I have one character who is bugging me right now. I'm not 100% satisfied with her depth of character and internal conflict. It occurred to me that I'm struggling with her because... her life is not that bad.
Last edited:
How to make a goodie-goodie character complex, deep, and interesting?
- Thread starter blackcat777
- Start date
I wrote a somewhat "goody-goody" MC in my series, and I always felt what makes him interesting is his struggle to keep to the high road - to maintain his innate decency and compassionate nature while trying to be the powerful, ruthless ruler everyone thinks he should be.
Think of the character of Elinor Dashwood in Austen's Sense & Sensibility, who is trying her best to do what's right even though it stands in the way of her happiness. If there's tension and conflict involved with the choice to be good, that will make a character compelling - not superficial ticks and quirks.
Think of the character of Elinor Dashwood in Austen's Sense & Sensibility, who is trying her best to do what's right even though it stands in the way of her happiness. If there's tension and conflict involved with the choice to be good, that will make a character compelling - not superficial ticks and quirks.
Last edited:
I always have a rougher time writing females, too, at least in low-tech settings where they are physically limited in agency.
I need to stand on my head and think about this.
I need to stand on my head and think about this.
If she has demon sex in book three, maybe she has angel sex up front.
??
Or, She is goody good in all the ways you need, but has some secret vice that she thinks is horrible and it bothers the heck out of her, but everyone else thinks is silly for her to worry about? Like she obsesses over speeding a few miles over the speed limit or something... it seems like an obsessive personality might give you some tension.
??
Or, She is goody good in all the ways you need, but has some secret vice that she thinks is horrible and it bothers the heck out of her, but everyone else thinks is silly for her to worry about? Like she obsesses over speeding a few miles over the speed limit or something... it seems like an obsessive personality might give you some tension.
I think you have a larger problem here, based in your heavily clichéd views of women. If you can resolve that, the way to fix your character problem will become clear.
The character of mine who is most like yours in my story does in fact run away from home. No demon sex, though, just finding herself and what she wants in life, in the process.
But some of my favorite female characters in science fiction that fit your mold, do not run away - they stay in their circumstances and what grows ... is their understanding and philosophical views of the roles of men and women in society.
Example: A patriarchal society world that I read has some very strong women in traditional roles. They have come to realize that 'liberation' comes in many forms. While some of these traditional women stridently proclaim a desire to break through the societal expectations placed upon them (and do break free), others live within those expectations, because they prioritize some aspect of their life that also is traditional - like raising their children, which is a legitimate and laudable drive of adults including women. Or running their household, in the case when their male partner is unable to.
Sometimes this evolution of understanding and philosophy (in characters including goody women) is beautifully communicated in fiction.
There are amazing women out in front blazing the way, and there are amazing women who take another path and work long hours and you would never give them a second glance - but they are making sure that their children, or friend, or partner, or stranger, is getting the support that person needs.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2007
- Messages
- 1,461
- Reaction score
- 443
Yeah, it is definitely harder to write compelling characters who have led sheltered and happy lives. Pretty much all my characters either have some kind of darkness or trauma in their past, or some kind of shameful secret or inner demon...something personal they're struggling against. Because when I try to write happy people I feel like I don't have as much to work with, narrative-wise. That said, I don't think it's impossible.
You could maybe find a way to turn her goody-goodness into a conflict in its own right? Like, maybe she's tired of everyone underestimating her or treating her like a doe-eyed innocent (even if she kind of is, it would probably still get annoying for her to be treated that way). Or you could just have her be bored and unsatisfied with her sheltered life and have the conflict come from that. Think of Anna from Frozen. She's sweet and innocent, but still has a personality. Though I guess most of her conflict comes from the loss of her friendship with Elsa, so there's still some sadness and pain there.
You could maybe find a way to turn her goody-goodness into a conflict in its own right? Like, maybe she's tired of everyone underestimating her or treating her like a doe-eyed innocent (even if she kind of is, it would probably still get annoying for her to be treated that way). Or you could just have her be bored and unsatisfied with her sheltered life and have the conflict come from that. Think of Anna from Frozen. She's sweet and innocent, but still has a personality. Though I guess most of her conflict comes from the loss of her friendship with Elsa, so there's still some sadness and pain there.
