Every character has a name - does this lead to too many named characters?
My tendency when writing is to give every character a name. Even the most minor ones. It says something about a nobleman when he knows every guard and stablehand by name, and it's something I want. So it's never "a guard" - it's always "Sergeant such-and-such".
Another effect that I like is that of the world being populated - there are people in it, and every person has a name, and that means - a life, even if we don't see it. A world where everyone aside from the main characters is "a guard" and "a servant" feels to me like everything around the main characters is theatrical scenery made of cardboard.
I'm a discovery writer, so first time a guard "comes on stage", he gets a name. Next time I need a guard, I pull out that same guy who I've already named. So characters start getting mileage. I don't plan anything for those characters in advance, but over time they do get a life.
My concern is: I often hear complaints with regards to some published works (e.g. A Song of Ice and Fire) about there being "too many characters", "too many names to remember". Now, "a guard" is not a character - he's a prop. "Sergeant such-and-such" is a minor character.
Is that something I need to be concerned about? Are there ways I can mitigate the downsides of having a great many named characters in my novel?
The complaint you are perceiving isn't really about too many names or too many characters. It is about the story's comp …
5y ago
This will not help determine how many is too many character to name but to mitigate the downsides, I would look closely …
5y ago
Details and structure define the tone of how something is read, and names are a detail. Whether or not a character/prop …
5y ago
Simple--Metrics. Count the number of named characters and the number of acts/chapters they are in. Named characters sh …
5y ago
With a few exceptions, every one of my characters has a name, gender, age, and family relationship. A large percentage a …
5y ago
I say don't censor your "discovery" -- include the names of everyone -- they may come back in later, or you may want to …
5y ago
I'm a discovery writer, I don't name every character, or even every character with lines. Here's a waitress (I just made …
5y ago
7 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.
With a few exceptions, every one of my characters has a name, gender, age, and family relationship. A large percentage also have a backstory. I have well over 100 characters.
As others have said, you don't need to use all the names. But it's your world, you should know the people in it.
Naming characters helps you keep track of them. I have lists on my wall so if I need to pull up, say, a random 3 year boy, I can check my lists and say, okay, that would be Barachel. It can help you keep consistency from scene to scene as well. Characters in movies have names (or unique descriptors, but usually names if they're in more than one scene) just to make it easier for writers/directors/etc to keep track of them.
Naming characters humanizes them, so they're less likely to end up as stereotypic fodder.
Having your characters use other characters' names shows us what kind of people they are, something you pointed out. When I'm switching points of view, I also switch how people refer to each other. My MC knows the names of all the other kids that came with her. One of my other viewpoint characters refers offhand (in his head, not out loud) to another character as "some little twerp." This will change over time.
Not everyone wants to name people, and that's okay too. But you do. So use it. There are a lot of advantages to knowing your world down to the last little detail.
0 comment threads
Details and structure define the tone of how something is read, and names are a detail.
Whether or not a character/prop should have a name will depend on how you want the story to feel to the reader, and ties in to the traits of characters (and narrator[s]) in the story you're telling.
In most stories, having a scene where the main character walks into a bar and lists off everyone there, by name, and in detail, is likely to come off as weird/annoying/tiring, and probably completely unneeded.
In a story that specifically deals with exploring the life of someone with autism/obsessive traits and how that impacts their perception of reality, then it may not only be fitting, but may offer a highly effective layer to the overall tone and feel of a story. (In which case, the main character not knowing the name of some random basically one time prop-character could even become the entire plot of a story as they try to find a pointless name to put with a meaningless face.)
In short, names and details in and of themselves are neither a downside nor an upside to writing. Their impact on the flow, tone, and feel of the writing is what we need to care about. Does the name/detail/structure bring your piece closer to the flow/tone/feel you are after? - Then it is a good thing and should be included. Does it take you further away from what you're after? Then rework the piece to better meet the goals of your story.
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/42824. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
The complaint you are perceiving isn't really about too many names or too many characters.
It is about the story's complexity. If there is only a single character, but she is juggling dozens of situations, complaints would manifest about "too much going on" or "hard to follow." Especially if the situations have nothing to do with each other.
