Showing posts with label characterization. Show all posts
Showing posts with label characterization. Show all posts

Monday, July 30, 2012

Psychic Distance

by Jodie Renner, freelance editor

Steve Berry, in his workshop at Craftfest, the first two days of Thrillerfest, spoke about “psychic distance”—how close the reader feels to the various characters. These days, it’s considered more effective to draw your readers in “up close and personal” to your protagonist, so they get more emotionally invested in him and his plight, and want to keep turning the pages to find out what happens to him. Conversely, it’s best to keep minor characters and walk-ons at an emotional distance proportionate to their importance to the story.

The following list shows examples of ways to refer to your characters in your book, starting way out in the distance, in omniscient point of view (or from the POV of a character referring to another “walk-on”), then gradually moving closer as the characters become more important to the story, until we’re right in their heads, in close third POV (or first-person POV), seeing and feeling what they are, reacting right along with them. This list is based on Steve’s hierarchy, but expanded by me, with more details added.

Starting from furthest out and going down to right in their heads, refer to your characters as:

· Generalities: person, people, kids, teenagers, men, women, office workers, moms, taxi drivers, police officers, man, woman, etc.

· By their title, job, profession, etc. without their name, eg. the detective, the police officer, the reporter, the cab driver, the waitress, the hotel clerk, etc.

· Title plus name, eg. Detective Jackson, FBI Agent Michael Smith, etc.

· First and last name without job title or descriptor – Cotton Malone, Wade Jackson

· Last name only – Malone, Jackson

· First name only – Cotton, Wade

· “he,” “she,” “I”

Steve Berry will start out a book with the full name of his POV character, for example, Cotton Malone, to get us right into his head fast. He doesn’t start with “the former Justice Department operative” as that’s too distancing for the protagonist, whom we’re supposed to identify with and bond with quickly. Then Berry immediately switches to just Malone, and works in later that he retired from the Justice Department. Berry doesn’t use the full name again, as that would put us back at arm’s length from the character. Using their title as well as the name (Detective Wade Jackson) would back up the reader even more, and once we’re in their head and the story is progressing, using the title alone (“the detective”) would probably make the reader wonder who we’re talking about.

But Berry takes it one step further and prefers to just use “he” most of the time when in Malone’s point of view, to keep the psychic distance to a minimum. In this case, “he” is the equivalent of “I” in first-person point of view. For example, Berry uses Malone’s name, then continues for three pages with just “he”, until the beginning of the next chapter, where he starts with his name again. In another novel, Berry starts out with “Tom Sagan” (his protagonist), then switches to “Tom,” then just uses “he” most of the time. As Steve says, “the tighter the psychic distance, the better it is.”

You may not wish to take it this far, but do remember that if we’re in a character’s head, especially your protagonist, you don’t want to use distancing descriptions of him or her like “the PI” or “the doctor.” It makes sense to start the novel with the full name and title, like “Special Agent Warren Cross” for clarity and to orient the reader quickly, but soon after, you’ll likely switch to “Cross” (or maybe their first name) and stay there. If we’ve been in his head for a while and you suddenly refer to him as “the special agent” it will be very jarring to the reader, who may even wonder if another special agent has arrived on the scene. 

Berry prefers to call female POV characters by their first name, and I tend to agree with him, for the most part. If the female is, say a police officer, in a milieu where everyone refers to each other by their last names, then use her last name when she’s at work, and her first name when she’s at home or among friends. In general, though, it seems more natural to call “close” female characters (and even most males) by their first name, especially when we’re in their viewpoint. Along the same lines, Berry will usually refer to the villain by his last name, even in his POV, to create some psychic distance.

Using a related example, disguised from my own editing, say your young mid-20s male protagonist has hooked up with a female in her early 20s and they’re on the run from the bad guys. Very soon, he’s not thinking of her as “the young lady” (if he ever was—he probably thought of her as “the girl” at the beginning) or “the grad student,” or “the tall, thin girl” or whatever. As their bond increases, he’s thinking of her only by her first name or “she.” And to describe something they’re doing, don’t say “the two young companions” as again, that’s too distancing. It reads like someone else talking about them, but we’re in his head and he’s become very close to her. He’s not thinking of the two of them as “the two young companions.” Just use “they” or “the two” or whatever.

On the other side of the coin, you definitely don’t want to get into the point of view of any minor characters like store clerks, taxi drivers, restaurant servers, etc., and best not to give them a name at all, unless they play a bigger role in the overall plot. Naming these walk-on characters can be distracting to the reader, who starts to think they have more importance somehow. So in general, just stick with “the cab driver,” etc.

What do you think? As a reader, have you ever felt jarred by language that perhaps inadvertently changes the psychic distance between the reader and a character? As a writer, do you have any opinions about this issue?

Copyright © Jodie Renner, July 2012
See also: "Open Your Novel in Your Protagonist's Head"

Jodie Renner, a freelance fiction editor specializing in thrillers and other fast-paced fiction, has published two books to date in her series, An Editor’s Guide to Writing Compelling Fiction: WRITING A KILLER THRILLER and STYLE THAT SIZZLES & PACING FOR POWER (Silver Medal winner in the FAPA Book Awards, 2013). Both titles are available in e-book and paperback. For more info, please visit Jodie’s author website or editor website, or find her on Facebook or Twitter.




Friday, January 6, 2012

The Evil Optimist

By Peg Brantley, Writer at Work, Stumbling Toward Publication



I'm an optimist who can't imagine living life any other way. I work at making the choice to constantly see my world in a fresh and positive way. I would prefer to be a bit naive rather than suspicious and guarded. Not stupid—just not paranoid. For me, this is an easier way to live.

When people find out I write crime fiction—and we get the inevitable and uncomfortable question of my publication status out of the way (sigh)—if they're still interested (and if they're readers, they're still interested), they want to know about where I get my ideas, and finally, they want to know about how such an upbeat person can write about such bad things happening to people.

Maybe what they're really asking is where they need to draw the line regarding our friendship. I know I'm in trouble when, after talking about some of the plots of my books, I'm asked if they are based on personal experience. Usually as my new friend backs toward an exit.

When I write bad things in my books, it's to depict people with the strength to survive those events. People who continue to love and laugh and don't allow trauma to rule their lives. People whose appreciation for life gets bigger as their world gets smaller and uglier. People who, usually, are honest and courageous at some level.

Evil is a choice. Just as love, hate and goodness are choices. Most people (except in my books) choose goodness, but even good people find themselves from time to time facing a part of themselves that is to some degree malevolent. That's how we recognize evil when we see it, or read it. That's how I know how to write it.

I'm an optimist with a bad side. Go figure.