Heroes!

Before I get into my rant, I need to tell you a little something about my husband. He doesn't watch TV. He doesn't watch many movies. He doesn't even read much, with a few non-fiction exceptions. He's very happy inside his own head, which is a completely foreign concept to me. Inside my head is a dangerous place, but that's a topic for another day.  

At the end of a long day, sometimes all I want to do is turn on the television and cuddle up with that man on the couch. It doesn't happen. And curling up on the couch all alone is a lot less fun when I can hear him in the kitchen doing the dishes I ought to be helping with. So I do most of my television viewing while he's not around.

Up until recently, though, there was one show I could count on having him watch with me. It was The Event, which we watched at the infinitesimally slow rate of about one episode every two months, but at least we were watching it together (except that one night last year when he watched one without me, which just about knocked my socks off!)

I'm not certain what it was about The Event that got his attention--the fast paced action? The jig-saw puzzle quality of the story-telling? But I can tell you exactly why we stopped watching it. I'll try to do it without too many spoilers, just in case.

Shawn Walker

There's a guy in the show. His name is Shawn Walker, and he is an everyman turned hero--a software engineer who isn't thrilled to be caught up in a government conspiracy.  All he wants to do is rescue his girlfriend from...well, from lots of things. Things do keep happening to that doe-eyed lady.

I don't remember exactly what episode we were watching that fateful night last week. It was somewhere between episode 15 and episode 20, though, so relatively far into the season. Suddenly, out of nowhere, really, this resourceful, morally straight guy (Shawn, not my husband J) lost control. How to say this without a spoiler...

Nope. There's no way. ***Spoiler alert!***

He tied up one of the minor characters (who might or might not have betrayed him. Shawn's evidence was flimsy) and threatened to torture him if he didn't reveal some important information that the man claimed to not know. And then he made good on his threats, hurting this man very badly. I'm not sure how badly, because at that point, my husband turned the TV off, and that was the end of the only television show he was really interested in. I was never interested enough in it to watch it for its own sake, so I may never know the fate of that poor man.

***

Oddly enough, on my own time, I happen to be watching another show that has a storyline involving torture. I'm a bit late in the game to the TV show Lost, and I'm watching a few episodes with torture scenes from season 2. And there's a difference. Maybe it wouldn't have been enough to keep my husband watching, but Lost is a character-driven show. The characters had different reactions to the idea of torture, and both before and after the scenes, they had to deal with what torturing someone did to their soul, and then they had to decide if they would ever torture anyone again. There was no cookie-cutter answer. Again, I didn't watch to see what happened, but it would have been very odd for anyone on The Event to take time for deep introspection. It's an action oriented show. The most they would do is stare off into the distance, shake their head sadly and continue blundering blindly down their chosen path. (Simon is the exception to that, and he was by far my favorite character.)

Sawyer

Sawyer is my favorite character on Lost, and I can tell you exactly why. Sawyer has a moral code. You don't see it at first, and he does a lot of things that would be reprehensible in anyone else. OK, so they are reprehensible when he does it too, but there is a line in the sand that he will not cross, and he knows exactly where it is. There are also lines he's crossed before and had to live with the consequences, and so he won't cross them again. He's an anti-hero.

(Again, I just finished season 2, and with the whims of television writers being what they are, I have no idea what Sawyer turns into by the end of the show, but I've got my fingers crossed.)

So today I have been thinking about my character's moral codes. What drives them morally? Truth? Justice? Family? Love? Duty? Do they expect more from themselves than they are willing to give? At some point, a hero will sacrifice something they desperately want because they will not cross a moral line. And they will be forced to cross lines they never thought they would. (Your people are torturing my family, so I am going to torture you until you promise to take me to them...) But IMO, these choices only work when the writer sees them for what they are--character defining moments. Not action scenes.

What are your thoughts about the moral codes of characters? Are anti-heroes more sympathetic than archetypal heroes? Have you ever lost interest in a character when they deviated from their moral code?

