Comments on: Writing Excuses Episode 6: Flaws vs Handicaps

By: Damien

Damien — Sun, 23 Mar 2008 16:19:23 +0000

I just wanted to say that I am really enjoying these ‘casts, as I am working towards [hopefully!] getting published someday.
That being said, I chose a slightly different road for my character. My main character–a “sociopathic mercenary” to combine the terms used in this ‘cast, is at all times viewed from the eyes of the woman who is slowly falling for the tormented inner him, the person he would be if he could lay down his vengeful quest. It starts out simply, and continually works towards complication. She can’t stand him, then she admires his professionalism, then onward.
That being said, I certainly wouldn’t turn down advice from real, published authors…………

By: Mike Barker

Mike Barker — Sat, 22 Mar 2008 01:42:54 +0000

I’ve summarized the talk at http://mbarker.livejournal.com/62729.html

Caught up! Just in time for another episode.

By: Speaker

Speaker — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 20:31:22 +0000

Dan - specifically responding to your earlier response to me but - EXACTLY. I think that’s one of the major appeals of Dexter - he often talks about having to put on a mask to appear normal to everyone else, which is very much a sociopath but… as a geek working in a very old fashioned southern office, it also describes how I feel on a daily basis as well.

Everyone here talks about hunting and football while I keep my opinions on my most recent comic books to myself.

By: Dan Wells

Dan Wells — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 19:26:55 +0000

Hezekiah and 42, I think you both make some really good points, but I maintain my stance that Valjean is not a main character in the second half of the book–not because I have an over-restrictive definition of a protagonist, but because I just don’t think the book is about him any more. Of course, it’s been 15 or so years since I read it, so I might be remembering wrong.

Howard said it best–don’t get bogged down trying to assign hard definitions to a fluid, artistic medium.

By: Howard Tayler

Howard Tayler — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 07:17:09 +0000

Let’s be clear on something: while lots of good literature features main characters with flaws, obviously exploitable character flaws are NOT a requirement. If the story works without them, you don’t have to retcon your analysis of the story, or redefine “flaw” so that the theory fits.

This is art we’re talking about. Not mathematics. It is not absolute.

By: 42

42 — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 01:36:37 +0000

Sorry to keep posting on this discussion.

Dan: So you’re saying that Jean Valjean isn’t the protagonist throughout most of the book? I don’t think I agree with that. It seems like you’ve forced your definition of protagonist on the book. I feel that Jean ValJean remains a protagonist throughout the book. So I guess, I’m not converted to your definition of a protagonist. It feels too constrictive.

Hezekiah: I never really saw Jean Valjean as being overprotective of Cosette in the book. Protective–yes, overprotective–no. It was Cosette’s decision to reject his protectiveness because of what she wanted, not because Jean Valjean’s protection was excessive.

Course, Hezekiah’s response does make me think that perhaps the author doesn’t have complete control over what the reader will deem as a flaw. Readers are free to decide if a character has a flaw even if the author did not intend for that character to have a flaw. Readers are also free to ignore what a author may have intended to be a character flaw.

I still think that for some characters, they have exernal traits that are more than handicaps. The Miracle Worker without a deaf and blind Hellen Keler doesn’t work. Helen Keller may have some internal character flaws, but her external handicaps are driving the conflict of the story. Being deaf and blind are part of her character and drive many of her other character traits, if not all of them. For many characters there are just many external factors that are central to their character.

Course, I’ve heard people argued that Helen Keller is really the antagonist in the Miracle Worker and I can see that as valid.

Also, I guess I’ll always think if Superman as a protagonist even when there are no apparent flaws in him. I don’t know if he needs a flaw.

Antagonist seem like they may need character flaws more than protagonists need them. In fact, I’m not sure it’s a good idea to give flaws to protagonists in stories where there is suppose to be a strong contrast between good an evil.

I’ve probably written too much, I’ll shut up now.

By: Hezekiah

Hezekiah — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 22:24:13 +0000

I’d assert that Valjean remains flawed through most of the story. He is very overprotective of Cosette as he raises her and by necessity has become a little paranoid–that is how he’s responded to being a fugitive. Also, he seems to have some kind of need to make those he loves happy and comfortable. This is what got him into bread-stealing at the very start, what conflicts him in part when he saves the mistaken 24601 from prison, and what gets him mixed up with Cosette (whom I’d vote is a handicap) and the rebellion. That’s a rather counter-intuitive flaw, but it nevertheless is one for someone who is on the run from the law (another handicap). Oh, and even through the end he seems to find it very difficult to forgive himself of minor sins committed decades before, while his forgiveness for others is virtually limitless. I think the story would be very different if he had the ability to step back and say, “Hmm, maybe I can’t burden myself with these other people right now. I’ve got that nasty Javier after me.”

Of course, my understanding of the story is limited to the musical, and so that might ultimately be a different story than the actual book.

By: Dan Wells

Dan Wells — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 19:57:16 +0000

Jean Valjean has several character flaws in the early parts of the book, and by the time he overcomes them the book starts to focus more on other characters. One of the major themes of Les Miserables, actually, are the reactions that normal, flawed people have to a series of more or less flawless characters. Valjean interacts with a priest and some nuns and Cosette’s mom, both more selfless archetypes than characters, and decides to become a better person. Then other people, like Javert and Marius and Thenardier, interact with the new Valjean (now a selfless archetype) and some decide to be good, some decide to be bad, and some are destroyed by their own indecision. But my point is that yes, Les Miserables does include some flawless characters, but the story is never about them–they become catalysts to action, but don’t fill any kind of protagonist or hero role on their own.

By: 42

42 — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 13:47:59 +0000

Howard: that does make it clearer. Thank you for responding.

I still don’t know if I agree entirely with the idea that flaws are internal. There seem to be too many stories that are driven by a character’s limited power and external situations, not by character flaws. Tuesday with Morrie was my example of this. Jean Val Jean in Les Miserables could also be an example from my understanding.

Perhaps, stories that have rich enough external conflicts don’t really need characters with involved internal struggles to carry them?

In fact, I seem to remember David Farland saying that there is a trap author’s fall into of thinking that every major character has to have an internal problem or character flaw. When I have time I’ll have to look through my notes to see why.

By: Howard Tayler

Howard Tayler — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 05:15:21 +0000

@42: First off, we need to let go of any emotional baggage associated with the words “flaw” and “handicap” in the context of this discussion.

A crippled character (parapalegic, for instance) is obviously “handicapped” (general usage of the term) but for our discussion that word might not really fit. In fact, for our discussion it’s much more useful to stay out of the grey, and in the clear, black-and-white areas.

A protagonist who is a philanderer has a weakness. If it is exploited by the antagonist/villian, then we (in this context) would define that as a flaw. It’s helping to drive the story. If it’s NOT driving the story, then it’s just color on the page.

Now let’s say that our protagonist was caught in his philandering, and the exploitation of it (blackmail!) resulted in him being stripped of his badge and gun. Now we have a character flaw (philandering) AND a handicap (limited power and authority).

Is this any clearer?