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2011
- Messages
- 8,943
- Reaction score
- 3,151
Sat Nam! (literally "Truth Name"--a Sikh greeting)
Good people can be interesting if you give them difficult circumstances. Or moral dilemmas. Or a choice that looked like the high road that turns out not to be. Or a choice that IS the high road, but alienates them from family and/or friends.
Or they aren't real attractive (at least they think they aren't). Or they have really oddball (by societal standards) ideas of what's what and WHY they're maintaining the high ground.
And we haven't even gotten to estrangements because they were holding the high ground. ETC.
Lots of possibilities.
Woman tend to be a lot deeper than clichés.
Hope that helps.
Blessings,
Siri Kirpal
Good people can be interesting if you give them difficult circumstances. Or moral dilemmas. Or a choice that looked like the high road that turns out not to be. Or a choice that IS the high road, but alienates them from family and/or friends.
Or they aren't real attractive (at least they think they aren't). Or they have really oddball (by societal standards) ideas of what's what and WHY they're maintaining the high ground.
And we haven't even gotten to estrangements because they were holding the high ground. ETC.
Lots of possibilities.
Woman tend to be a lot deeper than clichés.
Hope that helps.
Blessings,
Siri Kirpal
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2012
- Messages
- 5,448
- Reaction score
- 2,980
Agreed.
Also, I think part of the problem is that you seem to think that "dark" characters = "interesting" characters. Just off the top of my head, I can think of a dozen "good" characters who are just as interesting, if not more so, than their dark counterparts. Maybe rifle through your favorite books and see how those authors have done it?
And yes, please take some time to consider your problematic views of women.
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2015
- Messages
- 10,309
- Reaction score
- 5,274
- Location
- Melbourne
- Website
- www.lanifrank.com
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2011
- Messages
- 23,122
- Reaction score
- 10,881
- Location
- Where faults collide
- Website
- doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
Good people can still have conflicts, both with others and within themselves. Being good doesn't make one immune to shame, guilt, fear, angst and all those other interesting emotions. There isn't just one way of being good or virtuous either, even within the context of being law abiding.
As for having trouble writing women in a pre-industrial setting because of a lack of physical agency:
1. You're assuming a lot about pre-industrial settings. The amount of freedom and bodily autonomy women had has varied with time and place (even within so-called medieval Europe). And even in the most rigidly patriarchal societies, there were women who stepped outside of the normal molds, even serving in various combat situations, and doing science and philosophy, writing and art. Try reading Jason Poranth's book Rejected Princesses (or spending some time on his blog), many of which are accounts of real-world women from ancient history to the early 20th century who did remarkable (and sometimes very nasty, though many were heroes) things, often breaking rules to do so (though not all were rules breakers). There are some figures from mythology as well.
2. Not all agency is physical. Even a slave can make choices within the confines of their role (or to step outside it if they are willing to risk consequences). They can be interesting characters who do things that move a story forward and affect others. Women (and slaves) can be excellent spies, for instance, because they are often invisible and not taken seriously in a setting that sees them as objects and not people. There are plenty of books written from the viewpoint of women living in patriarchal systems. Children are another group that lacks physical agency and autonomy, yet there are plenty of stories with children as protagonists. How do writers make children interesting when they depend on adults and are under their control? What made you interesting and real to yourself when you were a child and lacked physical agency?
3. Unless you are writing historical fiction, you needn't make your pre-industrial society follow any that have existed in our worlds with regards to gender roles and limitations placed on women (or any other group of people). Plenty of popular fantasy writers have had female characters with physical autonomy and agency, and it's possible to conceive of speculative elements that would give women equal, or even superior, standing to men across a broad range of endeavors.
Try reading Kate Elliott's essay Writing Women Characters as People for some ideas as well.
