Can I make a character make a philosophic observation or say their opinion, even if it's unnecessary for the plot/story?
I have a character in my story who has the habit of making philosophic observations about life and the functioning of things, or his opinion/vision about something.
Although most of his observations make the story better with them, some don't or not much, but they also don't make it worse, it's simply dispensable.
I, however, added these "unnecessary" observations because I found them interesting and fitting in the context of the situation, but they don't help progress the plot or add to the story, it's just his observation.
So can I add/keep these or should I keep only what is necessary?
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/34718. 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.
Find Consequences.
It depends on how "dispensable" it is. Conversation, beliefs, philosophy, loves and hatreds, likes and dislikes, sympathy's and passions, are all parts of being a real person; what you are doing is character building, for a character that appears repeatedly and has something to do with the story.
Character and setting building are important and not always directly related to the plot. They can be, for example in Star Wars the setting and nature of Cloud City, where Luke gets his hand cut off, is important to the escape of all the good team. The setting of Hoth (ice planet) plays a role in Luke's developing command of The Force.
The important thing to remember is that you are trying to guide your reader's imagination of what is happening in the story, so a certain amount of leeway in the name of entertainment is permissible, but always keep in mind the pacing of your story. To illustrate with an overly obvious example, a fight to the death is not the time to be opining on whether prostitution should be legal or not. The best time for such opining is as filler during otherwise idle time, such as a necessary journey.
Make An Argument, a Challenge, a Conflict
I try to make such conversations at least friendly arguments. Conflict is a spice that can go a long way in turning bland assertions into something interesting. Even in ideas, even among friends. Disagreements in philosophy (I have them with my own best friends) are a form of battle, sparring or wrestling that usually results in a stand-off.
Find Consequences
What you write should have consequences in the story, but that doesn't mean it has to influence the plot, per se.
It can influence the behavior of the hero without changing the plot, it can get readers invested in your philosophical character so they understand his actions at a crucial moment: Self-sacrifice, bravery, or cowardice or betrayal. So whatever he does, however he helps or hinders the protagonist, does not come off as a deus-ex-machina or too convenient choice, but as part of who he is and what he believes. If I am going to have Allen sacrifice his own life for "The Cause", I want Allen to do this out of true belief, and how do I show that? By showing several times throughout the story that Allen is a true believer. At the time I show this, it doesn't have to be apparent to the reader why I am showing it, but the point is character building: I want the reader invested in Allen so his later (and perhaps life-ending) actions seem plausible: Yeah, Allen would do that.
If somebody has gone to the trouble of adopting or developing a philosophy (as I have) then this should have some kind of consequences in their behavior (mine does). For good or evil. That helps make a memorable character.
It can also make a good foil, by finding arguments against this philosophy (that aren't infantile, dismissive, or too easily dismissed), the hero arguing against your philosopher is defined as well, and perhaps converted on some points.
Debate is a part of life, and a part of friendship. Typically amongst friends, allies and coworkers, there is a strong interest in not alienating the opponent or dissolving into insults and vitriol, so such arguments end before somebody gets angry. (Unlike the Internet, where a lack of any significant consequence in group cohesion lets insult and vitriol spiral out of control.)
0 comment threads
This will largely depend on the kind of book you are writing and your writing style.
Contemporary genre fiction is often rather focussed and almost concise. The rule that everything you write should either serve the plot or characterization is reflective of that. Many readers appear to be impatient with anything that isn't either action or provides an insight into why the characters act that way. They often skip all the worldbuilding, backstory, and philosophizing of the narrator and complain about this in their reviews. On the internet you apparently have four seconds to convey your information, and many readers read novels with a smiliar hecticness. They lead stessful lives and when they have ten minutes to read on the train, they want to get right at it.
Older fiction on the other hand, and non-genre or "literary" fiction (a distinction in style and content, not quality) often takes its time and allows itself to meander and philosophize. These books aren't usually about narrating a "story" or sequence of events, but rather their aim is to portray a way of life, a person and their circumstances, a society, and everything that is a part of that can (or even must) be a part of that book. A philosophic observation that would be an irritating detour to the reader of an action-packed thriller, is the reason to read a book for those who seek to be stimulated intellectually.
Of course, as always, there are many possibilities in between those extremes: philosophical action thrillers can and have been written, and where you want your book to fall on that continuum is completely up to you. Whether what you do works will depend on your craftsmanship and who you market your book to.
But some concrete advice:
The fact that you ask a question here is an indication that you have the feeling that there is something wrong. I have found that when I have such a gut feeling, it is almost always right. So very likely you are overdoing it. Maybe a few philosophical observations help flesh out your character and are fun for the reader to read, but when they become compulsive and your character can no longer utter even a single straightforward answer without drifting off into reflections on life, the universe, and everything, then maybe you have lost control of your writing and allowed your character to take over the story you intended to write. So rein them in.
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/34720. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
Yes.
These observations may not advance the story, but they are a part of this character. They contribute to fleshing out the character and are your version of "show, don't tell" - instead of describing that the guy is always philosophizing, you show him doing it.
Also yes, if you, the writer, feel that this is something you want to share with the readers. Remember that the story is only the vehicle of the meaning that you are trying to convey. If this observation contributes to the underlying meaning, and can be given in this way without being part of the story, go ahead and do it.
For example, there is an entire second book hidden inside "1984" by George Orwell. Entire pages from it are read by the protagonist, and while they flesh out the background of both the world and the character, they are not strictly necessary for the story. But they transport the actual meaning of the book.
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/34728. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
0 comment threads