Copyright © 2023 Jerry Dunne
Many beginner playwrights struggle to understand the best way of approaching character so that their characters have a fulfilling journey throughout the play’s plot arc. And I say plot arc because we want to observe character from this perspective rather than the one of storyline, with its more obvious surface characteristics such as the physical, social, accent, idiosyncratic turn of phrase, general qualities (he’s such a nice guy!) and so on. Instead, this other perspective is more fundamental, though not at all more theoretical.
So, as we are going to approach character from the perspective of the plot arc, we need first to understand the fundamental building blocks of the plot arc. They are dramatic action (a character has a want, desire or need that they act on in some way and which is plot relevant), dramatic conflict (occurs when a character’s want, desire or need is opposed by someone or something and is plot relevant) and dramatic climax/crisis/event (creates a point of important change for character/s which is initiated by dramatic conflict and is plot relevant).
Now, from this description, it ought to be obvious that the most defining aspect of a character, if not the drama itself, is action. Nothing happens in the play without action. We might even say that a character is nothing without action; that action defines them completely; that they have no purpose for existing in the play without action. In fact, we might go so far as to say that character is action - dramatic action, of course.
This is really a rather interesting and unexpected approach to take in order to help us with the development of character, and it may well w0rk against some old and cherished beliefs that some writers or readers or theatre goers have, where they believe that character is something in its own right, something sacred and very much independent of plot. These folk may believe that their favourite characters breathed life before the play; that they breathe life offstage when they are not on stage; and that they will breathe life once the play is over. And that they will especially continue to breathe life in the imaginations of those who enjoy them. But if character is action, how will you know them except by their actions? How will you judge them expect by their actions? And their actions all take place within the plot arc, which happens in a very narrow framework. It all occurs at a particular place and time and under a particular set of conditions and surrounded by a particular cast of other characters. Your favourite characters are defined completely by that, and the plot has complete control over all. I would go so far as to say, the only reason these folk love their favourite characters at all is for that very reason. They admire them for the restricted plot arc within which they excelled. And most of what they say about them will be about the actions they performed within that plot arc. Bu because they love the characters so much they just can’t bear to imagine them with no existence at all outside of that narrow framework.
So, if character is a function of plot, and can only function within it, then nothing that is relevant about character operates outside of the plot arc; certainly not in drama, anyway. Just think about that for a moment. Nothing! Really? This idea is almost breathtaking in its sheer audacity! Does this follow then that if we wrote a detailed character study but one that was completely unrelated to the plot arc of any play, the study would in fact be worthless, because character is dramatic action and that is not merely any old action, but action with a plot-related purpose which itmust act on (the pursuit of a goal based on want, need or desire), and outside of this it has no relevance at all, no existence? No, of course it doesn’t make the character study worthless. The writer may well need such a piece of work to help them get their character to the starting line. But that’s just it. You have only got them to the starting line. Now what?
This, though, leaves us wondering what might be the best way to go about preparing our characters for that starting line. What, for instance, are the most important questions we might ask ourselves about our characters so that we might take the most effective step forward in this area? Well, I think they would have to be the following: what does my character want (within the parameters of the plot arc) and what are they prepared to do to get it?
These questions are raw, visceral and the answers, too, should be raw and visceral, as they will tell us a lot about the actions of the characters as they make their way through the plot arc of the story. They will tell us what lies at the heart of these characters. What they are? Who they are? Who are they really? We will find out about their motivations, morality, emotions, general qualities, and so on, where it actually matters; that is, in the dramatic actions of the play. What does my character want (within the parameters of the plot arc) and what are they prepared to do to get it? This is where we have to start. Internally, not externally! Everything else we learnt up to this point in some character study or bio is in no way near as important as answering these two questions.
But, even so, even with these two questions answered, the most important questions of all at this preparatory point, their answers will still only give us an idea of what is coming. We still don’t know how the characters will perform until they are put through their paces in the plot arc. We need to see them go through their dramatic actions, deal with dramatic conflict and dramatic crises, and only by the resolution of the play, will we know everything about them that we need to know. By then, we will have discovered how they handle conflict and crisis and how far they really are prepared to push themselves and others in order to achieve their plot-related goals.
By the way, isn’t this just how we define ourselves and each other? Isn’t this how we judge each other? Know the man by his actions. Judge the man by his actions. And we judge each other by actions within a particular set of circumstances and one which is relevant to our own lives in some way. If people perform their actions well in this environment we praise them; if they do badly we criticise or even condemn them for it; and the intensity of praise or penalty often depends on the relevant importance of both the storyline and the plot arc in which they find themselves.
*
In fact, let’s look at an example outside of drama that might help clarify how everything said above makes sense.
When we watch a sports personality perform their actions within the plot arc of the game, we get to find out everything we really care about them. We see character through the drama of the game. These top personalities are mesmerising, entertaining, but outside of the game, they are non-existent for the overwhelming majority of us. And for those who do know them personally, they know them within a completely different context, so their characters are different, too – no doubt mostly very ordinary. But within the game, and the more dramatic the game, the more plot related twists and turns we see, the more we see our hero deal with its difficulties and remain determined in his goal, the more of a hero he becomes in our eyes, and the more we adore him; and, so, the more we know about him as a sporting personality.
