First quarter friends
As I've mentioned before, I'm working on a military sci-fi novel.
Here's the trouble with the military: you don't spend all of your service, start to finish, with the same people. Not all the people you've done Basic Training with will proceed to the same Advanced Training as you. Not everyone who completes Advanced Training with you will be assigned to the same unit as you. In effect, after each transition, one is meeting new people and making new friends, keeping in touch with only a small sub-group of the friends from before. Like transitioning from middle school to high school, and from high school to university, only on a significantly shorter time frame. And that's before I so much as touch on drop-outs (and I do need those for tension - it could, theoretically happen to the MC).
The result of the above is I'm asking the reader to get to know a set of characters, only to lose sight of them several chapters later. The characters the MC was closest to in each stage do get further involvement in the story, but most drop out of sight. Similarly, in Victor Hugo's Les Misérables, we don't hear about Bishop Myriel, his sister and his servant after their scene with Jean Valjean, nor about Félix Tholomyès and his friends after he abandons Fantine. Only, I can't think of more modern examples, which troubles me.
I would like to give my first-quarter-of-the-novel characters as much loving attention as Hugo gives Myriel and Tholomyès (and it's the recommendation I receive here), but I fear to lose the more impatient modern reader's attention. Much like the MC, I expect my reader would be eager to get out of boot camp and into real battle. How do I balance making the boot camp part interesting by way of having the MC develop various relationships with well-rounded characters, against the fact that most of those characters disappear from the story after the MC leaves boot camp?
As the author, you have full foresight of events to come in the plot. You know in advance which characters will be with …
6y ago
> Similarly, in Victor Hugo's Les Misérables, we don't hear about Bishop Myriel, his sister and his servant after their …
6y ago
Your issue is common to many novels and other long works. Your characters aren't just dropping into and out of your MC's …
6y ago
+1 to both suggestions. In addition: 1. Play with an alternating viewpoint. There can be rich potential in viewing the …
6y ago
Just have him say thanks and goodbye and wish them luck. I spent many years in my career as a consultant, everywhere I …
6y ago
5 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.
As the author, you have full foresight of events to come in the plot. You know in advance which characters will be with your MC, where, why and when.
If you decide to write about them it is because they have a meaning. Generally, you don't describe every single person that ever happened to be within a twenty feet radius from the MC. This is in the same way in which you don't describe every single cobblestone on which they walk. Some cobblestones are interesting, some are necessary to understand the plot, some happen to be, the rest is a uniform background.
A suggestion. As your character gets to know these characters, show his feelings towards them. Show that he thinks about them. Show the emptiness after they are not there. Compare new characters to the old ones. Or that he just, suddenly and out of nowhere, recalled that irrelevant moment in which he was with them. In other words, show the reader why they were not just background cobblestones.
0 comment threads
Your issue is common to many novels and other long works. Your characters aren't just dropping into and out of your MC's life (like you often see in, say, TV shows where the MCs have friends for one episode then suddenly they have a big event and no one shows up). Your MC is changing settings. With set changes it's normal and expected to change supporting characters.
Making those secondary characters well-rounded without making the reader invest too much in them is indeed the hard part. I'm handling this by giving secondary characters full lives and backgrounds and individual personalities. But for myself. Very little of my backstory is getting into the book (a lot of the characters don't even get page time, let alone names, though I know them all). But what does make it through is personalized and not random.
My aim is to cut to the core of the character and bring that bit in. But really, they're there for the purpose of supporting the main character in service to the story. They have their own full lives and you will make that clear, but to the reader, they are there for a reason, not for themselves.
Your reader will invest emotional energy around the same level that your MC (or narrator) does. Something like bootcamp is an artificially close environment, so friendships get accelerated. But it's still only a few months. These are not lifelong friends, they're friends of the moment. Convey that and your reader will act accordingly.
Some of these friends might pop up later, or even become longer lasting regular characters. Or your MC (or others) might mention them. Doing this occasionally will help your reader feel that all that time spent getting to know people wasn't a total waste.
As long as you don't delve into a supporting character's backstory too much within the novel before ghosting them, your reader will go along with it. Changing casts is normal and expected.
0 comment threads
Similarly, in Victor Hugo's Les Misérables, we don't hear about Bishop Myriel, his sister and his servant after their scene with Jean Valjean, nor about Félix Tholomyès and his friends after he abandons Fantine. Only, I can't think of more modern examples, which troubles me.