Tom Clancy's novel Red October ambitiously describes many submarines doing all kinds of maneuvering and tactical operations. There are at least six things to keep track of throughout the climax. I tried following it twice and gave up. In comparison, the film is much easier to follow—and hence a far superior story than the book—because it is mostly the essence of the story.
It says something about a nobleman when he knows every guard and stablehand by name ...
Yes, that is great character attribute. But you needn't bludgeon the (undeserving) reader to express that. The nobleman returned from afar to his village. On the way home, he greeted every single person he passed by name. Even the stablehands and the dairymaids.
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/42855. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
Simple--Metrics.
Count the number of named characters and the number of acts/chapters they are in. Named characters should appear in at least two chapters, to reward the reader for learning them, better yet they should appear in at least two acts.
If you have fewer than 25 named characters and each character appears in 2 chapters and 2 acts, you are fine. This may sound silly, but it is a useful start point nonetheless.
If you have... 75 named characters, and 50 of them appear in one chapter only, you have a serious problem.
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/42784. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
This will not help determine how many is too many character to name but to mitigate the downsides, I would look closely at the types of names being used. For example five female characters named Lindsey, Laurel, Lauren, Liza and Lizzie might be a tad hard to keep apart. Maybe some minor characters dont need full names, just titles or nicknames, which will flesh them out a little without mixing them up with someone more important.
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/42838. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
I say don't censor your "discovery" -- include the names of everyone -- they may come back in later, or you may want to explore their story in a specific vignette. (I'm thinking of Neil Gaiman's Sandman story "24 Hours" -- takes place in a diner, and most characters in it we never see again.... but later there's a link between a diner-character and a new character.)
BUT... editing is where you decide if the names are worth keeping. Sometimes it'll add to the atmosphere (a waitress named "Hilda" vs "Ginger" vs "Mei"). Many times, you'll find that for the core story, there's no need for that level. (She still IS Marabeth, off having her life, but that's off page, and for THIS page, she's just The Waitress, and that's ok.)
I'm a big believe in icebergs -- 9/10s underwater. So if you're a discovery writer, you're building up the entire iceberg by exploring the formation of it ALL, but then editor-you gets on a boat, and sees from a distance only the small portion that will be needed within the book.
0 comment threads
I'm a discovery writer, I don't name every character, or even every character with lines. Here's a waitress (I just made up) with two lines:
The waitress approached, a smiling young girl that had been flirting with the young man eating at the counter. "Ma'am! What can I get you?"
Bethany put down the menu. "This, um, number three, and an iced tea."
"Right up!" the girl said, and spun to leave, but instead of walking back around the counter she took the long way around toward the register, passing behind the young man at the counter, and giving him a gentle punch in the right shoulder as she passed. He laughed, and turned to watch her walking.
Bethany smiled, but then turned back to her phone and the long list of attorney profiles she was browsing. About halfway through and still not a single candidate.
I think it interrupts the flow to stop and note the waitress's name (maybe on her name tag), and the young man's name (more difficult), it really isn't important to the story. She is real enough, the central character in this mini-scene, a young girl flirting with a young man she obviously knows and having fun at work in the diner.
Personally I don't give characters names unless it would be unrealistically awkward for them to not have one. IRL, most people don't remember their waitress's name, they use "Miss" (or for a male, often "Waiter" or sometimes "Sir"). That is not unrealistically awkward. And we need never refer to the young man again, so zero awkwardness.
I agree a nobleman or boss, IRL, is likely to know the names of his employees he interacts with often. But not necessarily all of them.
"Briggs, good to see you. I see your boy there, what's his name again?"
"Bilson, sir."
"Yes, Bilson. I see him heaping up the scoop for the oats there. A kindness, he thinks. Not enough to colic, but we want the pigs and chickens fat, not the horses."
"Sorry sir, I had not noticed. I will take care of it, sir."
"No need to be harsh. Brush and saddle up the white stallion, and bring him to the front. I'll be riding to Duckworth's this afternoon. Want to show some station, yes?"
"Yes sir. He'll be ready, sir."
I also give "walk-on" characters names if it would make sense that their own friends or customers or whatever would use their names, but I don't go out of my way to make that happen.
I guess that is the rule I follow, if the speech feels awkward without a name, I add a name, but I don't go out of my way or write extra to force that necessity.
0 comment threads
0 comment threads