The Trouble with Endings

I’m trying to perfect the ending to my novel right now, and honestly, I’m almost paralyzed.  I’ve never been this slow at writing, so easily distracted, so critical of every word and plot turn.  It is driving me crazy. 

But I know exactly why I’m feeling apprehensive about writing my ending.  To me endings are so important.  They can make or break the entire book.  I’ve kept reading stories despite my interest lagging a bit only to reach the end and found it brilliant, making the whole entire book, even the slow middle, amazing.  Conversely, I’ve been turning pages in a fury to reach the end only to be disappointed and left feeling hollow about the whole book.  Getting the ending right is crucial.

I blogged a while back about re-watching the series Lost, and I have finally made it to the end.  Please don’t calculate how quickly I burned through the six seasons.  Part of my speed was me trying to avoid writing my ending, but part of it was that even the second time around, the show is riveting.    But having reached the end, I’m reminded of how polarized the critics and fans were.  Some loved it, praised it as the best series of all time, well-done, and emotionally cathartic.  Some were disappointed, calling the writing lazy and saying it undermined the entire series.  Really, the whole internet was abuzz with people blogging about why they loved it or hated it.  On a side note, recently Damon Lindelof, co-created and executive producer of Lost discusses the ending and how he feels about the criticism, which I found very interesting.

For the record, I loved the ending.  I thought it was perfect, and I might blog next week about why it worked so well for me (for those of you who care), but today, I want to discuss why the ending for Lost was so satisfying for some and so dissatisfying for others.

Endings are tied to readers’ expectations from the beginning.  Every genre has certain conventions for beginnings that hint about what type of story to expect.  A horror story doesn’t start the same way as a romance unless one of the lucky couple bites it in the end of the chapter, and even then, there is a different tone and sense of foreboding that foreshadows the event.  Likewise, a love story with a tragic ending shouldn’t begin as a light hearted chick lit.  The reader needs to know what kind of story he/she is reading, and what to expect from the ending.   Now I’m not saying the ending shouldn’t be unexpected.  I like unexpected endings.  I’m a big fan of the big twist when it is done right, but there is a difference from a twist and an ending that completely jumps the shark, an ending that comes out of nowhere. Those endings are neither clever nor satisfying.

So to figure out why people were so dissatisfied with the finale of Lost, we need to look at the beginning.  From reading a lot of the complaints and praises for the finale, I feel like there two camps of viewer.  The ones who were intrigued by the mysteries of the island were dissatisfied with the finale, and the ones who were focused more on the characters’ journeys were very satisfied with the ending.  I’m sure I’m over-simplifying this a bit, but that is the general feeling I got from reading the many, many blogs and reviews on the Lost finale.  So looking back at the beginning of Lost, what kind of story was promised?  The mystery of the island or a journey of the survivors?  It just so happens that I watched the pilot episode not too long ago.  :)

The pilot episode was very much about the characters, especially Jack.  Yes, there was a plane crash, and people were reacting to that, but how they were reacting was already establishing who they were.  Jack taking charge and running around helping everyone, which of course he should since he’s a doctor, but then he’s the one to go out into the jungle in search of the cockpit and goes back to help Charlie when the smoke monster is chasing them.  This nicely establishes his need to save everyone.  Kate tagging along with Jack to get the receiver and her comment about running while she stitched Jack up hinted of how she could never stay in one place for very long, and Sawyer not really helping much and smart mouthing off showed how he only looks out for himself.  Things were happening, but the focus was very much on the characters. 

Later episodes with the flashbacks, further illustrated this character focus, showing that all the characters were lost long before they got on the island.  The natural end for the show would be for those characters to find themselves, which is how the series did end.  They found themselves in the sideways world (the afterlife) when they remembered the island and remembered each other.  They found themselves through each other.  If that was your expectations of the series Lost, then the finale was perfect.  It resolved the original promise of lost souls finding their way.