This one is good too: https://www.tor.com/2016/03/23/writing-women-characters-into-epic-fantasy-without-quotas/
This is also a good essay: https://www.tor.com/2012/12/06/historically-authentic-sexism-in-fantasy-lets-unpack-that/
And please, please, please don't refer to women and girls with the stand-alone noun "females," unless you're being biological in context and also referring to men and boys as "males" in some demographic sense (police will often refer to suspects or victims as "males" or "females" symmetrically in their reports, but that's a specific usage). I know you didn't mean it this way, but referring to people of the female persuasion as "females" is a dog whistle used by some of the most sexist jerks on the internet.
https://jezebel.com/the-problem-with-calling-women-females-1683808274
As for having trouble writing women in a pre-industrial setting because of a lack of physical agency:
1. You're assuming a lot about pre-industrial settings. The amount of freedom and bodily autonomy women had has varied with time and place (even within so-called medieval Europe). And even in the most rigidly patriarchal societies, there were women who stepped outside of the normal molds, even serving in various combat situations, and doing science and philosophy, writing and art. Try reading Jason Poranth's book Rejected Princesses (or spending some time on his blog), many of which are accounts of real-world women from ancient history to the early 20th century who did remarkable (and sometimes very nasty, though many were heroes) things, often breaking rules to do so (though not all were rules breakers). There are some figures from mythology as well.
2. Not all agency is physical. Even a slave can make choices within the confines of their role (or to step outside it if they are willing to risk consequences). They can be interesting characters who do things that move a story forward and affect others. Women (and slaves) can be excellent spies, for instance, because they are often invisible and not taken seriously in a setting that sees them as objects and not people. There are plenty of books written from the viewpoint of women living in patriarchal systems. Children are another group that lacks physical agency and autonomy, yet there are plenty of stories with children as protagonists. How do writers make children interesting when they depend on adults and are under their control? What made you interesting and real to yourself when you were a child and lacked physical agency?
3. Unless you are writing historical fiction, you needn't make your pre-industrial society follow any that have existed in our worlds with regards to gender roles and limitations placed on women (or any other group of people). Plenty of popular fantasy writers have had female characters with physical autonomy and agency, and it's possible to conceive of speculative elements that would give women equal, or even superior, standing to men across a broad range of endeavors.
Try reading Kate Elliott's essay Writing Women Characters as People for some ideas as well.
This one is good too: https://www.tor.com/2016/03/23/writing-women-characters-into-epic-fantasy-without-quotas/
This is also a good essay: https://www.tor.com/2012/12/06/historically-authentic-sexism-in-fantasy-lets-unpack-that/
And please, please, please don't refer to women and girls with the stand-alone noun "females," unless you're being biological in context and also referring to men and boys as "males" in some demographic sense (police will often refer to suspects or victims as "males" or "females" symmetrically in their reports, but that's a specific usage). I know you didn't mean it this way, but referring to people of the female persuasion as "females" is a dog whistle used by some of the most sexist jerks on the internet.
https://jezebel.com/the-problem-with-calling-women-females-1683808274
Last edited:
.
You have an interesting point and I appreciate you bringing this to light: what if if my goodie-goodie character were a man incapable of physically defending himself instead? I hadn't thought to gender-flip the situation, and this is a valid question.
However, after thinking about this particular situation, I would still have the same problem, how to make the combination of lack of life experience, limited physical agency, and adherence to goodness interesting.
I would also like to add that, as a woman, I could not fight my way out of physical violence in which someone tried to overpower me. It's 2018 and this is a real thing. It has nothing to do with my worth as a person. But in a "might is right" situation, I'm toast.
I do also have a male character who can't defend himself, but his character arc goes dark before light.
I spoke briefly and poorly - as a result of said demon sex, FMC explores a hedonistic, destructive inversion of her character which will give me all kinds of fun things to write about, concerning the interplay of light and shadow, selfless vs. selfishness. It's ultimately the integration of the two that save the day. BUT while my FMC is strictly light side for the first two books, I need to find another way to deepen her conflict before inverting her character. She gets a late start compared to everyone else. I don't feel like I'm "finished" with characters until I invert them.
Purity of heart, as in not giving way to rage or violence. She's the only one who doesn't rage and the plot hinges on that.
If anyone else has concrete suggestions for self-checking ways out of unconscious thought traps, I'd appreciate if you could share.
Generally, people make mistakes, mistakes have consequences, and then you're left with the choice to either learn and own up, or continue down a destructive path.
And on that note - this is why I appreciate these comments, thank you - it's the learning/owning up part of that process I find makes it easy to write character growth. So I'm struggling with ways to facilitate character growth without a host of selfish/destructive decisions being precursor. Mistakes are easy to make...
I suppose there are well-intentioned mistakes...
I was planning on taking the "acceptance" route in the last book. You make great points.
@Roxxsmom - thank you for the links!
