I read a book recently and it sucked. I mean, really sucked. And no, I won't tell you what book it was, because whether or not a book sucks is usually a personal taste thing, so I'm sure there are people out there that think it rocked. But anyway, I read through the whole book, because I always read the entire book even if it sucks in order to figure out WHY it sucks in the hopes that I never do the same thing myself. My reaction was bad enough to this book that I almost couldn't finish it (and keep in mind this is a published novel, but a major publisher). In the end, I think there were two fundamental things wrong with it: the character and the form. I'll talk about the character problem today as my writer tip post, and mess with the much more elusive and difficutl idea of "form" next week (in my head it has something to do with the "weight" of scenes and information, but I haven't gotten it down into a coherent idea yet).
So, the character in your novel:
Sympathetic Characters
You've probably heard writers stalk about having a sympathetic character, and the fact that it's necessary for a novel. And guess what? It IS necessary for a novel. The sympathetic character is what draws the reader into the novel, it's what makes them want to continue reading, makes them want to not put the book down, makes them CARE. And if the reader doesn't care about the characters, then there is nothing about the plot--no matter how cool it is--that will save the novel. You've lost that essential connection to the reader, and there's no way to gain that back. And you have to make the character sympathetic as soon as possible, because readers typically won't wait five chapters to become sympathetic with the character, they'll put the book down after twenty pages, not a hundred.
So having a character that makes the reader care is essential. This doesn't mean that you have to have a nice character, or even a "good" character. In fact, those types of characters are typically boring and DON'T make the reader care. As stated before, you're character needs to have some flaws, and needs to have problems, and these flaws and problems need to be ones that the reader can relate to. If the reader can see a little bit of themselves in the character, or if they can relate to the problem the character is having in some way (because their friend went through the same thing or whatever), then they'll be able to sink themselves into the character, and thus into the story. They'll have their own personal stakes in the story, and they'll be sympathetic with the trials and tribulations the character is going through at the moment. They'll be able to see the mistakes that the character is making, root for the character when things go well or bad, and in the end they're silently hoping that the character will prevail.
That's what draws the reader into the story. That connection to the character, that PERSONAL investment in the character. And again, you need to make the reader make that personal investment as early as possible. Once that's happened, there's only a few ways to screw things up after that. You've got them hooked, and as long as you don't betray their trust. (Oooooo! There's another writing tip post in itself!)
Anyway, that's what happened in this book I read. Or at least one of the things. I didn't get a personal connection with the main character, and thus I didn't care about what happened to her in any way shape or form. And it wasn't just no connection, I actually didn't even LIKE the main character. In one sense, she was TOO strong. I didn't see any flaw or weakness in her. There was a feeble attempt to make the character flawed, but it felt pasted on, as if the writer knew that this flaw was missing and after they'd written the novel they tried to put in a flaw . . . and it just didn't work. Because the flaw didn't have anything to do with the rest of the story, so I didn't buy it. And that flaw was of course the "change" that the character was supposed to go through during the course of the novel. At the end though, I didn't feel like the character had changed at all. Nothing had changed really, except she was a little bloodier and bruised.
So, in the end, I couldn't connect with the main character. And nothing else in the novel could draw me in. I though the setting--the worldbuilding--was unique and rather interesting, but there wasn't much done with it, and of course I didn't care about it because I didn't care about the character. The plot was also fine (not as good as the setting), but again, I DIDN'T CARE. It was just there, and the character was walking through it, and so what.
Think about books you've read that have had multiple characters, where you skip from one character to another. Don't you have favorite characters? And when one of your least favorite characters comes up, don't you sort of sigh and plow through that section so you know the important parts of the plot, but you can't wait to get to the next section dealing with your favorite character? That's a case where you have a connection to a character, and that connection is making you--no, FORCING you--to read the novel, even forcing you to read those parts dealing with characters you don't care about. That's a sympathetic character, and it's what drive readers through books. If you can't establish that, and fast, then the reader has no stakes in the novel, and is likely to put it down. So, think about your characters, think about how they act, what their flaws are, and whether or not people will be able to relate to those flaws. And make certain that the flaws aren't just slapped on there for the sake of having flaws. Make certain the flaws and how the character deals with those flaws have some impact on the plot, and perhaps the setting, and vice versa. If you can do that, if you can make the reader CARE about the character and whether or not he or she succeeds, then you'll have your reader by the throat to the very end.