The mistake we make is that because we know him in this way, we think we know more about him than we actually do, like people do with their favourite characters in the play. But, we only know them through their actions on the field, and the conflict those actions bring about and the crises points they face as a consequence of the conflict, all handled within the framework of the game’s plot. Outside of this, we don’t even know what they are like in practise with their fellow team mates, never mind outside of their profession altogether.
And if we did know a thousand other things about them, only some of those might be relevant. The closest we can get to know them as athletes outside of the game itself (okay, also from practise to judge their fitness) is by having them answer these two questions: what do you want as an athlete and what are you prepared to do to get it? Again, these are very plot-related questions and their answers will be helpful in having us think of them as serious if they take their game seriously. Do they take their practise seriously? Are they on both a strict diet and training regimen? And that’s all well and good but we still don’t know as much as we need to know (even though the questions are all we have at this point to help us work them out). What we still really need to know is how they will perform in the game on the day. And we will only know that much by seeing them in action in the game on the day. That is the only drama that counts. That is what makes them winners or losers.
So, whatever you put together about this sporting personality, whatever construct you build around him, a biography, a list of sporting attributes that make him look brilliant, (even if he has been brilliant in previous games up to now), no matter how impressive his strategy and tactics look for the next game, in the end it is all built on sand unless he proves it on the day, because whether you like it or not, his sporting character is a function of the plot arc of any one particular game. If he fails to succeed within it by his actions, he has failed in the only way that matters as a sporting character.
And, of course, the plot arc of the game is sometimes as dramatic as the plot arc in a play, especially when pundits and the public start talking about ‘heart’. Like in the drama, the greater the pressure the sports character is put under the more we learn about them. In fact, it is often exactly in this highly emotional place that we believe we know the character best of all. When the pressure is really on them, we often start talking about their deeper motivations to continue. How often do we see a boxing match, for example, when a fighter is under tremendous pressure and ought to just give in, when the chips are really down, when he is being beaten back and forth across the ring, when he is bloodied and exhausted and it looks like he has no chance of winning the fight at all, but he refuses to quit, to submit to his fate, and he keeps fighting back against all odds, and despite the fact that if he keeps going, the beating may even ruin his career as a fighter, that we rise to our feet in salute of his bravery, his motivations, his heart. This is the moment of great drama where we see the inner core of a man, generally silent and secretive, now letting itself be heard, be known through the plot arc of the game. It is here that great revelations about the human condition are exposed. It is here that we throw all sorts of positive attributes at our fighter because surely he is deserving of them, and if he manages to crawl his way back into the fight proper and even end up winning then he is a hero. He has gone on the hero’s journey and he has succeeded against great odds. We love him for it. He is truly a great man.
But is he truly a great man? We saw his actions in one plot arc, a narrowly defined one at that, and at one place and one moment in time and facing one opponent. He is a great fighter, yes, of great sporting value, yes, we can accept that because he proved that much; but a great man? What else do we know about him? The plot arc exploited his fighter’s heart but what is he like as a lover, for instance? Is he honest? Is he faithful to his friends? Is he kind to animals? Anybody know? No one knows and no one cares who saw the fight; they will remember the fight with great affection for the brave action of the personality in the ring at that moment in time, and that is all that matters to them. What does he want and what is he prepared to do to get it (within the parameters of the plot arc)? They have their answer. Now they ‘know’ all they need to know about his character. They are fight fans, not gossip mongers. He is a hero. They are content to imagine all the rest about him in a very positive way.
And isn’t that exactly the same way lovers of the drama in the theatre behave!
Character in drama is dramatic action!!!
Summary
If you are attempting to build a main character when you don’t even know what its fundamental role in the play is going to be, then you are wasting your time. If you don’t know the purpose of your main character’s role in the play then you don’t yet know the purpose of your play as a piece of drama. There is absolutely no point in doing anything until this is known, unless you are the kind of person who needs to start writing first and then the focus will come later. But even if that be the case, at some point this point must be resolved and you cannot begin to know your character where it matters until this is so. So take my advice and proceed like this: before you decide to build in any other way on character, before you start choosing their wardrobe or wondering whether they ought to be well educated or not, or even what their general qualities are like, ask yourself this: what do they want and what are they prepared to do to get it (within the parameters of the plot arc, naturally)? Because by asking yourself these questions you are beginning on the straight and narrow path to the heart of your characters.
Links:
The play’s 3-act plot arc structure
The scene’s plot arc structure
Inspiration from inside an empty matchbox
Emotion and the play’s plot arc
The plan: a bird’s eye view (for drama)
Individuality in the characters (for the play)
Sparking up character for the play
From stereotype to rounded character with speed and ease
CLCK HERE FOR THE SCRIPT & SHORT STORY READING SERVICES PAGE