The Need For Pain: Why Happy Characters Are Boring

Greetings all,

First a few notes:  For starters, I have the files for the Sojourn in Captivity audio book. I’m reviewing them now. The (very early) results seem wonderful.

Next: My wife an I are officially trying to have a child. This required a surgery to reconnect her tubes (which had been done during her previous marriage). The surgery went well, and I’d just like to take a moment and thank God for that. She and I both truly wanted to have more children, and we’re grateful the door is open. Her recovery has us both growing (code word for frustrated, which is actually why I’m doing this topic today). She’s stir crazy, and my routine is shot. Her number one comfort is being outgoing and doing things, which she can’t. My number one comfort is routine and consistency, which is nonexistent when I’m working and running a house.

But I truly mean it when I say this helps us grow.  You see, I aspire to have a boring life. I love the idea that tomorrow will be just like today. (Not at all my wife’s idea of a good day, but in this case opposites attract).  It’s all fine and good for a person to like what he likes, but if we don’t experience pain, we don’t grow. No one wants to read about the guy who encountered no stress and overcame nothing.

When we encounter struggles, it changes us. Pain  helps us grow. No, I don’t look forward to it, but I’m better when it’s over. Our characters are the same way.

Image taken from A Wheel of Time Wiki for character study purposes under Fair Use Doctrine.

A lot of my favorite characters are characters who suffered plenty: Rand from Wheel of Time suffered a ton (as did my favorite character in that series, Perrin). I’d say these characters are the extremes in terms of my top three series ever. Still, all my favorite books (personally) feature characters who truly struggled.

Here’s the next part to why this is so important. The readers or viewers must believe the characters might fail. I often have playful (yet also serious) arguments with a friend of mine (Hi Terry!) regarding why I honestly don’t care for DC. The characters are too powerful.  They have near Olympian power. Sure, Marvel has some OP characters, but most DC characters are of a ridiculous power level. I’m not afraid for them. I’m not in the least bit worried they won’t win the fight or meet their goal. This makes the story boring. If you want readers interested in your story, you need to convince the reader that character might fail.  This is all the more difficult to do because most readers expect a happy ending. They anticipate that, so it’s such an art to instill an honest sense of fear of failure for the character.

The wife and I don’t hate Jodie Whittaker or her Doctor, but we really couldn’t get into her first season. Now, other than Matt Smith (who remains the greatest Doctor ever), I hated every first season of every doctor. I think the writers take time to figure out the new Doctor just like the new Doctor (in the story) takes a minute to figure him or herself out. But we couldn’t get into it. Then something occurred to me: She never lost. Yes, the grandma died (was it the first episode?), but there wasn’t a connection. In fact, I’m of the opinion that character was pretty expendable. Why? Guess:

She was happy.

Image taken from BBC.com for character study purposes under Fair Use Doctrine.

The only good thing a happy character can do in a story is die. They have no struggle, and therefore they have no interest. The most interesting thing that could happen is to see this wonderful, happy character die, thus causing all the other characters to become even more interesting as they try to adjust to life after happy character.

Most of my readers who I talk to during conventions often ask me about the characters who die. We talk about this a little. The one character I get the most (playful) anger with killing (no spoilers) was the character who was happy. But that character’s death shook the readers and gave them an emotional jolt. This loss affected not only the readers, but the characters around the the dearly departed.

So I had some interest, but then life got consistent for the Doctor. Then things got easy. I can think of a few instances when there was great opportunity for this Doctor to face true loss on a couple different stages, and the writers didn’t take the plunge. But you can only put Lois Lane on the train tracks so many times before the readers don’t even care anymore.  Sooner or later, that engine needs to plow over Lois, or the “act” gets boring. That’s what I feel happened with this latest season of Doctor Who.

So I wanted to throw out those ideas when I had a moment. Hopefully things calm down for me. (I really do appreciate growth, but I miss my routine something fierce right now, and my wife is going to go out of her mind if I can’t take her out next week.)

What do you all think? Do you have a story you realize you didn’t like so much for this reason? Do you disagree?

Let me know in the comments below.

Thanks for reading,

Matt

Why Clara Oswald Fell Apart as a Character

I’m a huge Doctor Who fan. When Clara was first introduced, and when her arc with Matt Smith ended I considered her one of the better characters.

Image taken from Pinterest for character study purposes.

