Character Profiling - A Must? or A Miss?

[Deleted member 604]

"Characterisation is an accident that flows out of action and dialogue." ~ Jack Woodford ~ True? or False?

Writers,

We all know one of the most important elements in a novel is - Characterisation: making the characters seem vivid, real, alive. Not mere cardboard cut-outs deprived of human-like qualities such as - Flesh, bone, mind and soul etc.

I've just started several Character Profiles for both my major and minor dramatis personae so to speak in my new work of fiction.

The purpose of a character profile is twofold: to assist the writer in creating a character that is as lifelike as possible and to help with continuity issues in the story.
True or False?

In many bestselling authors interviews I have seen and read: They said that they came up with the basics of a character's personality and then they found that the character just "came alive" for them and ended up driving the story all on his own. These are writers with years of experience developing characters and it now comes more naturally to them. But for the beginning writer, sometimes a more concrete approach is helpful. Do you agree or disagree?

That is where the character profile comes in -- it is simply a tool for organising your thoughts about a certain character and keeping track of a particular character's idiosyncrasies and relationships. It can help flesh out a cardboard character and even make you think about facets of his or her personality that you had not considered before. Character profiles are especially helpful for novels which involve several main characters and for stories which use multiple points of view.
In my case fantasy writers use character profiles to keep track of factors such as magical abilities, family lineage, spells the character is under, and limitations on the character's power to ensure continuity in the action etc.

The Character Profile of one of my main characters is, currently 3 pages long and a word-count of 665.
When is it too much or not enough?
I would love your thoughts on this and like me do you use Character Profiling.
Are they worth doing? Do we really benefit from using them?
Kindest Regards,
Alix

 

[Tim James]

I find (and I am not in any way advocating this) that my characters build themselves as I write the first draft so that the character I end up with for the novel is a lot more "fleshed out" than when I start writing.

It is usually only when I start the editing of the first draft that I write down a full character profile for each of my main characters, so that I can check and revise and enhance the earlier parts of the draft, where my concept of the character may have been no more than just a name and a gender, if that.

I realise to some writers that would seem very strange. "How can you write about someone if you don't know how they will react and what they look like?" Fair point, but it seems to work for me.

As I said, when I start to write a story my characters are often like ghosts with not much definition to them. But each scene they are in prompts me to give them attributes that then bring them alive to me. It's an evolutionary process.

As I said at the start, this may not be the way for everyone, but each to his own.

Are character profiles worth doing? Yes, very much so, and probably the earlier the better.
Do we benefit from using them? Absolutely.

But for me and the way I write, I largely have to agree with the Jack Woodford quote at the start.

 

[Carol Rose]

Because I write character-driven stories, I’ve always done in depth character profiles before I write. But as I write, those characters often reveal facets I never thought of or saw coming. It’s powerful when it happens, but can totally derail a plot. LOL!

 

[RK Wallis]

I did start with bits and pieces like defining backstory moments, key personality traits, quirks but the more I write I’ve whittled it done to “I like...” I hate.....” “I want more than anything...” and then , yes, I now relate to that quote.

 

[CageSage]

For something a little different (and yes, I did once start with a full profile idea of a character), what I do now is a beat sheet for every character in the story - after all, they're all the heroes of their own story, right? That gives the motivation for the character to be in the story, their agenda, goal, drives - and how they will oppose or ally with the main character and that journey.
The next part may seem a bit unusual, but as I write something that defines the character - physically - I put that down on the beat sheet. I may not have a full picture of the character when I start, but I certainly know that character very deeply at the end. Every one of them. And why they need to be there.
But I don't like to read a laundry list of character elements or descriptions, I'd rather 'see' the picture myself, without too many already written rules associated with how the character looks. Feel is stronger, I go for feel, with just a bit of description, and only as it's req'd.

 

[Dan Payne]

Just writing, and letting your characters flesh themselves out as the story progresses, carries the danger of writing the same characterisation into multiple characters. After all, the actions and responses these characters take to the stimuli around them has to come from somewhere. If it's coming from something in your subconscious, you may find (and I have certainly found in some of my writing) that you've written yourself into the story. It's particularly egregious when you end up with several different copies of yourself in a story, some of them the wrong gender.

The most obvious outcome of this is that the characters all sound the same. That's a fine balancing act because you want your 'voice' to be consistent throughout the book and throughout all of your books, but you also want every character in every book to have a life of their own. If you can take the dialogue from one character and put it into another's mouth and it still sounds okay, chances are you're doing it wrong.