You have an interesting point and I appreciate you bringing this to light: what if if my goodie-goodie character were a man incapable of physically defending himself instead? I hadn't thought to gender-flip the situation, and this is a valid question.
However, after thinking about this particular situation, I would still have the same problem, how to make the combination of lack of life experience, limited physical agency, and adherence to goodness interesting.
I would also like to add that, as a woman, I could not fight my way out of physical violence in which someone tried to overpower me. It's 2018 and this is a real thing. It has nothing to do with my worth as a person. But in a "might is right" situation, I'm toast.
I do also have a male character who can't defend himself, but his character arc goes dark before light.
I spoke briefly and poorly - as a result of said demon sex, FMC explores a hedonistic, destructive inversion of her character which will give me all kinds of fun things to write about, concerning the interplay of light and shadow, selfless vs. selfishness. It's ultimately the integration of the two that save the day. BUT while my FMC is strictly light side for the first two books, I need to find another way to deepen her conflict before inverting her character. She gets a late start compared to everyone else. I don't feel like I'm "finished" with characters until I invert them.
Purity of heart, as in not giving way to rage or violence. She's the only one who doesn't rage and the plot hinges on that.
If anyone else has concrete suggestions for self-checking ways out of unconscious thought traps, I'd appreciate if you could share.
Generally, people make mistakes, mistakes have consequences, and then you're left with the choice to either learn and own up, or continue down a destructive path.
And on that note - this is why I appreciate these comments, thank you - it's the learning/owning up part of that process I find makes it easy to write character growth. So I'm struggling with ways to facilitate character growth without a host of selfish/destructive decisions being precursor. Mistakes are easy to make...
I suppose there are well-intentioned mistakes...
I was planning on taking the "acceptance" route in the last book. You make great points.
@Roxxsmom - thank you for the links!
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2012
- Messages
- 16,171
- Reaction score
- 3,734
Could you clarify the low-tech settings where they're physically limited in agency?
Also would you have trouble writing a male character who wasn't physically strong? I hope I'm not understanding what you're saying.
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2011
- Messages
- 23,122
- Reaction score
- 10,881
- Location
- Where faults collide
- Website
- doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
I've no idea why attempting to reply to your post with a quote is giving me nothing but a period within the quotes.
I was attempting to respond to your request in the above post (#14) for concrete suggestions.
See my post (#13) above, which has some links.
Oh, I see. You edited the post and took all the words away as I was trying to quote it.
Last edited:
Yes, 100%, I would have just as much difficulty with this particular character if it were a man.
I also don't often write characters that don't have a means of fighting back, magic, ray guns, or something (which all of the other women I've written before had). The point of this character is Not Fighting.
I made sure I didn't type "females" anywhere and then pasted all of it back.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2011
- Messages
- 23,122
- Reaction score
- 10,881
- Location
- Where faults collide
- Website
- doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
Also, if you think that being less strong overall then men means women never have any way of fighting back (or that strength is the only variable that determines the victor in a fight) consider that men vary considerably in strength and size also, and that boys were often drafted alongside men and that child soldiers are considered to be pretty terrifying. Their mortality rate is high, but some survive.
Also, you might want to read this essay. Women in combat were more common in history than many people suppose.
http://aidanmoher.com/blog/featured...attle-and-slaves-narrative-by-kameron-hurley/
I still maintain, though, that characters of any gender, even those who are victims or pacifists, who are weak and non combative can be very interesting and compelling. Not all conflict in life is physical. I'd argue that the vast majority of conflict isn't.
Also, you might want to read this essay. Women in combat were more common in history than many people suppose.
http://aidanmoher.com/blog/featured...attle-and-slaves-narrative-by-kameron-hurley/
I still maintain, though, that characters of any gender, even those who are victims or pacifists, who are weak and non combative can be very interesting and compelling. Not all conflict in life is physical. I'd argue that the vast majority of conflict isn't.
My line of thinking is that a happy life means the character has zero experience dealing with something bad happening. I'd be setting them up for a devastating fall to unwind their personality.
I completely agree.
I may be over-reliant on physical violence as an expression of conflict. This character is really important because she doesn't use it, and I need to make her as striking and compelling as possible.
Thanks again to everyone who took the time to reply and challenged me to think. When I figure out what is missing precisely, I'll report back and share what it is and why.
