How to write a 'fish out of water' character?
Inserting a Fish out of water character could be good way to introduce the reader to the world and also great for comic relief, but there were cases in books I've read when the character's naivete or ignorance was overplayed.
For example, a visitor from a more advanced civilization was too slow to interpret the economic situation and cultural clues, creating a somewhat Marie Antoinette-ish character. There were also cases where a character from a rustic background was written like a complete ignoramus.
What are the best ways to avoid these mistakes and portray a believable 'fish out of water' character?
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/33728. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
3 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.
If you've ever played D&D, think of this character as having low wisdom, high intelligence: smart, but not knowledgeable. Curious. Interested in obtaining new information, looking at new things in wonder, awe - whatever emotion you wish to evoke in the reader. Consider not only the knowledge your character lacks, but also the knowledge he has, and have him respond to new situations in light of this knowledge. (This might lead the character to mistakes, but the mistakes would be understandable and interesting.) Do make sure that your character does have some knowledge - he comes from somewhere, right? He has a frame of reference. He fits new knowledge into what he already knows. Let your character learn (so he doesn't appear stupid), and make him curious to find out things - all the things you want your reader to be curious about. Let the character have an emotional response to acquiring new information - he might be surprised, or feel himself rustic, or whatever, depending on the situation. And sometimes, let this character's status as an outsider be an advantage.
Consider, for example, Pippin's role in the Lord of the Rings. He starts out as a "Fool of a Took" - he does not fully grasp the danger they are in, he acts on impulse. Seeing a deep hole in Moria, he's curious to find out just how deep it is, and coming from the safe, calm Shire, he doesn't have it in him to show caution. Instead, he throws in a rock. Which is what the reader would probably do. The same Pippin later, not fully understanding the political situation in Gondor, nor the magnitude of what he's doing, swears fealty to Lord Denethor - a generous act, as even Gandalf concedes. Here Pippin's actions are naive, but praiseworthy. And that same Pippin, when being given orders that are crazy (burn Faramir alive), does not have a soldier's "obey orders, trust the leader" training, but instead responds as the only sane man. In all situations, he is a fish out of water, to different effects. (Another effect is of course that we see the wonder that is Minas Tirith, as well as the pre-battle fear and the horror of the battle itself through the eyes of Pippin who is new to all those situations, rather than through the eyes of a character who is accustomed to them, and for whom the experiences are thus blunted.)
0 comment threads
Well, the best way to introduce a reader to a world is to describe it to them. It worked for Tolkien. It worked for Rowling. It can work for you.
The best way to make a fish out of water character convincing is to have a very good reason why they are out of water, and either show them working as hard as they can to get back in the water, or provide a completely convincing reason why they wish to remain out of the water.
Falseness in a character always comes back to motivation. Every character acts in their own interest. Yes, there is such a thing as altruism, but altruism is an act of love and love is an interest. So if you have a fish out of water, tell us a convincing and self-consistent story about how they came to be out of the water. (By self-consistent, I mean consistent with the theme and mood of the rest of the story.) Then filter everything they do and say through the question of their desire either to return to the water or stay out of it.
0 comment threads
Probably the easiest way is presume the character is intelligent, well read in history and sociology, and unencumbered by "stick in the mud" thinking. An obvious choice would be to make her a professor and inventor, capable of thinking out of the box, and understanding novel new problems or relationships, or extrapolating from an Earth history that has a dozen kinds of social settings, religions she knows about, political organizations she knows about across the spectrum including communism, socialism, capitalism, dictatorships. She knows about wars and what causes them, she knows about civilization collapse, she knows about sexual relations in societies ranging from strictly suppressed to completely liberal, she knows about economic systems from primitive barter to high finance.
Give her enough knowledge of Earth, and the culture and economics and religion and professions may be new, but she will have plenty of metaphors and analogies to draw from.
So she is not boggled by anything, merely puzzled and works to ask about details, and her guesses may not always be correct but usually good. i.e. she may relate "MAGIC" to "TECHNOLOGY SHE DOES NOT UNDERSTAND BUT CAN USE", like an iPhone is for most people, or the Internet is.
0 comment threads
0 comment threads