Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/47739
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/47739
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

Your character takes an action. It all happens in your imagination.

Well, imagine then: could your character take the opposite action? Could they, proceeding with your example, choose not to help?

If right now you're thinking "maybe they were really busy"or something along those lines, you are making an excuse for your character's out-of-character action. That is, you _know_ that normally your character wouldn't act like that, so you're trying to find an excuse about what would cause them to do it. You are familiar with your character, you can anticipate their response. They are a person in your head, the action comes from how you see that person.

If, on the other hand, the character could just as easily have chosen not to help, if they're just the same character to you, I would say they're under-imagined. What you're holding in your mind is not a person, but a pawn. You have not given it enough character, enough personhood, to have free will.

The choices we make (the big ones, not "what shall I have for breakfast") are determined by who we are, how we see the world, what kind of people we are. Also by how we feel that day and what recent experiences might affect our perception of things, but that ties into the same thing: our choices are not random. It is the same for your character - their choices are bound up in who they are, how they see the world, what kind of people they are, what affects them that day. One choice would be true to all those things, the other choice would not. If both choices appear the same to you, then you just don't know who your character is. You've got to find out who they are to understand how they would act.

Original score: 3