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2012
- Messages
- 5,448
- Reaction score
- 2,980
I don't know what genres you like to read, but my suggestion is to read more. Really, there are so many examples of interesting characters who seem passive on the surface but are much more on the inside than they let on. The FMC in Gone Girl is (SPOILER!!!) not a good person, but for the first half of the book, she is presented as someone who is very caring, loving, and trapped in an abusive marriage. She doesn't fight back, not for the first half of the book, but man, she is SO interesting. And when the flip came, it was so, so good precisely because her character in the first half was such a sweetheart.
Orrr think of some of the female characters at the beginning of ASOIAF. Catelyn -- devoted mother and wife. Daenerys -- completely powerless to begin with, used as a bargaining chip by her brother. Sansa -- silly, vain girl whose biggest dream is to be married. All of these characters start out pretty passive, but even before they come into their own, their chapters are still really interesting.
Read more things written by women.
I gather you are done with this thread for now, as I'm coming to it late, but, food for thought:
'Good' does not equal 'Nice'.
What if her lovely, sheltered life has left her without empathy for others? It would work with her 'standing her ground'. She's stubborn, and believes that everyone lives like her, or should.
She has no understanding of why some people can't turn to their families for help, or why people live in poverty, because, hey, it doesn't happen in her world.
Thieves are thieves, and she makes no exception for people stealing to feed their families. People who are poor or in dire circumstances must have done something wrong to end up that way.
Girls get pregnant because they did something wrong. Boys join gangs because they like violence.
She might do charity work, because it's what 'nice girls' do, but she's looking down on 'those people' all the time.
Having her be pure and sheltered doesn't mean she can't be kind of smug and sanctimonious, and 'lawful good' can be quite the failing if she believes that if you break a 'law', you deserve whatever happens to you.
Anyway, FWIW.
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2012
- Messages
- 16,171
- Reaction score
- 3,734
No, sorry, that's not a thing in any way, shape or form. I know guys who couldn't fight their way out of a situation, couldn't break out of a hold, or defend themselves, regardless of size, and I know a 110-lb, 5-2 woman who can take down a guy who outweighs her by 100 lbs and is a foot taller, in under a minute, with not a single weapon but her hands.
Physics is fun. Knowledge is fun. A will and reason to fight is awesome.
Some men can fight, some can't. Some women can fight, some can't. Average upper-body muscle mass has shit-all to do with it.
Last edited:
How do you make an inherently good person interesting? You show her inner conflict.
She must occasionally be tempted to snap at someone, or to sneak a glass of wine she's not meant to drink. She must wonder why she has so little power in the society she lives in. She must find someone who has more power than her obnoxious or foolish. She must at times rail against her faith (assuming she has one), and question its rules.
Show her thoughts and feelings. Show why she doesn't rebel.
If you write her as a full, complex human rather than as a thin, poor stereotype you'll do fine.
She must occasionally be tempted to snap at someone, or to sneak a glass of wine she's not meant to drink. She must wonder why she has so little power in the society she lives in. She must find someone who has more power than her obnoxious or foolish. She must at times rail against her faith (assuming she has one), and question its rules.
Show her thoughts and feelings. Show why she doesn't rebel.
If you write her as a full, complex human rather than as a thin, poor stereotype you'll do fine.
How to write a female character: exactly the same way you'd write a male character, but taking in what affect societies attitudes has towards women would have on her.
Example. A female rugby player (chosen because I play rugby)
Why does she like rugby? All the same reasons why men like rugby.
What does she get out of playing rugby? All the same things male players do.
Add more and more questions here: same answers as for men. I could go on and on and on here. Women's brains are basically the same as men's brains. There is a massive amount of individual variation among women, just as there is among men. Lots of women don't like rugby. Lots of men don't like rugby... there's more difference within each sex than there is between the sexes. Therefore you're safe to assume that your female character functions mentally the same way your male characters do.
