I have a good track record in writing, and publishing, non-fiction and technical books. Having been in computer science areas for over 40 years, this type of structure and methodology comes easily to me. Practice, practice, practice. But, I’ve always wanted to write (and, preferably, to sell) fiction. Fiction requires different skills. Of course, the remedy is the same as for non-fiction. Practice, practice, practice. But the skills built up over my career do not easily transfer to writing fiction.
In order to have something that people want to read, there must be conflict, problems to solve, or growth. Such challenges should be relatable to the reader. But these challenges may be in the external or the internal. The external ones are considered to be problems to overcome. The internal challenges are “flaws”, and mistakes that arise from those flaws, which then affect the external and create problems that did not previously exist.
In the 1950s and 1960s, there was a group of science fiction authors that wrote “hard” science fiction. Many of these authors had, as their primary source of income, jobs in scientific fields. Problems often had to do with making something work or repairing something or achieving a specific goal. These external challenges were straight-forward. There were steps to be taken, situations to analyze, and a moment of triumph.
Challenges used to only apply to the situation — flaws optional
The person present, while the problems were addressed, was somewhat secondary and many writers (such as Isaac Asimov, in my opinion) had difficulties including believable relationships, between multiple people, within their work. The problems of the individual, if brought into the story at all, concerned their needs to survive. As a person who started to read from comics, I would compare these situations to those of Superman (and DC comics in general). It is not a coincidence that the superheros of that period had much in common with the science fiction writing of the times. Problems, overcome, solutions.
Move forward to the 1960s and 1970s, and character development became much more important. The plots of Spider-man (and other characters in the Marvel universe), were more character-driven — needing the ability to take care of Aunt May to be as important as figuring out how to beat the villain.
The authors of the 1950s and 1960s wrote (in my opinion) some really great stuff. Mission of Gravity by Hal Clement and the Foundation series by Isaac Asimov are such that have endured the test of time. There was also a lot of throwaway “pulp” fiction, but there is always a lot of forgettable art/music/movies that the best stand out from. It is the same in current days.
Even the 19th and early 20th century writers, such as Jules Verne, H G Wells, or Edgar Rice Burroughs, followed a pattern of step by step.
As can be deduced, when I started releasing my fiction, I followed in the footsteps of the old “hard” writers. For my young adult science fiction book, Rumblings in the Reef, the book I created was a world-building book. The protagonists, a group of “high school” students, inhabited a world where they were part of a species of people evolved from fish. They face challenges, and a specific problem, and they set out to solve it. But the character building was secondary. And that is where my problems, and those of the old “masters”, overlap. Creating believable, and interesting, characters was not their forté and it must become part of my skills.
[Note that mermaids and such are mammalian and probably, like whales, came from land ancestors who moved back to the ocean. The fish, or piscine, sapients face different components of life than those with a background of mammalian life.]
The literary flavor du jour
Literary agents (as do movie executives) love something of the nature like “this recent blockbuster plus these shifts and differences”. If a type of genre is selling now, they want more of it and that is all they want. When A Wrinkle in Time came out, it encountered a lot of rejections (26 rejections) but it changed the course of children’s literature. Many may not remember it now, but the Harry Potter series was rejected 12 times before effectively making it cool again to read (at least, for a while). I’m not saying my book is of the same quality as these two but it does NOT blend in with the current book themes that are selling — and has been of no interest to literary agents (so I ended up self-publishing). A book that MIGHT have been of interest to publishers in the 1950s does not thrill those of current days. Perhaps it would still be of interest to readers of today — perhaps not.
Immerse ourselves into the worlds of current themes. Magicians, dragons, vampires, special schools, romantasies, and so forth. Harry Potter is a brave, loyal, righteous character but he also makes a lot of mistakes. He keeps information to himself to his disadvantage and to the disadvantage of others. He forgets things at the worst times. His focus totally disappears when faced with too many obstacles. In spite of various abuses of authority he has experienced, he still expects those in authority to be proper and good and overlooks strange behavior (except with Professor Snape). And so forth.
Flaws connect with the spectator
Would Harry survive without an author continuously creating saving events? Probably not. Certainly, he couldn’t have been a protagonist in a 1950s book trying to make their way back to Earth without an adequate supply of food or oxygen. For every person like myself who says “but Harry, don’t you remember that particular item?” there are ten readers saying “he forgot that but I bet he makes it out of the fix”. The flaws make him human. They make him relatable. They make him a bestseller.
It’s not just Harry Potter, of course. There are many, many movies and books which quickly reach a point where, if the protagonist picked the better choice, the book or movie would soon come to a conclusion. Luckily for the reader/viewer, they often don’t make that choice. And so it continues.
Flaws generate the obstacles
If, in a character-driven book, things seem to be going much too well, you may rely on a mistake being made, or an action not being done, or a villain taking twenty minutes to head off to another room to allow an automated death to occur. Occasionally, a reader/viewer will say “if they had only …”. But they don’t and that means the end of the book or movie is still another thirty minutes away.
Something to Cheer About
Having flaws may be human but overcoming those flaws is what gives us something to cheer about. If they did it, maybe so can I?
Perfection equals Fragility
The protagonists in those 19th and early 20th century novels sometimes made bad decisions — or decisions that might have made sense at the time the book was written but seems absolutely nuts looked at through a 21st century eyeglass. But, more often it was an exterior event. In The Count of Monte Cristo, the drama gets involved with a greedy magistrate, a jealous rival, and an ambitious and unscrupulous fellow seaman. If someone is placed upon a pedestal of perfection, then they must be knocked off. The very idea of perfection is mirrored with the reality of fragility of that state.
The struggle to create the flaws
As a person with a science background, when I see a problem I want to fix it. So, creating characters with flaws is a problem for me. I hope there are those that still enjoy the problem being solved but I am aware that there are more who want to cheer the underdog, feel good when flaws are overcome. And be lovable — not just respected.
Our lives are beds from which we have the opportunity to learn and grow.