Established, experienced writers may be able to write off-the-cuff characters effectively without planning. A good character might surprise the author, responding to a threat or opportunity in a way that the author had not planned. This can be an amazing experience in the writing. This will not be all writers, though: for some of us that requires planning and profiling, and serious thought to be given to your character's upbringing and goals. Every character grows as s/he is written, but I think if you don't want to grow clones, you need to have at least a sketch of both who every character is, and who they see themselves as.

 

[DRFerron]

I keep an A5 notebook for each character. I don't know when a minor character may come forward in a future book and I want to know all about him or her, too. I keep more than sketches, they are almost mini-biographies and some backstory scenes are potential short stories. If I'm stuck and can't go forward in my novel, I'll pull out a character notebook and read what I've written, maybe add more, and typically get to a point where inspiration strikes.

 

[Paul Whybrow]

I compile character profiles for the heroes and villains of my crime novel series and also for the protagonists of various novellas. As much as anything, defining them shows respect and reinforces who they are; they stay alive in my mind.

A couple of times, a character who was the focus of a short story or novella migrated into one of my Cornish Detective novels. For example, my protagonist detective suffers from a bad back, so I had him go along to a shiatsu massage therapist. Rather than make up a fresh character, I lifted her from a novella where she was already fleshed out.

A couple of aspects of creating character profiles that I missed early on were basic facts and idiosyncrasies. Thus, I neglected to give my detective a birthdate, though I later found a suitable time gap that hadn't been used in the five stories. What makes people strange helps to make them real—and can be used for comedic effect. The muscle man of my detective squad is a big as a wardrobe, his very presence intimidates suspects into cooperating, but he's terrified of water—getting seasick crossing a puddle.

Other things to consider are: food preferences, phobias, allergies, taste in music, books and clothing, perfume/aftershave and insecurities about self-image. What do they do in their leisure time?

Apart from established reoccurring characters, I also sketch out profiles for people yet to appear. Sometimes these are based on news stories, where something peculiar has happened, that provides momentary wonder, but which could be spun out into part of a plot.

I also keep two files of character names—one is for everyone who's appeared in my novels, for, after all, I am worldbuilding, and they might appear again. To assist me in naming minor characters, I record local names culled from reading blogs and media stories about Cornwall, which has some distinctive family names, such as Bolitho, Trescothick, Furze, Kittow, Tyzac and Barnicoat. It all helps to give a sense of place.

Mind you, it sometimes feels like these figments of my imagination are banging on the walls of the desktop file, begging to appear in the next story!

 

[yanapuma]

I do character profiles and also use a model called the 'Enneagram' personality prognosis to give my characters an extra dimension. You'll find it onj the web somwwhere ... the more detail you have ... how they may behave and in what circumstances is useful I think ...

 

[Robert M Derry]

I think you need to do whatever you need to do to get into that character's head. I do draft character profiles, but they're never more than a page and I don't bother with the 'favourite (food/book/film etc)' type questions as I find them to be quite ancillary to my character's personality.

I tend to focus a lot more on motivations & desires as this ensures that my characters fit within the context of the plot.

I'd suggest that you need to write enough to give you a grounding of your character and then get started. If you find yourself writing notes for the sake of it you're probably procrastinating.

 

[Eva Ulian]

I'm ashamed to admit this, but I have no idea how my characters come to be. I just know, I've met them, in whole or in part, somewhere in real life.

 

[Amber]

I haven't ever used them. I've tried to write one once or twice but I'm terrible about sticking to it. I think they can be helpful though.

 

[Patricia]

Because I write character-driven stories, I’ve always done in depth character profiles before I write. But as I write, those characters often reveal facets I never thought of or saw coming. It’s powerful when it happens, but can totally derail a plot. LOL!

Isn’t that wonderful when it happens, because as the plot veers off in an unexpected direction, you find yourself reenergised by new options?
It’s taken me a while to appreciate the benefits of character profiles; although I may still have a way to go-mine are usually no longer than a single sheet of A4. In my very first novel when I had no idea what a character profile was, let alone how to construct one, I felt frustrated that although all my ancillary characters were fleshed out and believable, my main character was a blank, a cipher, with no real reason for her actions. In the end I had to begin to write a prequel to finally get to know her. Perhaps a well thought out character profile would have saved me a lot of trouble.