But that wasn’t the only promise in the pilot episode.  The island itself became a character.  The black smoke monster was introduced as well, showing that the island was far from ordinary.  And in part two of the pilot, there was a polar bear and the French woman’s transmitting message.  The mystery of the island was also presented with Charlie’s famous line, “Guys, where are we?”  

Every week the mystery of the island deepened with the others and the hatch and the darma initiative, and while many things were explained, many weren’t.  If you found the mystery of the island more intriguing than the emotional journey of the characters, I’m not surprised you were dissatisfied with the ending.  Because the sideways world detracted from that promise, and in some ways, may have undermined it.

So I believe the take home message from Lost is to be careful to fulfill the promises made to the reader.   Make sure you are delivering the type of story that the audience expects.  The beginning should reflect the ending, and if there is a problem with the ending, maybe you need to revisit the beginning.

Now I got to get back to working on my ending.  :)

~MaryAnn

Even the Noblest Characters Need Flaws

Sheena blogged yesterday about the conflict she has being a parent and a YA writer.  The desire to create believable, flawed teen-aged characters, but at the same time, not making those undesirable behaviors seem acceptable. 

Her post got me thinking about characters who are great role models.  Characters with a strong sense of a moral code, who are self-sacrificing and loyal and always do the right thing even when it costs them everything.  Characters who are real heroes.  While their virtues make these characters admirable, it is their flaws and imperfections that make them lovable.  Even the most noblest of characters needs to be deeply flawed.

Jean Valjean

Jean Valjean is one of the most compelling characters ever, and Les Miserables is in my top five greatest books of all time.  It is an amazing story.   If you haven’t read it, you should.  I believe you can download it onto your e-reader for free, so there really is no excuse.  And watching the musical is not equivalent to reading the book.  The novel is so much deeper and richer.  You really really need to read it (although I do recommend the abridge version).

Warning-mild Spoilers

Jean Valjean starts out as an ex-convict, imprisoned for stealing some bread to help feed his sister and her seven starving children.  When he is finally released from prison (nineteen years later), he is bitter and angry and doesn’t believe in any sort of justice.  He is broken.  But a single act of kindness from a bishop (who shows Valjean mercy even though Valjean stole from him) transforms Valjean into a compassionate, heroic man of faith. 

Valjean makes a lot of sacrifices for others.  He turns himself in to save another man who Javert (the policeman obsessed with bringing Valjean to justice) thinks is him.   He is generous even when he is running from the law and his generosity attracts too much attention and many times brings the law down on him.  He devotes his life to care for an orphan girl named Cosette who has no one but him to take care of her.  He even is willingly buried alive at one point to help her. 

But his noble and self-sacrificing traits are not what makes him such a compelling character.  He constantly struggles to hide from the law and keep Cosette safe.  All the while, he is plagued with self-doubt and moral dilemmas.  And because he has devoted his life to Cosette, he struggles with letting her go even though it is what is best for her.  At one point, he even selfishly tries to keep her from Marius, the boy she loves although later he risks his life to save Marius for her, but still, doing the right thing is hard for him to do.

It is Valjean’s self-doubt, his moments of selfishness, and his struggle to do what is right that makes him a sympathetic and compelling.  His flaws are what makes him feel real.

Jack from Lost

I’ve been re-watching Lost on Netflix lately, so I got Lost on my mind.  Jack is one of my favorite characters.  He definitely has an interesting story-arc and grows more than any other character on the show.  In fact, he kind of does a 180˚. 

Jack is a noble character.  He is self-sacrificing to a fault.  He is always thinking of everyone else before himself and makes a compassionate and inspiring leader.  Out of everyone on the show, I think he is the most admirable character, but he as deeply flawed as the rest of them.

His desire to save everyone is as much a flaw as a virtue.  His wife leaves him because of his devotion to his job and his unrelenting need to fix everyone.  He ruins his already shaky relationship with his father because he refuses to cover for his father’s malpractice (sure this was the moral thing to do, but Jack pays a steep price for doing it).  And ultimately, Jack’s inability to save everyone on the island breaks him, and he is only whole again once he sacrifices himself to save those that are left.

