This is a beautiful statement! It's why we like to read about characters, after all. They're placed in a fluid, dynamic, dramatic situation, even if it doesn't appear to be moving (not unlike a film lingering on a still scene), and we become invested in their actions.
People, unfortunately, aren't characters. We're rather frequently shit, in fact, but we also tend to be trapped in situations that aren't dynamic, the irony there being that, while our characters aren't alive the way that we are, they can do more living than we can.
As for characters who don't act, they seem to pay a heavy price. I think chiefly of Hamlet here. His father's ghost exhorted him to action, and yet he angsted, dilly-dallied, malingered, etc., ultimately to his doom when he did decide to act. The contrast here is Macbeth, who acted decisively, but made the wrong decision. Which of these two is more right?
As far as being relatable goes, I don't know how I feel about that. None of my characters, be they in 'fic or original, are really anything like me, nor are they idealized versions of me. (The closest I've come to breaking this, aside from back in Sailor Moon fandom and certain projects that "bank" on the whole Mary Sue concept, is Mark in FE7, but my take on him is really more inspired by Spock than by myself.) I'm merely an observer of sorts. It's my job as a writer to be an invisible reporter, so, regardless of how I feel about a character, there's got to be something there, a P.O.V. that I can occupy and explore, regardless of how alien it is.
I might be playing a bit with this very concept in yonder novel, now that I think about it. My two alternating mains represent a bit of this. One is more decisive than the other, though both arrive at agency through alternate means. (Not making the same mistakes as the prior generation is an overriding theme, so each is influenced by mentors, parents, enemies, etc.)
Possible to ruminate on what you present here for quite a while, so I'll stop myself here before I drown in my own blather.
no subject
This is a beautiful statement! It's why we like to read about characters, after all. They're placed in a fluid, dynamic, dramatic situation, even if it doesn't appear to be moving (not unlike a film lingering on a still scene), and we become invested in their actions.
People, unfortunately, aren't characters. We're rather frequently shit, in fact, but we also tend to be trapped in situations that aren't dynamic, the irony there being that, while our characters aren't alive the way that we are, they can do more living than we can.
As for characters who don't act, they seem to pay a heavy price. I think chiefly of Hamlet here. His father's ghost exhorted him to action, and yet he angsted, dilly-dallied, malingered, etc., ultimately to his doom when he did decide to act. The contrast here is Macbeth, who acted decisively, but made the wrong decision. Which of these two is more right?
As far as being relatable goes, I don't know how I feel about that. None of my characters, be they in 'fic or original, are really anything like me, nor are they idealized versions of me. (The closest I've come to breaking this, aside from back in Sailor Moon fandom and certain projects that "bank" on the whole Mary Sue concept, is Mark in FE7, but my take on him is really more inspired by Spock than by myself.) I'm merely an observer of sorts. It's my job as a writer to be an invisible reporter, so, regardless of how I feel about a character, there's got to be something there, a P.O.V. that I can occupy and explore, regardless of how alien it is.
I might be playing a bit with this very concept in yonder novel, now that I think about it. My two alternating mains represent a bit of this. One is more decisive than the other, though both arrive at agency through alternate means. (Not making the same mistakes as the prior generation is an overriding theme, so each is influenced by mentors, parents, enemies, etc.)
Possible to ruminate on what you present here for quite a while, so I'll stop myself here before I drown in my own blather.