I've been revisiting some of Jim Kelly's essays regarding characterization. Jim -- better known on book jackets as James Patrick Kelly -- was one of my instructors at the Stonecoast MFA program. I've read Jim's excellent sci fi novel "Burn," which even folks who aren't sci fi fans can appreciate because, well, of the excellent characterization!
One essay mentioned E.M Forster's definitions of "flat" and "round" characters. Flat does not mean cardboard -- it simply means a character who can be summed up in a sentence. Jim's example is Gollum from "Lord of the Rings." Gollum is driven by his desire for the ring of power. Round characters are those that have the ability to surprise us in their decisions and actions by doing the opposite of what we might expect and we can accept that as readers because of the character's depth. If we're still looking at sci fi/fantasy, many of George R.R. Martin's characters come to mind in this regard. They never quite act as one might expect, which keeps things interesting, but does not seem contrived.
Then there are the "spear carriers" who march through stories, serving the wine or being household servants or the woman passing on the street.
Well, back to perusing. Jim does make a good point that you're better off reading about craft when you have your feet up by a crackling fire and can look back at what you've been working on during the day, puzzling out how to make it better.
Add Comment
