secondary characters
Found this on Alicia Rasely’s site when I was looking for a link for a longer entry on craft I’ll be posting later. I find her stuff really helpful and like everything she talks about on this page, except I’m not sure if I agree with this:
from Top Ten Plotting Problems:
6. Tumors and Parasites– The cast of thousands: Secondary characters are distinguished from major characters– the protagonist(s) and the antagonist usually– by their lack of a story journey. That is, they exist to make things happen in the plot, but their own conflicts and issues shouldn’t be part of the story. (If they’re that interesting, let them star in the sequel.) Every person with a story journey (described progress towards a significant change in their life) dilutes the impact of the major characters’ journey. In some books (family sagas, for example), this can work. But in most protagonist-centered popular fiction, tracking the secondary characters’ lives and loves is going to waste time and confuse the reader. Watch out for long passages in a secondary character’s viewpoint which dwell on his problems and not on the protagonist. And keep count of how many subplots you’ve got– make sure each one supports the main plot in some way.
I know she says cast of thousands, but I get the feeling she means that even delving into one or two secondary psyches is a problem. But I think secondary characters in a Single Title can have their own conflict that supports/mirrors the main romatic/action plot. I don’t like secondary characters who are just there taking up space and announcing their part in the next book, who do the minimal work to support the main characters and that’s it. I like it when the secondary characters do enough to make me want to read more about them - I like to be left thinking - they’re so interesting I WANT them to have their own book. I’m thinking Suzanne Brockmann as a prime example here, although I have heard complaints from readers who feel her secondary characters are sometimes more interesting than the main characters. And her secondary characters do get lots of airtime.
Thoughts, please, as I wander into secondary characters in my own WIP who definitely have their own internal conflict and problems, although their portion of the book is considerably smaller than the main plot. Do you mind readng about secondary characters who have their own journey? Do you like writing secondary characters who have their own arc?
Did this make sense? It’s early. *heads for coffee pot*
Steph T.
February 15th, 2005 at 10:35 am
I think having secondary characters in story lines that somehow compliment the main story, really, can only strengthen the main story. There are a lot of catagory books that work this way, even. (And of course I can’t think of any off the top of my head).
And 9 times out of 10, I think it’s very obvious (and distracting) when a writer introduces secondary characters just because they’re going to have the next story.
February 15th, 2005 at 11:04 am
Hmm. I’m torn on this issue. Usually I want a book to focus on just the h/h. I’m almost always disappointed when I have to deal with another storyline, another POV. I don’t want to get to know anyone else. For me, the h/h are the important ones, and I just don’t care about anyone else.
However…
There are exceptions. Naturally, I can’t think of any right now. But every once in a while secondary characters are interesting enough that I don’t mind reading a little in their POV.
None of this is making sense, is it? I need coffee.
February 15th, 2005 at 2:44 pm
As long as the secondary characters have something to do with the main plot and/or characters and are fully-realized characters in their own right (i.e., not two-dimensional stereotypes such as the “ditzy friend” or “chauvinistic ex-husband”) I don’t mind them. Then again, I don’t have a big problem with “sequel baits” as long as they don’t detract from or outshine the main H/h.
I currently have a couple that exists as secondary characters in stories 1 and 2, but they will have their own story in book 3. Right now, their relationship is percolating. And I include them in the first place because they have a reason to be in the story. The reason I’ve done this is because H2 and h2 need the space of time covered in several books to get to where they need to be for their own story to occur. Does that make any sense?
February 15th, 2005 at 9:06 pm
I like secondary characters and get into their stories as well. I do like their plots to relate to the main one somehow, but I don’t get upset when I “have” to read about other characters in the book. I’m one who enjoys SB’s secondary characters–even the WWII subplots, although those take me a couple scenes (or more) to get involved in.
February 15th, 2005 at 9:32 pm
Emily - I agree about not minding secondary characters if they have a real purpose, no matter how small - drag ‘em in *g* I can’t think of many category titles that use subplots either because of the space restrictions, so I’m a little more forgiving of tiny subplots in those books. I guess those are more for showcasing a group of friends and you can look forward to the series of series books (not sure if that made sense)
Larissa - you did make sense (should that scare me? *g*) But I tend to get a little bored with just the h/h…reading and writing them - LOL
Lynn - what you said makes total sense with your secondary characters, because I’m going through the same thing with mine right now. They’ve got a big enough plot in the first story, but I need them to get through this plot in order to give them their own story or it won’t make sense.
Amy - I tend to like Suz B’s secondary characters more than her main ones and I’m not sure why *g* I was a huge Sam/Alyssa fan and I loved the way she kept their relationship subplot going through several books. I love couples who have a real hate/love thing going on. Drives some people nuts, I know…
February 16th, 2005 at 10:24 am
Steph - I too loved Sam and Alyssa. And Suz B does have a way with secondary characters. I always wince when I read complaints about them - that they over-shadowed the main H/h. I was never really into the WWII subplots, but I loved watching the S&A relationship develop.
Which furthers my point - S&A never would have been as intriguing if SB hadn’t drawn their relationship out over those books because in doing so, she was afforded time. They’d meet, fight, part, meet, love, fight, part, etc. which lent a great deal to believability IMO. One of my complaints with romance novels as a whole - and especially suspense - is how quickly the H/h fall madly, deeply in love. Of course, I’m doing the same thing myself :) But it’s nice for a change to see a couple who take a little convincing to get together.
February 16th, 2005 at 12:08 pm
I am a secondary character slut with a cast of thousands…though I have been able to make my secondary stories tie into the main storylines most of the time. It’s like a ball of yarn my kitten got hold of.
February 16th, 2005 at 8:45 pm
I’m a romantic at heart, and when I read, I want that main hero and heroine to take up most of the story.
But if the secondary characters are written well enough that i fall in love with them too, then all is good.
February 17th, 2005 at 10:10 pm
LOL Cece - I don’t mind lots of characters when I read something, as long as they interest me!
Note to self: make Jill fall in love with my secondary characters.
Second note to self: Get someone to publish book with secondary characters so Jill can fall in love with them *g*