What's different? Life experience is different. A male rugby player would've been encouraged to play rugby as a boy. He would've had lots of opportunities to play and develop his skills, and recognition for his achievements. This would've encouraged him to keep going and keep improving and formed him into the player he is today. A female rugby player is a lot more likely to have been discouraged from playing as a girl. Maybe she had to make a lot of fuss to be allowed to even play in the first place. Even if the local club accepted girls, maybe her parents just assumed only her brothers wanted to play and she had to kick up a fuss to be allowed to play too. Or maybe the club didn't allow girls to play and she had to do ten times as much to find a club that accepted girls, travel further to train, have to deal with a general lack of opportunity to play and develop her skills, maybe her school didn't let girls play rugby so she could only play at her club. Maybe she constantly had to deal with sexist and homophobic attitudes (maybe she's not gay but the stereotype of gay female players means everyone assumes she's gay). Maybe her friends made fun of her for playing rugby instead of doing more stereotypically "girlie" activities. Maybe it got even harder to play as an adult because there was no women's team in her area so she has to drive for miles to play. And she has to balance this with her job and parenting responsibilities... but she stuck with it and kept going and all the adversity just made her all the more determined, and that's what's made her the player she is today.
So when you write female characters, especially in situations where there's a lot of sexism and/or women are treated very differently to men, of course you have to take this into account. It will affect how she reacts to things... just as it would a male character who's been through the same kinds of experiences.
So I agree very much with the comments above that if you sort out how to write female characters it will also fix the problem of her being a boring character. Yes she's had a sheltered life and suffered no major trauma. But everyone has some kind of difficulty in their life so you need to figure out what difficulties she's faced. You said that she's in a low tech situation where females have limited agency and you also said she's feisty and will stand her ground. That is enough, you just need to get a bit deeper into her mind regarding how the way females in her society are treated has made things hard for her, together with any other difficulties she's face, but she's stood her ground and done her own thing and overcame the adversity anyway. All without going so far as to make people see her as being a troublemaker (which you've made it clear she isn't to be seen as in the first book). That has the makings of a very interesting character.
Example. A female rugby player (chosen because I play rugby)
Why does she like rugby? All the same reasons why men like rugby.
What does she get out of playing rugby? All the same things male players do.
Add more and more questions here: same answers as for men. I could go on and on and on here. Women's brains are basically the same as men's brains. There is a massive amount of individual variation among women, just as there is among men. Lots of women don't like rugby. Lots of men don't like rugby... there's more difference within each sex than there is between the sexes. Therefore you're safe to assume that your female character functions mentally the same way your male characters do.
What's different? Life experience is different. A male rugby player would've been encouraged to play rugby as a boy. He would've had lots of opportunities to play and develop his skills, and recognition for his achievements. This would've encouraged him to keep going and keep improving and formed him into the player he is today. A female rugby player is a lot more likely to have been discouraged from playing as a girl. Maybe she had to make a lot of fuss to be allowed to even play in the first place. Even if the local club accepted girls, maybe her parents just assumed only her brothers wanted to play and she had to kick up a fuss to be allowed to play too. Or maybe the club didn't allow girls to play and she had to do ten times as much to find a club that accepted girls, travel further to train, have to deal with a general lack of opportunity to play and develop her skills, maybe her school didn't let girls play rugby so she could only play at her club. Maybe she constantly had to deal with sexist and homophobic attitudes (maybe she's not gay but the stereotype of gay female players means everyone assumes she's gay). Maybe her friends made fun of her for playing rugby instead of doing more stereotypically "girlie" activities. Maybe it got even harder to play as an adult because there was no women's team in her area so she has to drive for miles to play. And she has to balance this with her job and parenting responsibilities... but she stuck with it and kept going and all the adversity just made her all the more determined, and that's what's made her the player she is today.
So when you write female characters, especially in situations where there's a lot of sexism and/or women are treated very differently to men, of course you have to take this into account. It will affect how she reacts to things... just as it would a male character who's been through the same kinds of experiences.
So I agree very much with the comments above that if you sort out how to write female characters it will also fix the problem of her being a boring character. Yes she's had a sheltered life and suffered no major trauma. But everyone has some kind of difficulty in their life so you need to figure out what difficulties she's faced. You said that she's in a low tech situation where females have limited agency and you also said she's feisty and will stand her ground. That is enough, you just need to get a bit deeper into her mind regarding how the way females in her society are treated has made things hard for her, together with any other difficulties she's face, but she's stood her ground and done her own thing and overcame the adversity anyway. All without going so far as to make people see her as being a troublemaker (which you've made it clear she isn't to be seen as in the first book). That has the makings of a very interesting character.
Last edited: