Is character development really necessary?

efreysson · Nov 20, 2009

Character development pops up again and again in any discussions about writing, and I look over my work and see that I actually have very little of it. But I also don't see how I really need it.

Is some kind of character arc really considered essential for any fiction longer than a short story? Can't a character be deep and interesting without going through personality changes between the prologue and the epilogue? Because I certainly think one can, but I'd like to hear some opinions on this.

Fredster · Nov 20, 2009

I think it depends on the genre, personally. I don't go into something that's heavy on action and adventure expecting a great deal of change in the main character. Something else, more literary, maybe so.

I like the fluff more, though.

backslashbaby · Nov 20, 2009

Shhh, don't tell anyone, but I don't need a character to change or learn anything, either

I hate flat characters, but I don't need happy endings and I don't need character change. I do need interesting.

Kristiina · Nov 20, 2009

Depends on the story, maybe. It certainly makes the story seem more significant if it is something which changes the protagonist in some way. But I have nothing against stories which don't make the main character change, although it's good if even those stories will give some sort of revelations about him/her. Like, perhaps, a character who seems sort of cold and distant will show kindness to somebody under the right circumstances - it's not something new to him, just something that he usually doesn't show. Or perhaps a character who seems like the perfect, unafraid hero type will show fear, and the reader finds out that yes, he does get scared, just like everybody else, he just usually manages to hide it. Or we'll find out that the seemingly nice and reliable type is actually anything but. I think I like the protagonist who is what he seems and stays the same the whole time best in adventure stories, where the main question has more to do whether he manages to save the world/city/his family/whatever.

NeuroFizz · Nov 20, 2009

The phrase "character development" can be interpreted in more than one way. If it is interpreted as the writer making the character seem real and three-dimensional to the reader, yes, I'd say it is extremely important. If it is interpreted as having the character go through significant change during the course of the story, it all depends on the type of story, as someone mentioned upstream.

Phaeal · Nov 20, 2009

Character-driven fiction needs character development or at least character self-discovery. But fiction can also be based on milieu, idea or event (Orson Scott Card's "MICE quotient"). MIE stories can get away without significant change arcs in the characters.

Characters don't need to change significantly in MIE stories, but they do need to be developed well initially -- they must convince, they must be interesting. A good example of such a character is Sherlock Holmes. He changes little over a long literary lifespan. Yet he's one of the most famous characters ever. Holmes works because (1) his stories aren't about him changing (are event- or idea-driven) and (2) he's interesting from day one.

Character revelation, which is not the same thing as character change, is important in all types of fiction. Detail accreted over story time makes the "stasis" character dynamic.

In reality, most fiction is not purely M, I, C or E. But one or two of the elements usually dominate. Some I or E stories do feature character growth. Some could harmed by it. Much C fiction relies on events (E) to trigger or inhibit character change. As usual, the writer must have the dexterity of a juggler on a tightwire to pull off the perfect balance.

Imbroglio · Nov 20, 2009

Uh, I mean, I haven't really read too many books to be honest, but from what I have read, and I think this includes other types of media as well, such as video games and movies, character development is very, very important. The two posters above me describe the difference well, in my opinion. Characters don't necessarily need to change, but if I don't know who they are or they aren't realistic in any sense, then I feel a little empty.

Like, just as an example, the Transformer movies really leave me wanting more, not because the plot couldn't satisfy me, but because I had virtually no investments in any of the characters. Shia LaBeouf is definitely the most prominent, but even he was trivial to me. Which is a shame because the detail on the Transformers in the movie is amazing.

Another one that comes directly to mind is 9, and for the same reasons.

No video games pop directly to mind for bad character development. Sorry.

Dx

kaitie · Nov 20, 2009

I'm going to be of the yes it's important category. I actually learned that one of the defining traits of a novel is character development. I don't think the changes have to be major earth-shattering changes, but I can't think of a single story I've liked that didn't have some sort of character development off the top of my head. It might be subtle sometimes, but that's fine.

If you consider the events of a novel and the things that happen to a character, I find it very hard to believe that a character will go through everything completely the same as when the story started. If they are, I have to question what was even the point of the action.

The only potential exception I can think of this would be a series that involves the same characters, in which case development might occur over a large arc as opposed to a single novel.

So yeah, I'm of the opinion that character development is incredibly important.

Libbie · Nov 20, 2009

Development has to happen to some degree. I mean, most characters are changed in one way or another by the choices they make, even if it's a temporary change. And if you don't have a character faced with a decision or a challenge, you don't really have a story. However, as others already mentioned, the development doesn't have to be enormous, nor even a large part of the story. But TECHNICALLY, some kind of development in the form of a psychological change as the big decision is made, yes, that has to be there. Otherwise you've got a static character drifting through a static world, and that's not interesting.