However, from the moment Capaldi’s arc started, I’m of the opinion that the writers weren’t ready to let Smith go so Capaldi could shine, and no character suffered more for that than Clara.

During Capaldi’s entire arc, Clara’s character degraded to such a degree that I’m of the opinion there are some who think of her as one of the worst companions of the modern era. But why?

 

Here are my reasons:

1. Continuity Conflict: We established that Clara’s arc at the end of Smith’s tenure was wonderful. The problem is, when Smith left and Capaldi came in Clara was resentful of the “older” Capaldi. She had an entire episode where she “came to grips” with the Doctor being a different person.  The problem is, if anyone were able to roll with the regeneration mojo, it would be the companion who has helped every doctor to have been or to come. In fact, she should have recognized that doctor.

   1. 

      Image taken from the TARDIS Data Core website.

      Some might argue, “But her memory reset!”  Really, then explain the scene when Clara speaks with the aged Smith in “Time of the Doctor.” She told him, “You’ll just pop up with a new face.” This is when the show went on to account for the cannon’s established number of regenerations (12).  She knew that Smith would go, and another new face would appear.

   2. Only she didn’t. She acted with shock and even asked if there was a way to change him back. This rather bigoted point of view from a character who should know the Doctor better than most just felt half-hearted. Especially in the “argument” she posed on why she wasn’t bigoted (but then continued to doubt the Doctor.
2. A Love Story with No Love: The show went on to push the love story between her and Danny Pink. The problem, they never developed that love story. Compare the love story between Rory and Amy, a story that was so compelling, Amy’s choice to stay go be with Rory (while the reason I hate her (she was the only character the Doctor begged to stay with him)) made sense because they established several times through  multiple season just how much they mean to one another.  Meanwhile, Pink went on one awful date and had one speech (in which she lied to this man she was supposed to love so much she betrayed the doctor). So when that episode happened, her heartbreak over Pink’s death just didn’t mean anything. For crying out loud, she professed her love over the phone. (eye roll)
   1. This love story didn’t have any development or growth, so her reaction to his death just felt like an excuse.
3. A Fall From Grace with No Consequence: I think this is the most tragic reason this character just fell apart. The following season, we saw Clara begin to get pretty dark. (The justification did feel off from the beginning since we’re still just finding it hard to believe she cared so much for a man she willfully lied to.) Anyway, justification aside, this arc was fascinating…

   1. 

      Image taken from The Ultimate Guide to the Fashion of Doctor Who website.

      … until she never had to face the consequences for her fall.  This season was one of the most frustrating for me because we’d see an episode that was just fantastic (Face the Raven or Heaven Sent) are undercut by episodes that render the tragic cost of those episodes moot. Clara makes a huge mistake and heroically accepts her fate (until the Doctor brings her back). I even disliked the return of the Doctor’s memories.

   2. When character makes poor decision after poor decision but doesn’t face consequences, it annoys the audience. They start to doubt the story will unfold with any real suspension of disbelief.  Comic books kill characters and bring them back all the time; however, those characters are at least dead for more than two episodes.

All of these reasons have nothing to do with Jenna Coleman or her acting ability to act (which I feel is outstanding). The problem is, in my opinion, with the writing. The plotting for Clara’s arc lacked respect for her previously established cannon and enough foreshadowing to make her plot twists convincing.

I think this is all unfortunate as she was such a great companion through Smith’s tenure.  Whatever happens with this new Doctor, I’m glad this new Doctor is getting a new companion. This will let us judge the pair together and individually.

What do you think? Do you still like Clara? Do you have more reasons her arc didn’t work? (Please don’t just bash characters or actors. I always seek to analyze based on definable characteristics not just raw emotion.)

Thanks for reading,

Matt

New Panel

I just wanted to let you all know I’ve added a new link to my panels page.

I had the privilege to join Authors Heidi Angell and J.B. Taylor for a fun discussion about the first two episodes of the new season of Doctor Who and its spinoff Class. You probably want to jump to the 30:51 mark as we had to hash out some technical difficulties, but that’s when the discussion begins in earnest.  If you want to see it, You just jump straight to it here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwiSyVea_KU&feature=share

Thanks for reading

Matt

The (Hopefully Decreasing) Divide Between Science Fiction and Fantasy

Big Break Studios posted a blog recently about genre busting, and that got me thinking about the interesting divide between science fiction and fantasy.

