The #5 rule of characterization: Generally speaking, characters have more layers than is immediately obvious.
The #4 rule of characterization: Everybody acts 'out-of-character' once in a while.
The #3 rule of characterization: What we do not do, we fear.
The #2 rule of characterization: What we actually do, we love.
I've put these rules together to come up with these
ideas of character schticks. Basically, the whole scheme looks like this:
| normal | shadow | progressive | regressive | |
| public schtick | ||||
| private schtick |
A character's schtick is a role associated
with a character and the actions that go with that role. A schtick is composed
of a subject and a modifier. The subject is the role; the modifier
is the way the character goes about that role.
Public schticks are the masks people put
on in public; they're our jobs, our 'what-do-you-do?' Public schticks serve
to advance the obvious, physical, external plot. Private schticks
are the things people do in the company of close friends and other intimates;
they're the 'real you.' Private schticks serve to exposit character, and
promote character interactions and development.
Normal schticks are the faces we show in
everyday situations; our 'light side.' Shadow schticks are what
we become and do under duress, either from external or plot based conflict,
or internal or character based conflict.
Progressive schticks are what the character
is growing towards in order to advance the plot (public) or better understand
themselves (private). Regressive schticks are the inverse; they
represent a confusion of the characters themselves, whether to advance
the plot or just create chaos character-wise.
How Do You Know When a Schtick's a Schtick?
Basically, schticks are expressed either actively or passively. Actively, schticks are expressed through quotes, quirks, and memorable scenes. Quotes are called in the book buisiness 'cast-offs' (or so I'm told.) They're those great lines that a character utters or thinks or is somehow else associated with, that have you saying them again and again. Examples:
"I'm not left-handed either." -- The Man in Black,
from the Princess Bride
"Of course it talks! Did you think it would wiggle
its ears in code?" --
Fenobar, from Demon of Undoing
"...she was gorgeous now. Once she realized she
could have any guy in school she wanted, it would be 'bye-bye Xander, hello
jock-of-the-month club.'" -- Xander, from Rebecca Carefoot's 'Gonna Make
Some Changes.'
Quirks are those little, strange things a character does is unique to them. They're usually actions, but can be delivered (usually less effectively) through conversation. Examples:
Vizzini (from the Princess Bride) yelling "IT'S INCONCIEVABLE!"
every time his plans start to fall apart; Fezzik constantly rhyming; Inigo
fighting with his left hand.
Holmes' sharpshooting of 'V.R.' on his apartment
wall; his smoking habit to aid his thoughts.
Willow (from Buffy the Vampire Slayer) 's fear of
frogs; her tendency to babble under social duress.
Memorable scenes are
just that, scenes that imprint themselves indelibly on the mind of the
reader. Examples:
The whole swordflight-fight between Inigo and Count
Rugo, the six-fingered man.
The plane scene from Casablanca, where Rick tells
Ilsa to go.
The end of Moby Dick, with Ahab killed by his obsession.
Passively, they are expressed through demeanor, accoutrements, and shots. Demeanor is how a character looks, basically. It includes face, body language, and physical form. Examples:
Darth Vader's whole Jedi outfit and labored breathing.
Frank Black's (from Millenium) extremely lined and
worn face, almost always scowling.
Accoutrements are the character's constant possessions, the ones they are never seen without, or at least always associated with. They don't have to be the same thing, just the same kind of thing for an individual character. Examples:
The Jedis' lightsabers - color-coded, no less.
The scarlet 'A' in the Scarlet Letter.
Willow's fuzzy wardrobe.
Shots are those short scenes or passages which center on the description of one character. Examples:
The Emperor coming out of his shuttle, escorted by
his Imperial Guard.
The 'scream nobody heard' scene in the Scarlet Letter.
Frank's hair white after his wife leaves to die.
How do you find out a character's schticks?
