Are different levels of character development required for primary as opposed to secondary characters?
Primary characters would normally include the protagonist, antagonist, and maybe one or two "fellow travelers" of these. Secondary characters would consist of non-trivial characters that are not primary characters.
My understanding is that the primary characters should be developed to the point where the audience knows them as their lover or best friend, because that's what they are for the duration of the work. Can secondary characters be developed to a lesser extent? If so, how much less? Can a secondary character such as a doctor even be a "generic" character, or is that treating him or her with too little importance?
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/28625. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
2 answers
You are accessing this answer with a direct link, so it's being shown above all other answers regardless of its score. You can return to the normal view.
Yes, you can develop secondary characters, and should to the extent your narrative has room.
While they are multi-volume arcs, David & Leigh Eddings's Belgariad and Malloreon series are good examples of this. The main character is Garion, later Belgarion. Other major protagonists are his aunt Polgara, grandfather Belgarath, and eventual wife Ce'Nedra. There are five or six secondary protagonists who travel with them on their quest, and all of them get enough backstory and character development that you know who each person is individually and separate from Belgarion's story.
You don't want to overwhelm a single book with eight characters' backstories, but each person should get enough presentation that they are distinguishable. And please try to give everyone a personality and at least a suggestion of a life which has nothing to do with the hero. This is critical for a love interest. The Love Interest should have a life which starts before s/he meets your hero. Family, friends, hobbies, history, a job.
If everyone in your book exists solely to perform a function for the protagonist, your book may feel flat. You don't have to have 20 heroes, but yes, some fleshing out is good.
0 comment threads
I'll go right ahead and declare that you're far too versed in 'writing theory' than the practise of writing itself.
All the writing techniques being questioned are related. Once you understand that basic fact all the other technical terms fall into place.
Start with the basic "SHOW DON'T TELL".
As an egotistical writer you are itching to tell YOUR story but it's not YOUR story it's the character's story.
BAD WRITING
You want to tell us that Bob's wife had left him and ever since he'd taken to drinking after work - don't do it. SHOW us Bob dragging his young intern Vanessa (a secondary character) to the bar every night after work. Bob confides in Vanessa but the more Bob talks and Vanessa listens you are developing both characters. Why does Vanessa put up with this shit? Does she fear for her job? How far will she go to get ahead? Or does she fancy her boss? Or maybe she's just a good listener.
Every time characters interact you are developing both characters.
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/28826. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
0 comment threads