Sn00py · Nov 20, 2009

NeuroFizz said:
The phrase "character development" can be interpreted in more than one way. If is it interpreted as the writer making the character seem real and three-dimensional to the reader, yes, I'd say it is extremely important. If it is interpreted as having the character go through significant change during the course of the story, it all depends on the type of story, as someone mentioned upstream.

Well said.

Here's the thing. In general, people don't change as much as they think they do. But there are sometimes subtle variations in their circumstance or their person that vitally affect one or the other. And sometimes it is the lack of change that propels the story. Raymond Carver springs to mind as an author that dwells particularly on characters that rarely change. If they do it is more in the perception of their circumstance, his stories often driven by a character's desire to do something, anything to alter their circumstance but finding real life is often more about sad acceptance and compromise. Sometimes the best we can hope for is more of what we already have.

maestrowork · Nov 20, 2009

Are you talking about character growth/change or character "development" as in making your character three-dimensional and real?

Character growth/change is not mandatory. It depends on the story. Some character could even descend into madness or tragedy. But they can be exactly who they are from beginning to end, as long as that fits the story.

But character development (as in writing a well-developed character) is essential for good fiction, IMHO. Is it absolutely necessary? Not really, as evident in many stories with flat, cardboard characters, but personally I don't care for those stories that much. They may be thrill rides, but if I don't care about the characters, it's forgettable.

Example: Indiana Jones. He doesn't really change much from first movie to the last. He is who he is and he's a great character because the writers (and Harrison Ford) took care of developing his character and give him dimensions, including flaws. He's not this flat hero.

Sn00py · Nov 20, 2009

Libbie said:
Development has to happen to some degree. I mean, most characters are changed in one way or another by the choices they make, even if it's a temporary change. And if you don't have a character faced with a decision or a challenge, you don't really have a story. However, as others already mentioned, the development doesn't have to be enormous, nor even a large part of the story. But TECHNICALLY, some kind of development in the form of a psychological change as the big decision is made, yes, that has to be there. Otherwise you've got a static character drifting through a static world, and that's not interesting.

This is a good point. Only after 5 seasons has the character HOUSE seen any significant change in his person. The writers admitted that the show is formulaic, and so too is the character. It relies on viewers being able to enter the show at any point and understand who the character is. However, every episode poses him with the potential for change and, arguably, has planted the seed for the changes that are only now becoming evident after half a decade.

Rhoda Nightingale · Nov 20, 2009

Yes. Very, very yes.

This is just a personal preference on my part, as a reader, but if there's little to no character development in any given story, I will see it as a waste of my time. I don't think it's necessary to spend several hundred pages on backstory or anything like that, but the characters have to be three-dimensional, unique, and at least a little relatable in order for me to care about them. If I don't care about them, I won't care what happens to them, and no amount of plot twists or clever word play will make that otherwise.

Shadow_Ferret · Nov 20, 2009

What Ray said.

Three-dimensional believable characters ARE important. In that case, all the character development is done off-stage, by the writer, as he creates the character.

Kaiser-Kun · Nov 20, 2009

I think character development is necessary, but the character doesn't needs to become stronger/wiser by it. How are the events in the book affecting the character's life? Is he already used to such things, like Indiana Jones? Are they life-changing like Harry Potter's?

ChristineR · Nov 20, 2009

Sn00py said:
This is a good point. Only after 5 seasons has the character HOUSE seen any significant change in his person. The writers admitted that the show is formulaic, and so too is the character. It relies on viewers being able to enter the show at any point and understand who the character is. However, every episode poses him with the potential for change and, arguably, has planted the seed for the changes that are only now becoming evident after half a decade.

You can't compare House to a novel. House is a TV show, with most stories ending after one hour, and other stories stretching throughout the season. There's a huge arc of character development for the people who get some horrible rare disease, or get over some horrible rare disease. The supporting characters all also have had major amounts of development and change over the course of a season. House is the foil for all this, and there's certainly been opportunities for him to change externally, say by hiring a new assistant.

There are certainly short stories that use this model. The Jeeves and Wooster stories come to mind. But there's a ton of character development in this model nonetheless.

ChaosTitan · Nov 20, 2009

NeuroFizz said:
The phrase "character development" can be interpreted in more than one way. If is it interpreted as the writer making the character seem real and three-dimensional to the reader, yes, I'd say it is extremely important. If it is interpreted as having the character go through significant change during the course of the story, it all depends on the type of story, as someone mentioned upstream.

This.

Libbie said:
Development has to happen to some degree. I mean, most characters are changed in one way or another by the choices they make, even if it's a temporary change. And if you don't have a character faced with a decision or a challenge, you don't really have a story. However, as others already mentioned, the development doesn't have to be enormous, nor even a large part of the story. But TECHNICALLY, some kind of development in the form of a psychological change as the big decision is made, yes, that has to be there. Otherwise you've got a static character drifting through a static world, and that's not interesting.

