You can, in fact, add great tension by giving the sense that the narrator is telling the story from a future date...



True, but I was assuming we were talking with standard tenses/narration.
_



			I walked along, all the while not knowing what was behind me.
		
Click to expand...

_


> There's also ways to push ineffable feelings to increase the tension, or even inject knowledge to the character, but not have them react.
> 
> _I could feel it, something wrong in that silence. It was behind me, I knew it, or maybe I didn't... but I felt it. My fears confirmed when I saw its glowing eyes reflected in the window across the street. Still, sprinting down the alleyway would only let it know I knew. Knowing, at that moment, was all I had.
> 
> _Cheesiness aside from my example, it can be done. I don't mean to be that guy, but what might be difficult for you, might not be difficult for others. I've read many great, suspenseful tales in first person, with one of my favorite novels of all time being such a book--and history agrees that there are novels written in first person that defy time and storytelling itself.



In other words, I think what you want to say is something like this:

"If I had known the creature was behind me, I wouldn't have ordered that extra drink."

Of course, when you do that sort of thing, an element of drama is removed, since we know the narrator/character had to have survived the scene in order to reflect upon it.

(For some reason, I can't get rid of that extra quote. /shrug)


----------



## Kyle R (Jan 6, 2015)

Morkonan said:


> Writing in First-Person is more difficult than writing in Third-Person.


For me it's the opposite; I find writing in third person more difficult than first. :encouragement:


----------



## Bishop (Jan 6, 2015)

Morkonan said:


> Of course, when you do that sort of thing, an element of drama is removed, since we know the narrator/character had to have survived the scene in order to reflect upon it.



Not at all. I've read many books where the MC dies at the end, it's told entirely in his past perspective, and it's just given that his narration is after death. Sometimes a cheap cop out, if you ask me, but sometimes done well.


----------



## SwitchBack (Jan 7, 2015)

Bishop said:


> I disagree. I say MORE descriptions of shapely derrieres and the undies that contain them!



We'll start right away Lieutenant Plissken.


----------



## Marthix2011 (Jan 9, 2015)

Lyra Laurant said:


> Look at the passion with which you talk about your character! I can't see why this should be a problem
> I think you should use her full potential, without worring too much about outshining the other characters. You can always write a second draft in which you work more on the characters you didn't develop much in the first.



Thank you for the sweet response!  Your post makes me even more motivated to write my antiheroine's story!


----------



## Morkonan (Jan 9, 2015)

Kyle R said:


> For me it's the opposite; I find writing in third person more difficult than first. :encouragement:



You're an anomaly... We should hire scientists to study you.  (In a good way!)

First-Person can be "mechanically" difficult for_ new _writers. People sometimes solve this problem, these days, by using multiple First-Person views. I think that's sort of a cop-out, though "whatever works", I guess. (It's... clunky, IMO.) But, if you're trying to stay with a traditional First-Person PoV, Limited Omniscience "making things happen" regarding essential plot-pieces and story structure can be more difficult in First-Person than Third. Narrative Style can be tripped over, as well, with limited omniscience ruling the day and a competing new writer's "instinct" to slip from that, from time to time.

How many posts do we see here with new writers tackling First-Person and inadvertently swaying into Third-Person, Omniscient or otherwise having problems with their PoV? (Rhetorical)



Bishop said:


> Not at all. I've read many books where the MC dies at the end, it's told entirely in his past perspective, and it's just given that his narration is after death. Sometimes a cheap cop out, if you ask me, but sometimes done well.



True. But, I usually find those sorts of stories a "slap in the face" rather than being written well. That's probably "just me."  But, I'm sure there are plenty of well-regarded ones written well _in spite of _the fact that they breached that moment of trust with the Reader.


----------



## TJ1985 (Jan 9, 2015)

There was a writer, he passed away in 1964, who was basically addicted to one of his lead characters. That character starred in 14 novels that I know of, and many more short stories. The writer? Ian Fleming. The character? Bond, James Bond. 

I've got to think, had Mr. Fleming fallen out of infatuation with B,JB at the end of his first novel (Casino Royale) in 1953 and moved on to write other characters with the same vigor, Bond would likely be an interesting one-and-done novel/movie character. Fleming stuck with him and created a legacy that has placed Mr. Fleming in popular culture eternally. There is nothing wrong with liking your character. It would be easier to write for the hero if you don't despise the character. 

The only advice I have is to make sure your initial character doesn't annoy you, the writer. Those little habits sometimes become so synonymous with characters, and if it bugs you in the first short story you'll be sick of it by the fifteenth. I often wonder if Fleming got tired of being served martinis, shaken not stirred. Had he known it'd become a trademark he might have written "No drink for me, just the nearest harlot available, thanks." eaceful:

Well, that's what _I_ would have written...


----------