Basically, you take all the ways a character can
express schticks -- quotes, quirks, and memorable scenes; demeanor, accoutrements,
and shots -- and try to find some common motivations to account for them.
Then you organize the motivations into schticks, e.g., oh she is motivated
to act this way in public, this way in private, this way under duress.
To come up with the progressive schticks, you take
the subject of the shadow schtick and the modifier of the normal schtick,
and (ahem) stick them together. The converse results in the regressive
schtick: shadow modifier, normal subject.
It's not a perfect process by any means. I used
to think public and private schticks couldn't overlap -- they can. I also
used to think each character generally had only one schtick for each slot
-- that's not true either. I'm also not sure about the whole progressive-regressive
thing.
The #1 rule of characterization: Generally speaking, people's
motives are stupider (simpler/lower) than you think.
| Sample Statement | Level of Motivation |
| I love you | Apprehension/Awareness |
| I want for you, what you want for you | Rational-Logical Thought |
| I want you to be happy | Emotions/Feelings |
| I want what's best for you | Compulsions/If-Thens |
| I want you | Needs/Drives |
The Levels of Motivation
Apprehension/Awareness
At the Apprehension level, characters act out of free will. They do something because they decided to do it. No reason, just decision and action. Simple? Yes. Unrealistic? Yes, but why? Because (see rule #1) most people aren't this smart.
Rational-Logical Thought
The Rational-Logical level, characters act out of considered thoughts. They either think things through from a reasonable basis (rational) or from an assumed premise (logical) and then follow the train of thought to the end. This is the classic basis for motivation, to my mind. It's also pretty unrealistic (see rule #1.)
At the emotional or feeling level, characters act because of what they feel. This is what I've always considered real motivation -- and of course, I was incredibly wrong (see rule #1.) Yes, feelings can be complex; you can feel several different things toward a person at once, and they can and often do conflict. Yes, feelings can overlap; contrary to people's beliefs, it's quite possible to be in love with more than one person at the same time. Yes, feelings can change, often in an instant (falling in love), but also slowly and over time (growing apart.) But what I never counted on was that most people's motivations can not be comprehended or apprehended like a feeling. Why? Most people's motivations are stupider!
Now we start to get into the real meat of ordinary motivation. Compulsions, or what I like to call 'If-Thens', are simple statements of conscience. It's easier to give examples than explain them. Examples:
IF I'm not good, THEN I'm damned.
IF I don't (give christmas presents/act polite/floss...),
THEN I'm not good.
IF I (give my children presents/act nice/pay my
taxes...), THEN I'm good.
IF I act (macho/polite/loose/dutiful...), THEN my
social status will rise.
IF I hurt (my enemies/people I hate...), THEN I'll
feel better.
Basically, If-Thens have a character act out of the unquestioned belief that if they do something, or act a certain way, the same specified good or bad thing will happen. This is how a LOT of people are motivated, believe it or not! But, it's not the core of human motivation. Nope, that's one rung lower...
Needs and Drives are basically a character's nature. They are innately part of who the character is. Examples:
I NEED (sex/love/money/power/stuff/status/freedom/knowledge/to
die/to live...)
I WANT (you/more/no more pain/to be happy/to have
everything the way it was...)
I MUST (understand/get out/be good/hurt others/love
others/think rationally...)
As you can see, they can be quite varied. The one constant is that they are absolute; a character never questions his or her needs; they often have to deal with it by controlling, denying, expressing, etc. it, but a need can never be reasoned with. That is the reason I hate them, they take away an essential human dignity, freedom. But they are the raison d'etre of characters, quite literally. There is no more realistic motivation than a drive; every character has them in one form or another...at least I assume so.
Other writing resources:
Awards Page
Character Breakdowns & Analysis
Fun With Profiling:Buffy the Vampire Slayer
How to Write
Motivations by Age Type
More on Schticks Page
My Attempt to Figure Out Relationships
Page
Palaskar's Primer on Emotions for Characterization
Wants &a