Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Obviosity


I know at this point in my blogging career, readers have probably lost count of the number of things I’ve listed as literary pet peeves, but let me add this one: excessively quirky characters.

You know what I’m talking about:
Her name is Calliope and she’s a welder by day, an assassin by night. Her assassin’s weapon of choice? A spear gun! The darts of which have been dipped in radioactive curare! (Can curare be radioactive? I’ve never heard of that.) She loves mah-jongg, cranberry gelato, and dyes her hair a different color each day (Really? How does she have time to do that with all the assassinating and welding she’s doing?) She's on a mission to unearth the truth about her missing parents, both of whom were circus freaks/CPAs. (So they can, like, do my taxes while swallowing flaming swords or something? I'd actually pay extra for that, assuming they could get me a decent refund.)
Come on.

I think the reason for these sorts of over-the-top characterizations is that we authors are trying to avoid making obvious choices about what characters should be or act like.

I’m sympathetic. I am. Nobody likes to feel like they’re trotting out clichés at every turn. There have been many times I’ve taken out references or changed direction plot-wise because I decided I was being too obvious (read: lazy) in my narrative choices.

So, yeah, obviously one should avoid being too obvious. But let’s not swing too far in the opposite direction either. I’m sure we can all count on one finger the number of people we know who are internationally-sought-after computer hackers and also accomplished flamenco dancers.

Have you ever created something—a plot twist, a relationship, a setting—and thought, “Hmm. No, that’s far too obvious.” What did you do about it?

And since no one says the word, “Obviously,” like Alan Rickman, I leave you with this:



(Reminder: To leave a comment, first click on the post title. 
The comment box will then come up at the bottom.)

Comments (14)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
No, you're not allowed to ponder this. You've got revising to do, missy.
I'll have to think about it. Wow. I've been M.I.A. with comments. Still working on revisions, stuff like that will do it to you. I hope you are well.
1 reply · active 702 weeks ago
Christine! Good to hear from you!

Revisions are indeed the blackest of black holes. You're lucky you're even allowed out into the daylight while you're working on them.
I think you forgot that Calliope is also in the throes of planning a lavish wedding to a dark and brooding circus master who has a misshapen head resulting from a large benign brain tumor...or is it? Because what's a quirky character without a complicated love interest?

My first chapter had some obviosity in it, but I was blind to it. That's why I find trusted and clever critique partners (ahem cough).
1 reply · active 701 weeks ago
Yeah, the problem with obviosity is that there's sometimes a fine line between: "this choice makes the most sense/is the most true-to-life" and "this choice has been done a thousand times."

I've been struggling with this on my WiP. Sigh.
PEOPLE like this are my pet peeve. And since I live in L.A., one of the west coast hubs of hipsterdom, I see this a lot.
1 reply · active 701 weeks ago
Oh, don't even get me going on actual PEOPLE! I think I may need to create a separate blog for that and call it: Here's What's Wrong With the World. :)

And, yes, I imagine L.A. is the capital of needless, inexplicable quirkiness.
I had to watch that clip even though I've seen it hundreds of times. Alan Rickman is so awesome! It is super hard not be swing either too cliche or too quirky, but it's the less is more rule, you know. A quirk or two? Endearing. All quirk, all the time? Tiring. So, maybe one clue is that if we get tired of keeping track of our characters quirks, they have to many. Eh?
1 reply · active 701 weeks ago
Yes, perhaps it's like that "What Not to Wear" rule of dressing yourself and not over-accessorizing: Look in the mirror right before you leave and remove one thing. Voila! Perfection.
Ob-vious-ly. And I love him smacking Ron in the head with the book. (How I've wanted to do that in class from time to time!!)

I don't want to genre-bash, but I think one place where we see a lot of over-done quirkiness is in the cozy mysteries. I used to read a lot of those, say about 10 or 12 years ago, but I got pretty tired of just the thing you're talking about. Either it works (Stephanie Plum) -- or it just plain falls flat. I
1 reply · active 701 weeks ago
Yeah, maybe with mysteries, I'll spot you an extra quirk or two. I mean, if you're a killer, you've got to have some bizarre reason for doing people in beyond the usual "she's a psychopath" thing. That's sooooo obvious.

Why not have a character who's motivated by the desire to turn her ex-lovers or anyone who crosses her into life-size garden gnomes?
I happen to like quirky characters, but, true, overly over-the-top characters are...peevish.
I think it does depend on the genre and setting. And how well an author can pull quirky off. Clearly a fantasy is different than a contemporary or literary piece.

Also, I like the name Calliope. :)

Have a lovely weekend,
Lola
Feeling lazy (blame the flu shot) but since I couldn't just "like" this post like I really wanted to, I'm here, letting you know with *words*. Anyway, the funny thing about obviosities is some characters are written so uniquely well that I become confounded if the lab tech on a new cop drama doesn't wear purple lipstick and black ponytails. I mean, how can they possibly do their job well if they don't have a spider web tattooed on their neck?

Post a new comment

Comments by