Post History
Here's the thing about Watson: he is a fully developed character. If you met him at a party, you would say to yourself, isn't that Doctor Watson? This is even more true in the Sherlock TV series (i...
Answer
#4: Attribution notice removed
by
System
·
2020-01-03T20:41:54Z (over 4 years ago)
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/28317 License name: CC BY-SA 3.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
#3: Attribution notice added
by
System
·
2019-12-08T06:31:58Z (over 4 years ago)
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/28317 License name: CC BY-SA 3.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
#2: Initial revision
by
System
·
2019-12-08T06:31:58Z (over 4 years ago)
Here's the thing about Watson: he is a fully developed character. If you met him at a party, you would say to yourself, isn't that Doctor Watson? This is even more true in the Sherlock TV series (in no small part because Martin Freeman is a much better actor than Benedict Cumberbatch). I think the formula for character is pretty simple: you have to be interested in them. Ask yourself, if your protagonist was hit by a bus tomorrow, would you still know who the sidekick is? Can you imagine Watson without Holmes, Sanch Panza without Don Quixote? Sam without Frodo? Hermione without Harry? Q without Bond? Jeeves without Wooster. I think the answer in each case is yes. Not, of course, that it would be the same story, but there would still be a story, a person capable of telling a story about. Who is your sidekick without your hero?
#1: Imported from external source
by
System
·
2017-05-28T03:55:34Z (almost 7 years ago)
Original score: 4