 

[Steve C]

I'm ashamed to admit this, but I have no idea how my characters come to be. I just know, I've met them, in whole or in part, somewhere in real life.

Same here. I have almost completed my first novel and all the characters are a mix of people I have known. I use very little description but let the dialogue and story lead the way. So far I have refrained from a lot of description and the leading lady has no specific eye or hair colouring but works as a model so we know she has a good figure. She burns toast and is often late so we know she is scatty. The reader can decide the rest. Giving the reader the freedom to imagine is I think more important than setting characters in stone. Having said that I am a first timer so may have it all wrong.

 

[Webbwalker]

...the character just "came alive" for them and ended up driving the story all on his own.
This is how my stories happen, every time. I've never written a character profile, though it sounds like an interesting exercise. My characters tend to simply appear, almost fully-fleshed. It's plots I have trouble with.

 

[Nikky Lee]

I don't write character profiles in the traditional sense (or at least I don't think I do). My characters tend to evolve as I write and I'll often go back and rework any defining details in as I go--and keep notes on that to help with consistency (i.e. physical traits, fears, desires etc). That said, one of the characters in my major WIP was based on a profile exercise I did at a writer's gathering--I liked it so much I decided to use it. Curiously, a lot of my betas have said they liked this character the most, so perhaps it is something I should do more often.

...the character just "came alive" for them and ended up driving the story all on his own.
This is how my stories happen, every time. I've never written a character profile, though it sounds like an interesting exercise. My characters tend to simply appear, almost fully-fleshed. It's plots I have trouble with.

I am the exact opposite--we should trade notes! Plot? No problem! Character? Well...

 

[Dan Payne]

It's plots I have trouble with

But plots come from character. Situation + characters = plot. The trick to being an author is to find a way to shape the plot in a way that brings the reader to a satisfactory ending. I don't see how you could do it the other way around: a plot without character isn't really a plot, is it? No good plot survives its first encounter with the characters...

 

[yanapuma]

But plots come from character. Situation + characters = plot. The trick to being an author is to find a way to shape the plot in a way that brings the reader to a satisfactory ending. I don't see how you could do it the other way around: a plot without character isn't really a plot, is it? No good plot survives its first encounter with the characters...

I think this is a common problem with some writers ... and I count myself among them ... good with character and dialogue not so good with structure and plot or the other way around good at structure and plot not so good with character ... different sides of the brain required for these two ...

 

[Tim James]

I think this is a common problem with some writers ... and I count myself among them ... good with character and dialogue not so good with structure and plot or the other way around good at structure and plot not so good with character ... different sides of the brain required for these two ...

Character is touchy-feely, plot is logical and methodical. (Vast generalisation there, sorry!)

 

[Deleted member 604]

@Dan Payne and @yanapuma,
I think like people, personality wise we are different and in saying that, I think we are different as writers and we both have weaknesses but are stronger in other parts of our writing. And truth be told, I think that imperfection is what makes us distinctive in our writing style. Actually, light bulb moment I will do a thread on that one, well a Brainpick at some point.
And we shape out our stories and plots differently.
What may necessarily work for one writer may not for another.
And as a writer myself, of fantasy some things come to me much easier than other components and ingredients do.
Writing Fantasy alone can be complex and tedious.
For example I have written my plot which by the way is totally different to a synopsis. And I find even though I have plotted a certain Chapter, I must picture and experience how I start that chapter in several different ways before I decide which one I will choose. And it takes me a few days to do such.
You have to remember Chapter openings alone is a writing device of sorts and you must decide on the most effective way to open that Chapter which appeals to the readers not you as a writer the most. Same when it comes to your characters they must appeal to your readers, they must have flaws, their habits and personality must reflect how they behave in a given choice, circumstance and if they have super powers they must be persistent and not appear out of the blue which can happen if you have some plot-holes so to speak.
So for me plotting my characters from head to toe and everything else in between is just as important as plotting the story itself. And when you put two of them together, the result is, what can I say, phenomenal.

 

[CageSage]

Character is touchy-feely, plot is logical and methodical. (Vast generalisation there, sorry!)