In his attempts to save everyone, Jack struggles and struggles, and so many times he makes the wrong decisions that only complicates their problems.    He is quick to act and slow to think, closed minded, plagued with self-doubt, and has some serious anger issues.

And just like with Jean Valjean, it is these faults that make him interesting, and his constant struggle that makes him feel real.

The Real World

In real life no one is perfect, but a lot of times we like to appear that we are.  I feel this happens a lot in my community.  Everyone is almost afraid to admit that they struggle in life.  We all try to pretend that our marriages are ideal, our houses are always clean, our bills are always paid on time, and our children are always obedient, talented, and brilliant in every way.

I don’t know if people are like this everywhere, or just where I live, maybe it’s an issue with middle class America, but I feel like we are almost afraid to admit that we are human, that we struggle.  But I think this perfect image that we try to project holds us back and keeps us from really connecting with each other.

The people I am closest too have seen the ideal version of me stripped away.  They have seen my insecurities, my stupidity, my vulnerability, my arrogance, my doubts, my selfishness, my weirdness, and I have seen the worst in them as well.  But those parts of ourselves that we work so hard to hide, that we fear will make us unlikable actually can make us more lovable, because these are the aspects of ourselves that we struggle with, the parts of us that are damaged, that make us real, that make us human.

And this is exactly why characters need to be flawed.  They need to be sympathetic.  They need to struggle.  They need to be human.

 ~MaryAnn

How to Make the Ensemble Work: Lessons from LOST

I’m a big fan of LOST. In fact to this day, I still mourn the loss of it. I know a lot of fans were disappointed with the finale, but for me it worked. The story delivered the promises that it made to me. A lot of viewers got caught up into the mystery of the island, but to me, the story was always about the castaways. Characters who were metaphorically lost and could only find themselves after they became literally lost.

Recently I found the entire series of LOST on Netflix, and I started watching the first season. I’m as drawn in as I was the first time. LOST wasn’t perfect, but it did do a lot of things right, and I know I’ll have more to say about it especially the ending, but that will be another post. Right now I want to talk about how LOST made an ensemble cast work.

The Awesomeness of a good ensemble

In stories with a true ensemble, there really isn’t one protagonist but a group of main characters, and these stories tend to focus on the relationships between the main characters. In LOST, it is clear that Jack is the main protagonist but just barely. For the most part, there was a core group of characters that the series focused on.

But even if a story has one clear protagonist, developing other main characters and creating a core group can really make a story special. Part of the magic of Harry Potter was the engaging large cast of interesting and well-developed secondary and side characters. I really don’t think the Harry Potter books would not have done as well without Hermoine, Ron, Dumbledore, Snape, etc.

I’ve read a lot of high fantasy novel with a core group of characters on some sort of quest. Even though there usually is one main protagonist, the dynamics of the group is very important. In fact, the stories that stayed with me the most were the ones which made me connect to almost every character in the party like Lord of the Rings, The Belgariad, and Harry Potter. Putting together an engaging ensemble of characters can really make your story shine.

How to make an ensemble work

The series LOST gives us lots of valuable insights in how to make an ensemble cast work.

1. Work the characters into the ensemble slowly. Nothing is worse for a reader than to be thrown into a large group of characters with no real focus. The reader quickly gets lost and loses interest.

LOST started with Jack. He was the first character on screen, and he anchored the audience through the first episode. All of the other characters were there in the chaos, but Jack was the focus, and he slowly introduced us to the other characters as he met them. The other characters take turns being the focus of later episodes, and really it takes almost the entire first season for all the main characters to be fully introduced.

Character introductions are important. Don’t rush into establishing all the players. Introduce a few characters at a time, and let the others be a mystery as the plot unfolds. Wait for the right time to make them the focus and reveal their backstory.

2. Every character needs an interesting backstory. LOST spends a lot of time on backstories for the main characters, and it is done really well. It accentuates who they are and who they become.

