I thought I’d use my first space here to mention a part of the process that my mixed up mind uses in creating fiction. Specifically, I should add, in writing novels. Novels have the curse / benefit of requiring depth of character. It’s not enough to mention Sylvia the bag lady over on fourth, if she plays an important part in your novel; you have to bring her to life. In a short story you might give a quick snapshot of her and leave the rest to the reader’s imagination, but readers of novels are more perceptive and demanding. If you have the time, and the words, you shouldn’t expect them to take your sketchy notes and arrange them for you.
One way of bringing these fictional people to life that I have found helpful is to talk to them in my head. When I read something someone else has written, I do the same thing. I assign voices and mannerisms to the character that differentiate them from one another. Good narrators of audio books have a way of shifting tone and inflection so that you remember a character, even if that character drops out at the beginning of the book and comes back later. Their voice brings the face you have assigned them back into focus. It’s important when you are writing a book to keep these same concepts in the forefront of your mind.
There is a problem that has been pointed out in some of my earlier fiction that I feel is particularly relevant. It exists in my current writing, as well, but I try to fix it before anyone notices. I tend to write myself heavily into major characters in my books. This practice, in and of itself, is not a problem, because it lends some of the aforementioned depth to the way their minds work. It’s also very comfortable, familiar ground for me as creator. The problem is that when I do it too often, I tend to create a series of characters that, while interacting with one another normally enough, all speak with the same voice. It is because of this tendency of mine that I developed the method of talking to the characters in my head. I drown them out.
A wise friend and talented author, Thomas Sullivan, (The Phases of Harry Moon, Dust of Eden, Upcoming – Second Soul) who has a lot more experience with voices in his head than I do with voices in mine, lent me a trick that is a good starting point. Give the characters “tics”. Give one character an odd, repetitive speech pattern. Stephen King did this in Dreamcatcher with his military fanatic (name escapes me) who called everyone “Buck,” and continually asked them, “Do you believe in Jesus, Buck?” Things like that. You can describe them as pushing their glasses back up on their nose, running their fingers through their hair, give them accents and colloquial sayings to toss about. Anything to jar you back to their voice. Anything to keep you from drowning them out.
I suspect that, in the case of characters in novels, some experience in the field of drama would be invaluable. At least it would be good to understand the art of the character actor. Some actors just have a “persona” and they play that same part in many different settings. Other characters can shift so drastically you have a hard time believing it’s them. The girl from the musical Chicago that won the supporting actress Oscar for Cold Mountain (whose name I also can’t recall) is such an actor. It’s a thing of beauty to see the transformations these talented folks bring to the screen, then to see that same person on, say, The Tonight Show and find out they are nothing like any of the characters they have portrayed.
I can put my mind into that of nearly any character I tackle. It’s something I’ve always been able to do. Unfortunately, putting myself into their mind is only half the battle. When I become one of the
characters in my head, my voice tends to overpower theirs. It’s hard to think like someone else, and at the same time remain detached enough to craft the thoughts into a new voice. It’s an art. That’s why it’s important, to me, to talk to them. If you can keep both voices running, your own, and that of the character you are creating, holding your image of that character firmly in mind, you can imagine how they will react to you. Then, when you write about them, you can write in the reactions you discovered during your internal dialogue. Besides (if Rich Dansky is reading this, he’ll understand) who wouldn’t want to spend a few minutes talking with The Vampire Montrovant?) Of course, if they start talking back in any real sense, it’s time to seek therapy and take up Origami…
Nobody said it would be easy…I’m glad it’s not. I’m glad that every aspect of writing remains challenging. Creating something interesting and useful for this essay, for instance. I’m in good company here, and have already read some fascinating entries, and I’m looking forward to what’s to come.
David Niall Wilson
17 Comments, Comment or Ping
Mark Rainey
Very insightful method of dealing with characters, Dave. Kind of like having voices in your head, only in reverse.
I like the comparison of fleshing out a character’s personality to an actor taking on a part. Apt, and probably an excellent device to work yourself into establishing character identity. Might be worth a try myself.
Now, how about keeping all those friggin’ personas of yours out of my tales. They’re trespassing, dude.
–Mark
Jun 30th, 2005
Janet Berliner
Good topic, Dave.