To be the one who disagrees with the above statement, I give forth my reasoning -

A definition of story I like to keep in the front of my planning process is similar to this:
A character in conflict who struggles through difficulties in order to seek resolution.
The character is the one who moves the plot through the obstacles - so it's the actions of the character that define the plot.
If a character has no conflicts in their life, they have no aims, no aims, no story goal.
The whole thing is a generalised form of logic placed inside the person who's going to carry the story to the reader.
There is no touchy-feely with character - they have a purpose, a big, whole-of-story purpose (along with a scene purpose for every scene), otherwise, it's just a stroll through [somewhere].
If the story has no conflict - both internal and external - there's no arc, if it has no obstacles, there's no way to demonstrate the changes to the character, or to define the path to reach the goal (resolution), if the story has no goal ... no more said. No aim in life is the same as sitting home and watching a blank telly screen.

 

[Dan Payne]

The character is the one who moves the plot through the obstacles - so it's the actions of the character that define the plot.

The big exception to this is grand science fiction. I'm reading SevenEves by Neal Stephenson atm, and so far the characters have existed solely to serve the plot. None of them have become major throughlines of the novel, which is all about the big science fiction concepts and how people respond to stimuli, rather than specific people. (Possibly there are novels in this form in other genres I don't read - James A Michener for some reason suggests himself.) These novels work in large-scale plot that covers many characters. When you're only sketching characters for a scene or two, maybe a chapter, you can do what you like with them.

There's a place for such fiction - heck, I used to write like that. But most modern fiction is not like that and most novels now require a single character, or at most a few, to experience the plot for us. The character seeking to attain a goal and push through obstacles is the reader's entry point to the story, the viewpoint through which one experiences the plot, and if the plot is not being affected by the choices the character makes, it's not going to turn out great.

Building your plot and then inserting a major character or two and working out, for each scene, what that character needs to do to move the plot forward, then working back to discover why the character would do that thing in each scene, seems like working backwards. Some writers can make it work. Sometimes, though, you get The Walking Dead - for which the primary criticism is always "Why would they do something that stupid/out of character? - Oh, it's to make sure that this other event happens as planned." It can produce those enormous set pieces that inspire us to write the story in the first place; there's a lot of satisfaction in seeing all the cogs of your story aligning, your characters all doing their bit, But readers can sometimes - often? - tell when a character is serving the plot and not the other way around.

As always, YMMV.

 

[Eva Ulian]

I believe much depends on what kind of a writer you are, and what kind of books you write. With commercial fiction, all, and I mean all, depends on the plot- think of Dan Brown's Da Vinci Code- it doesn't matter how badly written it is- the plot's the thing that sold that book in its millions, and the characters took second place.

Yet books that made it to the classics are character driven and the plot takes second place- take D.H. Lawrence and Women in love, we don't remember what it's about, but we certainly remember Glenda Jackson as Ursula.

However, thrillers like "The Eye of the Needle" have both strong plot and strong characters... of whom Stephen King is a master.

 

[yanapuma]

All fiction serious and popular have strong interesting characters ... Da Vinci code is really what Hollywood calls high concept and in that case the plot can reign supreme and this is also true of sci-fi ... however all the rest ... Tom Sawyer Oliver Twist Holden Caufield Randle Mc Murphy Begbie, Sick Boy, Renton, Spud Heathcliff Jay Gatsby George and Lenny Philip Marlowe Jack Torrance ...............

 

[RK Wallis]

I'm reading Larry Brooks' Story Engineering and he's shed a new light on the Da Vinci Code for me. Seems it struck a deeper cord with readers because of it's theme:

It was about the veracity of the dominant religion of Western culture. It was about a speculated truth that had been, according to the story, swept under the rug of time. It was about the lengths people will go to in the name of what they believe. On a thematic level, this was what the story was all about.

Brooks, Larry. Story Engineering (pp. 117-118). F+W Media. Kindle Edition.

 

[CageSage]

The big exception to this is grand science fiction. I'm reading SevenEves by Neal Stephenson atm, and so far the characters have existed solely to serve the plot. None of them have become major throughlines of the novel, which is all about the big science fiction concepts and how people respond to stimuli, rather than specific people. (Possibly there are novels in this form in other genres I don't read - James A Michener for some reason suggests himself.) These novels work in large-scale plot that covers many characters. When you're only sketching characters for a scene or two, maybe a chapter, you can do what you like with them.

There's a place for such fiction - heck, I used to write like that. But most modern fiction is not like that and most novels now require a single character, or at most a few, to experience the plot for us. The character seeking to attain a goal and push through obstacles is the reader's entry point to the story, the viewpoint through which one experiences the plot, and if the plot is not being affected by the choices the character makes, it's not going to turn out great.

