Real People Have Real Flaws
This weekend I read my face off, both for work and pleasure. When I first started working in publishing, my friends would ask “How can you possibly read outside work?” Certainly it’s a lot of reading to tackle (and I read a lot anyway), but these days, I find it crucial to read published books and comfort rereads in addition to manuscripts.
Why? Because I need examples of what’s good. Turning off my analytical, editorial brain is easier when the book I’m reading is polished. Not that I don’t occasionally get good manuscripts, but I am always reading those with a critical eye because submissions won’t really resemble the finished the product once editorial has gotten their grubby mitts and red pens on it.
Soon I shall have reviews of WILL GRAYSON, WILL GRAYSON by John Green and David Levithan, BEAUTIFUL CREATURES by Kami Garcia and Margaret Stohl, TENDER MORSELS by Margo Lanagan, and THE WHITE CAT by Holly Black. Yes, I read all four books in two days. It’s the one skill I can boast of: I read super fast! (I also reread THE DEMON’S LEXICON by Sarah Rees Brennan and NORWEGIAN WOOD by Haruki Murakami.)
Anyway, I did promise to spend this week discussing character development, so without further ado:
Real lego people don't have flaws.
Yesterday I discussed how likeability was not a requirement in making a real, compelling character. Today I’m going to discuss how to make a character empathizable (me and Shakespeare, makin’ up words) with real flaws.
I find “flawed” tricky to execute because what people consider flaws are so subjective. I am arrogant, vain, shallow, and judgmental. Those are my flaws. I do not make any apology for them. I rather like myself as I am, less-than-desirable qualities or no. And I don’t think my flaws make me any less likeable/empathetic to my friends and loved ones.
The Reader’s Value Judgment
What are “real” flaws? They are not superficial “faults” like being less-than-conventionally attractive, clumsy/klutzy, sarcastic, etc. Flaws are personality traits, qualities that are as fundamental to a character as other traits like loyalty, intelligence, and passion. In fact, I would argue that flaws are just regular ol’ “traits” with the reader’s value judgment placed on them.
Because I don’t often see arrogant characters as being “flawed”. I really like it when people are unabashed jerks or bitches; I find it refreshing. Characters who are convinced of their own superiority amuse me, either because their arrogance is justified or it isn’t. If it isn’t, then I laugh; if it is, I think it’s admirable. (Take pride in what you’re rightfully good at! This especially means you, ladies! BE ARROGANT. IT’S OKAY.)
Any personality trait, with the right spin, and the right angle, can be a flaw. For instance, loyalty. Loyalty is generally considered to be a positive quality. But what happens when being loyal to someone you love goes against other principles you hold dear? Loyalty to love or a “higher good”: which is “better”? That’s for the reader to decide. The phrase “to a fault” comes to mind. A character can be loyal “to a fault” (to whatever value the reader judges to be “worse”). Hence, what is generally considered a “good” thing turns into a “bad” thing.
Put Your Characters Through Hell
I’m not someone who advises writers to come up with a character rap sheet. They’re helpful for some, but I don’t think you can delve so deeply into the moral/ethical ambiguities when traits are listed in bullet points. I believe the real test of a character is how s/he acts in an extraordinarily stressful situation. Seriously, make your characters suffer. I am all for sadism here.
Under duress, people can betray the absolute best and worst qualities about themselves. A previously shy and retiring character can rise to a leadership position because s/he possesses really astute common sense. A previously brave character can reveal him/herself to be a coward when s/he is personally threatened. When the stakes are really high, then characters emerge as three-dimensional people.
Not Everyone Will Like Your Character
You know what? Not everyone will like your character. That’s okay. Not everyone will like you either. The sooner you can accept this about yourself (and your characters), the easier life (and writing) will be. Some people just rub you the wrong way. For instance, I can’t stand people who let emotions get in the way of good sense, who wallow in inactivity instead of taking charge of the change in their lives. I have little patience for those who cling to “safe” things. I especially cannot abide a martyr. Life is not a popularity contest. Neither is writing.
Those are my thoughts on writing “flawed” characters. People on Twitter have asked about antagonists and secondary characters, so perhaps I will tackle different character types in the next post. What do you all think?
“Life is not a popularity contest. Neither is writing.”
Love it.
I think the best revelation I had as a writer was to put my characters through hell. To find their worst fears and bring them into play. To find their strongest convictions and challenge them. (That last one came directly from Donald Maass in a Writer Unboxed post.) It’s hard to do that to our characters, but it almost always makes them stronger, and the story more interesting.
I think your “to a fault” comment is great too. Like, a “sensitive” guy can be great, but an overly sensitive guy can come off weak or annoying. (I like my men to walk that line of confidence and arrogance, if you couldn’t tell, hehehe.)
Rate:
0 
0
Wow, JJ! I think your new web design is absolutely amazing! I totally have envy. I’ve been drooling and rolling my mouse over stuff for five minutes. (I LOVE the navigation bar!) The colors are awesome!
And Cinderella is haunting.
Rate:
0 
0
Thanks!
Re: Cinderella. Uh, haha. Um. My only excuse: I was 18 when I wrote it.
Rate:
0 
0
I love unabashed jerks. But I think the key to the reader/viewer empathizing with them is in the reader/viewer having more knowledge about the character than the characters around them. If the reader/viewer doesn’t understand the reasons behind jerk’s actions, then they eventually cross the line into bully
Rethinking the morality assigned to specific traits is a brilliant point. I recently read a manuscript where a character had a trait I’d always considered admirable, that I aspired to, that I could never imagine being bad. And that trait became a fatal flaw. The author gave me a new way of looking at things, and so it completely rocked my world.
Rate:
0 
0
JJ, I LOVED when you said:
“I believe the real test of a character is how s/he acts in an extraordinarily stressful situation. … Under duress, people can betray the absolute best and worst qualities about themselves.”
I am absolutely going to take this bit of advice to heart and start giving my characters hell! What better way to find out more about them? Genius.
Thank you so much for this!
Rate:
0 
0