Fantasy and science fiction fans have an oddly antagonistic side.  I think part of this is due to what makes fantasy and science fiction fun.  Who was the best Doctor? Which craft would win in a race? Which craft would win in a fight? Which character would win in a fight?

It wasn’t until I really started finding my stride as an author that I noticed this strange habit of fans of one genre not appreciating the other. How big is it? How prevalent? I don’t know, big enough to notice? Anecdotally, for every fan I hear that screams at the other genre, I hear another that just enjoys a good story. The inspiration from this post is that the very fact that these two genres aren’t more closely linked surprises me.

So I thought I’d sit down and talk about the largest areas of contention.  NOTE: All of this is anecdotal, I’m curious if anyone has a more analytical example.

Possible vs Impossible: The Science in Science Fiction.

Speculative science is the heart of any science fiction novel. A science fiction writer is bound by unwritten contract between himself and his readers (I’m a guy, so I’m using the male personal pronoun). Things have to have rules. There must be an explanation for how, scientifically, this story is plausible.  I actually FIRST encountered this in high school science. The teacher was quite admit about disproving any and every science fiction movie out there. As he continued to dispute each movie, I couldn’t help but realize he must have ACTUALLY watched them. Weather he did that just to disprove it or enjoy it is really more of a personal issue, but the point is he watched them. Brandon Sanderson mentioned a discussion he’d had on a panel regarding magic systems and then released his “Laws” on magic.  This brings me to the point of contention:

Science fiction fans want a plausible, scientific reason to justify the possibility of the story. Fantasy fans want a sense of wonder. Feel free to argue and debate this point, but I’ve already said this evidence is anecdotal and these opinions are mine. It’s also my opinion that the reason science fiction fans demand plausibility is the very fact that they want to believe this story could happen. One (fantasy) is about escape where the other (scifi) is about hope.  (And let the debate on that assertion begin).

I don’t really care about this particular sticking point, as I believe both genres do what matters most: They show readers who they can be, if only…If only we strive to travel the stars, we could learn so much more. If only, to me, means nothing more than, “when we.”

I know neither of this are either of the ships I mentioned, but I fear copyright in some cases.

Try this experiment:  Go to a convention. Find a pair arguing about weather the Falcon could beat the Enterprise in a space battle.  Go to them and explain it doesn’t matter because a team of dragon riders from Pern could take them both down at the same time. Before they get going. Make sure you specify that these “dragons” are in reality nothing more than genetically enhanced alien lizards that evolved through cloning and gene modifications.  Call this your control group.

Then, go do the same thing with another pair of fans, but don’t explain the genetic modification tools.  Try not to laugh as this pair of individuals debating the military characteristics of non-existent spacecraft looks you in the eyes and says, “it doesn’t matter because dragons aren’t real.”  I’ve done this experiment, but I failed to avoid laughing. I’m sometimes a petty person.

Most of the derision I see across these genres comes from that particular fissure in the genre planet. A few authors are doing fantastic things, and that’s inspired me. What if fantasy authors worked a little harder to make their magic plausible? What if science fiction authors worried a little less about how possible things are? I have two projects in the works that I think pay tribute to both genres. They’re primarily fantasy in terms of marketing but when I can explain something scientifically, I do. The magic systems in each project (Perception of War, the series Sojourn in Despair comes from, is one of them) is fairly hard (if you subscribe to Sanderson’s First Law).

I think there’s a trick to that though. That trick is commitment to your core genre. You want to avoid Deus Ex Machina whenever possible. A story that ends on an overly convenient plot device, regardless of genre, isn’t going to go over well with the fans.  But this divide I’m discussing, I think, comes more from this assertion:

Fantasy fans are more willing to suspend disbelief than science fiction fans.

So, if you’re writing fantasy, I wouldn’t recommend taking three chapters to dissect your magic system right up front. Fantasy readers usually stop at, “Guy can fly.” It’s wonderful to weave in a few explanations of powers as the story progresses, especially if that ability is going to be the key to saving the universe (see Sanderson’s First Law). Science fiction fans demand more details. They’ll want to understand how things are possible sooner, and are therefore more willing to accept large data chunks in the story early on, (accept and larger are dangerously unspecific terms).

What are your thoughts? Which side of the line do you fall under?  Also, I meant what I said. A wing of dragon riders of Pern, and I’d argue a single dragon like Ruth or Mnementh could take out both starships. Seriously.

Thanks for reading,

Matt