Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/10150
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

I like reading stories where the characters are given an initial run-down as they are introduced into the story.

The run-down could roast the character in sarcasm, describing what others say and had said about the character, or praise him/her, would include their hitherto history and known accomplishment, rumours and hearsay.

I classify the contents of a run-down into

1. The author's personal description about the character/personality of the character. (_Character of the character? Silly, but how else could I say it?_)

2. The author's revelation about the thought history, desires and disappointments of the character that only the author would have known.

3. The character's known history

4. History of chatter, opinions, roasts, allegations found in item 3 concerning the character, but written without direct opinion from the author about the character.

The run-down is lightened up and made entertaining with roasts and sarcasm. A run-down is written as an intriguing short story within the story. I am not saying the run-down is compartmentalized into the four categories. Rather, the run-down relies on those four categories written as a short story.

But as the story proceeds, the actual character of those persons would take twists and turns, that would prove the initial run-down as wrong, inadequate or vindicated, besides the changes in the personality and experiences of the character.

I remember reading Dune. I remember the doctor who betrayed Duke Leto Atreides. However, I also recall observing Frank Herbert's writing of the series having become darker and relying more on author's personal perception in the initial run-down of a character, after the death of his wife. I think when an author becomes lazy making the initial run-down an op-ed piece rather than an intriguing short-story - that ruins the whole story.

Original score: 1