And this.

I cannot think of a single book I read this year which did not include some sort of development for the main character.

Sn00py · Nov 20, 2009

Series television has had a huge impact on how we tell stories in any medium, particularly in novels that are part of a series or saga. If you're saying there is nothing to be learned about character development by studying how it is done effectively in a different medium then you are missing out on a worthwhile lesson. In fact I'm now doubly confused if that is what you mean, because your very next words:

There's a huge arc of character development for the people who get some horrible rare disease, or get over some horrible rare disease. The supporting characters all also have had major amounts of development and change over the course of a season. House is the foil for all this, and there's certainly been opportunities for him to change externally, say by hiring a new assistant.

analyze a method of character development that can be used for great effect in any medium.

ORION · Nov 20, 2009

The thing is...character development whether it's in a genre form such as mystery or thriller OR mainstream or literary - serves the purpose to make the reader care and compel the reader to continue to read on...yes it is possible to have flat one dimensional characters who go through the book unchanged BUT it can be safely said a story can be improved by expanding beyond stereotypes at least for the primary characters...
I think much can be learned by television as we are forced to care about House NOT necessarily by what he says overtly but by what we see week after week...why do we keep watching him? Because we care about what happens to him. People sometimes think he's a "real" person. Actors say when they play Doctors they are often asked for medical advice even from people who know they aren't doctors...It is this air of believability that brings a story to life.
We know Frodo intimately... We know Jack Reacher...We know Stephanie Plum...We know Oscar Wao...We know Garp...We know Hercule Poirot...We know Tom Sawyer...
We know Scout...We know Hal (even tho he's a machine)...Pick any book that resonates with you and I guarantee you cared about one of the characters...

kuatolives · Nov 20, 2009

A story that has a character that doesn't change is called a fable, not a novel.

Lady Ice · Nov 20, 2009

Yes, it is necessary. At least one of your characters must change. If you think of The Great Gatsby, most characters don't learn their lessons (although there are some moments of recognition) but Nick has gone through a great change.

If you have no character development, then the character has no reactions. Why would you want to read a story where a character reacts to nothing? That's incredibly unbelievable. Even if X fails to acknowledge that Y is his son publically, he will have still had some reaction- he will either be more ignorant or maybe he starts to realise. As you get more information about a thing, it's bound to effect you somehow.

The character may not have learnt his lesson, but he has gained experience. Whether he uses it or not, he has still changed from who he was at the beginning.

Cyia · Nov 20, 2009

kuatolives said:
A story that has a character that doesn't change is called a fable, not a novel.

And a writer who tries to make it a novel is called a hack.

cwfgal · Nov 20, 2009

What Orion said.

Beth (aka Annelise Ryan)

ishtar'sgate · Nov 20, 2009

efreysson said:
Character development pops up again and again in any discussions about writing, and I look over my work and see that I actually have very little of it. But I also don't see how I really need it.
Can't a character be deep and interesting without going through personality changes between the prologue and the epilogue? Because I certainly think one can, but I'd like to hear some opinions on this.

Character development doesn't necessarily mean personality change. In character development, at least the way I see it, the reader is drawn deeper and deeper into an understanding of the character. I'd relate it to the difference between meeting a person for the first time and getting to know them well over a long period of time. For example, on first meeting a character the reader might think he's good looking, the life of the party and a fun person to have around. Later on the reader finds out this character has a very short fuse and his anger is as intense as his humor. Still later the reader learns the character is very mercurial - one minute up and then the next minute almost suicidal. And so on. It's a development. You don't know everything about a person the first time you meet them and readers won't know everything about characters the first time they appear on the page.

maestrowork · Nov 20, 2009

ishtar'sgate said:
For example, on first meeting a character the reader might think he's good looking, the life of the party and a fun person to have around. Later on the reader finds out this character has a very short fuse and his anger is as intense as his humor. Still later the reader learns the character is very mercurial - one minute up and then the next minute almost suicidal.

Have you been spying on me? HOW DARE YOU!!!!#@$@#$#@

Is character development really necessary?

Closer than ever

Village idiot

~~~~*~~~~

In the land of frost, volcanoes, and well-armed wo

The grad students did it

Whatever I did, I didn't do it.

PERPETUAL EXISTENTIAL CRISIS VICTIM

With great power comes

Worst song played on ugliest guitar

Literary Laureate

Fear the Death Ray

Literary Laureate

Vampire Junkie

Court Jester

!

What happened?

Around

Literary Laureate

Sailed away years ago

Gonzo Journalist

Makes useful distinctions

Rewriting My Destiny

On the rocks

living in the past

Fear the Death Ray

*