So, the character in your novel:
Sympathetic Characters
You've probably heard writers stalk about having a sympathetic character, and the fact that it's necessary for a novel. And guess what? It IS necessary for a novel. The sympathetic character is what draws the reader into the novel, it's what makes them want to continue reading, makes them want to not put the book down, makes them CARE. And if the reader doesn't care about the characters, then there is nothing about the plot--no matter how cool it is--that will save the novel. You've lost that essential connection to the reader, and there's no way to gain that back. And you have to make the character sympathetic as soon as possible, because readers typically won't wait five chapters to become sympathetic with the character, they'll put the book down after twenty pages, not a hundred.
So having a character that makes the reader care is essential. This doesn't mean that you have to have a nice character, or even a "good" character. In fact, those types of characters are typically boring and DON'T make the reader care. As stated before, you're character needs to have some flaws, and needs to have problems, and these flaws and problems need to be ones that the reader can relate to. If the reader can see a little bit of themselves in the character, or if they can relate to the problem the character is having in some way (because their friend went through the same thing or whatever), then they'll be able to sink themselves into the character, and thus into the story. They'll have their own personal stakes in the story, and they'll be sympathetic with the trials and tribulations the character is going through at the moment. They'll be able to see the mistakes that the character is making, root for the character when things go well or bad, and in the end they're silently hoping that the character will prevail.
That's what draws the reader into the story. That connection to the character, that PERSONAL investment in the character. And again, you need to make the reader make that personal investment as early as possible. Once that's happened, there's only a few ways to screw things up after that. You've got them hooked, and as long as you don't betray their trust. (Oooooo! There's another writing tip post in itself!)
Anyway, that's what happened in this book I read. Or at least one of the things. I didn't get a personal connection with the main character, and thus I didn't care about what happened to her in any way shape or form. And it wasn't just no connection, I actually didn't even LIKE the main character. In one sense, she was TOO strong. I didn't see any flaw or weakness in her. There was a feeble attempt to make the character flawed, but it felt pasted on, as if the writer knew that this flaw was missing and after they'd written the novel they tried to put in a flaw . . . and it just didn't work. Because the flaw didn't have anything to do with the rest of the story, so I didn't buy it. And that flaw was of course the "change" that the character was supposed to go through during the course of the novel. At the end though, I didn't feel like the character had changed at all. Nothing had changed really, except she was a little bloodier and bruised.
So, in the end, I couldn't connect with the main character. And nothing else in the novel could draw me in. I though the setting--the worldbuilding--was unique and rather interesting, but there wasn't much done with it, and of course I didn't care about it because I didn't care about the character. The plot was also fine (not as good as the setting), but again, I DIDN'T CARE. It was just there, and the character was walking through it, and so what.
Think about books you've read that have had multiple characters, where you skip from one character to another. Don't you have favorite characters? And when one of your least favorite characters comes up, don't you sort of sigh and plow through that section so you know the important parts of the plot, but you can't wait to get to the next section dealing with your favorite character? That's a case where you have a connection to a character, and that connection is making you--no, FORCING you--to read the novel, even forcing you to read those parts dealing with characters you don't care about. That's a sympathetic character, and it's what drive readers through books. If you can't establish that, and fast, then the reader has no stakes in the novel, and is likely to put it down. So, think about your characters, think about how they act, what their flaws are, and whether or not people will be able to relate to those flaws. And make certain that the flaws aren't just slapped on there for the sake of having flaws. Make certain the flaws and how the character deals with those flaws have some impact on the plot, and perhaps the setting, and vice versa. If you can do that, if you can make the reader CARE about the character and whether or not he or she succeeds, then you'll have your reader by the throat to the very end.