Building your plot and then inserting a major character or two and working out, for each scene, what that character needs to do to move the plot forward, then working back to discover why the character would do that thing in each scene, seems like working backwards. Some writers can make it work. Sometimes, though, you get The Walking Dead - for which the primary criticism is always "Why would they do something that stupid/out of character? - Oh, it's to make sure that this other event happens as planned." It can produce those enormous set pieces that inspire us to write the story in the first place; there's a lot of satisfaction in seeing all the cogs of your story aligning, your characters all doing their bit, But readers can sometimes - often? - tell when a character is serving the plot and not the other way around.

As always, YMMV.

I think this form of storytelling is replacing the original 'new adventure' style of stories. Go West, young man - seek your fortune in worlds as yet unknown ...

However, it can fall apart for readers if they don't get a sense of the 'why do this'?
The genre of speculative fiction has the hardest format to define in terms of the emotional attachment req'd - for hard sci-fi, it's the tech as much as the ground covered that's the adventure (new mind-boggling tech, or science, or ???); for others, it's the 'new world, new dream' connection.

As long as it's a good story, I'm in. But a story needs someone to show how to traverse this landscape (person, being, entity, sentience).
And, yes, YMMV.

 

[Dan Payne]

I sometimes think of it like this: Plot is made up of what the characters do. Character is why they do it.

Getting back to the original topic, if you have a plot where characters do something, there is character in it, even if you haven't written out a detailed character profile. The actors must have personal reasons for doing what they do. But possibly the author hasn't thought through these reasons and these characters, which exist because of the exigencies of plot, can take them by surprise.

I don't write this way; I don't write detailed character profiles, but I know who they are before I start constructing the plot. I imagine a problem 'pantsers' might come up against is that the requirements of the plot might require actions of the actors that don't match the characterisations previously established. Maybe someone who's been there can elucidate on the topic.

 

[CageSage]

I sometimes think of it like this: Plot is made up of what the characters do. Character is why they do it.

Getting back to the original topic, if you have a plot where characters do something, there is character in it, even if you haven't written out a detailed character profile. The actors must have personal reasons for doing what they do. But possibly the author hasn't thought through these reasons and these characters, which exist because of the exigencies of plot, can take them by surprise.

I don't write this way; I don't write detailed character profiles, but I know who they are before I start constructing the plot. I imagine a problem 'pantsers' might come up against is that the requirements of the plot might require actions of the actors that don't match the characterisations previously established. Maybe someone who's been there can elucidate on the topic.

I can't remember where I saw/heard it, but I follow the idiom of 'we are what we do, not what we say' - which applies to characters in story as much as people irl.
I can't speak as a pantser - all my characters have a beat sheet that determines what their motivation is - they have a reason to be there, and feel strongly about their rights to pursue their goal. All of them. The conflict may come from their inner values and how those values are tested through the trials of the story ... much fun that way lies!

I think what I do has been referred to as the same as method acting, but applied to writing - it creates a depth, an honesty, to the inner realm of the character.
Okay, there might be one or two moments when ...
anyway, back to the topic at hand: profiles - I think my profiles don't have much to do with what a person looks like, but what their inner self is, and I wrap an interesting package around that inner shape. Yes, I think the main character should be an interesting person, memorable, real, and as I find the 'external' specifics, these are things I put in the profile page. But what they look like is not who they are.

 

[Webbwalker]

I am the exact opposite--we should trade notes! Plot? No problem! Character? Well...

Lol. It's an interesting process, co--writing. I used to do it a lot. I wrote an almost-successful sitcom with a contributor, and used to write short stories with a friend who is no longer a friend - an ultimately less successful collaboration.

@Nmlee, I'm interested in your process. Do you write your story first, then people it with characters?

But plots come from character. Situation + characters = plot.

I can't write a plot ahead of time. My characters write my plot. I visualise them in a setting, and then just take dictation. My first drafts are always easy and great fun to write. It's the subsequent editing, literal years of fine-tuning, that's the hard part.

 

[Carol Rose]

Hey gang, let's remember this is a discussion, not a competition. All our thoughts and opinions are valid, whether you agree with others or not. The Prime Directive includes not taking offense, and not offending. Okay? We can agree to disagree. Discussions do not include calling others out and explaining why you believe you're right and they're wrong, or vice versa. I'd hate to shut down this thread because it contains a lot of useful information. Thanks.