I’ll be looking for Jeff’s book. Thanks for the recommendation.

I particularly think the following point of hers in really important if one is trying to write realistically:

“3) Be aware of “one step forward, two steps back” kinds of change. So the character has just seen the last dragon die, and is solemn and subdued for one night. That doesn’t mean that she won’t go back to being an immature little shit the next morning.

Another problem with the stair method of character change is that it seems to cement any alteration. Once the character notices that she’s seen another perspective, she won’t flip back to her original one, ever. And of course, since that new perspective is always the truth, she doesn’t have to. She can just keep pressing forward, certain in the knowledge that she’s right.

Oh, come on. Have you never changed your mind because of new information, then changed it back because of more new information? Have you never hesitated, or been caught in the middle, even after learning to see “the other side?” Has no one ever made you respect their point of view but not convinced you of it? Have you never known the reasons for your own behavior and yet not been able to help yourself?

Fictional characters seem not very prone to that kind of thing, much as they aren’t prone to minor mistakes. A gradual process of change would show ripples and hesitations and going back and shades of decision, not just “I have changed my mind completely. I now say that this is the truth, and I will always think so.””

I recommend reading the whole thing (I also recommend reading all of her rants, especially if one writes fantasy or science fiction - though that’s going to take a while, since she has hundreds of them up).

Glad to have you back! I always learn so much from your posts!

Blessings,
Edwina

I’ve never completely understood the concept of character arc. Now I think I do. Thanks!

I can also see how it fits into the story I’m currently designing, even though it’s a mystery-suspense, I also just learned character arcs aren’t necessary important in that genre!

I would respectfully disagree with the assessment that Michael begins without a real problem but gains one in the story. The very fact that “Michael surprises everyone by volunteering to make the hit himself” shows us that he already had an internal conflict about loyalty to the family vs. his desire to stay out of the whole messy business. People don’t do things for no reason whatsoever, and characters do not do stuff like offer to kill someone for no reason either. It was his internal conflict (which had to have been present from the very beginning of the book) between loyalty vs. morality that motivated him to offer to make the hit on Vito’s would-be assassin.