There is Jack with a complicated relationship with his dad, and even in his backstory, he is trying to save everyone. Then there is Sawyer who while trying to find the man who was indirectly responsible for the death of his parents actually becomes the man he’s been hunting and hating all those years. Hurley uses the numbers he hears a man repeating in a mental institution in the lottery and wins the multimillion dollar jackpot, only to be plagued with bad luck thereafter. All the main characters of LOST have rich, detailed, often heartbreaking backstories that are just as rich and fascinating as what is happening on the island.

Honestly, most stories should not go into this much detail about backstory. LOST was telling two stories in most of the episodes, the backstory of a character and that character’s present experience on the island. The backstory paralleled what was happening on the island, which was really quite brilliant. This fit the story that the writers of LOST were trying to tell, but it doesn’t work for all stories.

Still backstory is important. In fact, I feel that it is essential for good characterization. So making interesting, detailed backstories for all the characters in the ensemble will make them feel like real characters whether or not that backstory is revealed. Everyone in the group should have their own motive for going on the adventure or being a part of the group outside of the main character. This will make all the characters in the ensemble come to life.

3. The characters interact with each other in big and small ways. In watching the first season of LOST again since it first aired, I was surprised by how many times the characters interacted with each other in small ways that weren't big plot turns.

I remembered the big things like Locke befriending Walt, Charlie and Claire's romance, and Jack and Sayid torturing Sawyer, but I didn’t remember all the small interactions like Hurley trying to fish with Jin, Sawyer giving Charlie Claire’s diary, or Jack pushing Boone aside to resuscitate Rose. These were all small moments, but they gave the impression that these characters were interacting with each other even when they were off screen. It made it feel as if these people were really living together which sets up the strong relationships that developed later.

A lot of times in my reading of high fantasy adventure stories, we see the protagonist getting to know all of other characters in the group, but what is sometimes missing is that interaction between the other characters without the protagonist involved. I know this is hard to do especially when the protagonist is the main focus, but if you can subtly work in moments showing glimpses of how the supporting characters interact with each other to give the impression that there is more going on beween them than what is on screen or on the page. This will give the ensemble realistic group dynamics that make them feel like a real people instead of a bunch of characters following the protagonist around to service a plot.

4. Conflict, conflict, conflict. LOST is chock-full of conflict. First of all, they are stuck on deserted island that is pretty creepy with whispers and an unseen monster that tears people apart. If that isn’t enough, they are not the only people on the island, and the others are rather hostile.

But that isn’t all the conflict. Every character has internal conflict, Jack’s insecurities on being a leader, Sayid’s guilt, Sawyer’s inability to connect with others, Charlie’s lack of self-confidence, and Michael’s struggle to be a good father. Then there are also conflicts between the characters. Jin suspects Michael is interested in his wife. Boone doesn’t want Sayid to “date” his sister. Michael thinks Locke is undermining his authority with his son. And Sawyer clashes with pretty much everyone.

If you throw a bunch of people together in any setting, there will be conflicts between them. A group that always gets along is not only uninteresting but unrealistic. The characters need to have conflicts with each other in order to feel like real people.

The thing about conflict is that it can push people apart and draw them together. It can strengthen or challenge relationships, and I feel that in real life, you can’t have a meaningful relationship without some sort of conflict.

The moments I really liked in LOST were the moments that they all came together. Whenever there was a bigger threat, they put their differences aside and banded together like when Jack, Sayid, Locke, Sawyer, and Kate went after Ethan who was threatening to kill them one by one. Those were the moments when you could see relationships forming, when they learned to trust and depend on each other. You need moments like that to make an ensemble work.

Some parting thoughts

LOST had a pretty big ensemble cast. That works well for a TV series that has a lot of time to develop characters and plot lines. But in writing novels, small groups work better. You should have the smallest group possible to tell the story. That gives more space to really develop those character and relationships to make the ensemble really memorable.

So I want to know what you think. What are some of your most favorite ensembles in books, TV, or movies, and why do you think they worked?

~MaryAnn