When I’m writing and someone in the so-called real world speaks to me, I’m more than likely to call that person by the name of one of the characters on the page I’m writing. Sometimes I start thinking about the possibility that the characters on the page are “real” and the rest are make-believe. It’s the old play-within-a-play.
Janet
Jun 30th, 2005
Jdamen
Great piece, my friend.
Jul 1st, 2005
Brian
Excelent, David!
Jul 1st, 2005
alaneye
Alaneye said…
Good stuff, David. When I wrote my first novel (unpublished as yet) I had been with the characters for so long that I worried that the main character in the next story would be the same guy with a different name.
Luckily it hasn’t worked out that way, and my new characters *are* different and I’m learning all about these new people as I write the first draft.
I liked what you said about giving a character ‘tics’ like pushing glasses up the nose as this was something I used myself in the first novel. These things only seemed to come together in later drafts, though, as I got to know them better.
Thanks for a good insight into your thought process.
Alan
Jul 1st, 2005
David Niall Wilson
Thanks all, and sorry for the formatting glitches. Joe has promised to fix them later (sigh). I’ll figure out what happened before the 1st rolls around again…
DNW
Jul 1st, 2005
Anonymous
Useful essay David. I think the ‘tic’ device is an excellent tool I can use to bring out the voice of individual characters. In the novel I’m writing now, I’m having a hard time getting into the head of one of my characters. She’s a 13 year old girl. My daughter is 13, so I think I’ll watch her and her friends this evening with an eye on their tics. Good stuff.
William Bolen
Jul 1st, 2005
James Goodman
Great post! I will put it to work at once.
Jul 1st, 2005
David Niall Wilson
Thanks for fixing it Joe. Now, if I can just get my blogger account to log in I can prevent it happening again…and again, thanks for reading, and commenting — all of you. It makes the voices happy when you acknowledge them (heh)
DNW
Jul 1st, 2005
jeff resnick
Feel like I just saved myself a ton of money by not signing up for that creative writing class
Great piece. Incredibly insightful and something i’ll be stealing from you and doing forever more…Thanks!
Jul 2nd, 2005
Peadar
Yes, very enjoyable piece, except for that bit at the beginning when you called me ’stupid’
Useful stuff!
Paranoid Peadar
Jul 2nd, 2005
Jetse
Well, I’m not so sure about the ‘tic’ device: it can be very counterproductive.
I’m working on four rewrites for Interzone (from last May’s email sub period), and for one story my problem is that the secondary character (the protagonist’s husband) did not come alive for me, while he plays a vital role in the narrative. His wife–the protagonist–worked beautifully for me, while he was almost completely opaque to me. I only remembered his two ‘tics’: pushing his glasses back up his nose, and repeatedly thinking ‘quiet resistance is best’. His motivations, his personality (both vital elements to the plot!) paled in comparison with his ‘tics’.
So the main thrust of my rewrite request was to breathe life into that character, show his motivations, show some of his angst, even if (*especially because*) he’s a rather introvert person.
Your mileage may very, of course, but I think you should use the ‘tic’ device sparingly, if at all.
Jul 2nd, 2005
David Niall Wilson
The “tic” device was meant as a catalyst to shift the character in your own mind - a way to seperate him from other characters in “voice,” not as the only method of telling one from another…sorry if that didn’t come across clearly. It’s a mental exercise, particularly when seeing/talking to the character in your own mind, that can help you shift gears…
Peader…no worries, calling myself stupid is a habit…it lessens the blow when other agree…(heh).
DNW
Jul 2nd, 2005
Michelle Pendergrass
And I thought I was crazy for talking with the voices in my head. LOL!
Thanks for letting me know there’s two of us in this world!
Great essay!
Jul 2nd, 2005
Mari Adkins
Great essay! I find myself doing the “talking with my characters” thing quite a bit.
Jul 2nd, 2005
Mark Leslie
David — great essay. Like yourself I’ve found the same thing happening in my own writing — I can get into the character’s minds and feel their thought processes as unique, but the damn voices were drowned out by my own blasted voice.
But I’ve started using your technique now. It works really well and is a great deal of fun. The only negative side effect is that sometimes I’m having these conversations aloud while walking down the street or sitting on public transit . . .
(Too bad, because if it weren’t for the fact that the back and forth was in two distinct voices, people might believe I was on a hands-free cell phone)
Jul 7th, 2005
Reply to “Don’t Drown Out The Voices in Your Head, Stupid”