It is indeed hard to think of a modern work that bothers to flesh out and spend time with characters who'll soon disappear. Personally, I find the modern trend annoying. Right or worng, I see it as Chekhov's gun stretched into characters and to the utmost. If the character will be important in the future, flesh it out, otherwise lose it or leave it cardboard.
Let me start by saying that in no way do I favour long, in-depth characterisation of transient characters just because. On the other hand, I do believe that even the most transient character should be fleshed out to a certain degree (even if it's just a particular habit that makes it into an individual in the background rather than an obvious stock character).
I'm asking the reader to get to know a set of characters, only to lose sight of them several chapters later. The characters the MC was closest to in each stage do get further involvement in the story, but most drop out of sight.
In this particular case, if you follow the trend, the reader will automatically know which characters will disappear from the plot and which will remain. If your aim is to tell the reader not to bother with them, go for it.
But, if your aim is to show how important they were for the MC during those months, then I suggest two alternatives:
a) Focus on the relationship
Don't worry so much about the characters per se, but about how the MC feels about them. Show how the MC feels sad when one fails an evaluation, or their happiness for the friend even when that friend is successful where the MC failed. Later, the MC could mention how they miss their old pals.
b) Focus on the characters
Give them moments where they can shine and be more than just a secondary character. Show their problems and how the MC is invested in helping them overcome such problems, much like they are willing to help the MC
In your particular case, I'd suggest option A. The reader doesn't really have to know the transient friends that deeply. The only thing that matters is that the MC enjoys spending time with them and that he finds them loyal and worthy friends.
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/41396. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
+1 to both suggestions.
In addition:
Play with an alternating viewpoint. There can be rich potential in viewing the same scene or battle from two different perspectives.
Have the MC develop a relationship with a staff secretary or pilot or supplies transport chief or other non-boot-camp stable and recurring character.
Have a boot-camp friend defect and the MC meets them in battle. Ooooh.
Have the main character be so gob-smacked by one of his early days friends, that thereafter he makes regular comments like, "Horatio always said (this)" and "Horatio wouldn't have done it that way,' etc. Your MCs new friend would understandably be annoyed or amused and ask about this amazing Horatio fellow.
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/41382. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
Just have him say thanks and goodbye and wish them luck.
I spent many years in my career as a consultant, everywhere I went I made friends, often for less than a year. These often began with lunches (everyone eats). I did my best when talking about my life and career to point out my stay was temporary, I would be moving on, and I liked it that way.
It is no different working in companies, at least in modern times. People come and they go; you stop seeing the people you've seen every day, even though you were friendly with them. Some that were particularly compatible still communicate with me; 90% of them have given up.
Friendship includes a healthy dose of shared experiences; when those end, the friendships tend to end. When I knew what people at IBM were talking about in reference to the internal politics and jokes about upper management, that was fun for me and my friends there. Once I disconnected, it is not fun for either of us; I am not up to speed on why the jokes are funny; and they would require too much explanation.
But that isn't a hostile end; I don't mind if an old lunch friend shows up and wants to visit and catch up.
A way out of that, to sustain a long distance friendship, is to focus on shared interests or experiences that we can still both experience despite being physically separated. Writing fiction is the first example of a shared interest I should mention (since we are on this site); pick the right person and you could have a remote friend, critique each other's work, talk about new fictions, etc. You might even collaborate!
Other interests might be politics. Finance and what is going on with the stock market. Sports. Movies and/or celebrity gossip. Developments in science and physics. Funny or viral YouTube videos! Music (and music celebrities).
Almost anything that has something new going on every day or every few days would count.
There is a psychological theory of friendship involving synergy. The basic idea is if you like music Type A, and I like music Type A, and we both search for good music of Type A, then by partnering up and sharing what we find, we double our search strength and increase our finds of good music of Type A. So we enjoy that partnership and call it friendship; as long as my other traits don't irritate you too much, and vice versa. Even better if you like my jokes, and I like yours.
That dynamic is maximized when there is a lot of stuff going on for the interest we share; otherwise you and I are finding the same things and little connection is created. Which is why I say something new every day or every few days, that is when the synergy can kick in and we become valuable to each other.
So your character lets friends go when all they shared was the ordeal of boot camp. He tries to keep them in his circle when they turned out to have shared interests and shared opinions, and a long distance friendship is viable (and you have some means of sustaining it). Otherwise, it's just "Man, you helped me get through this. Thanks for that, and good luck in your post."
0 comment threads
0 comment threads