Characters in Fiction

A novel's primary purpose is to tell a story but people make the story happen. In real life, each of us is entirely unique; we are far too complex to understand or describe. In literature, characters are abbreviated to what is necessary for the story. E. M. Forster in his book Aspects of the Novel (1927) divides the characters we find in fiction into FLAT and ROUND.

FLAT characters (also called humours, types, or caricatures) in their purest form are constructed around a single idea or quality. If, for example, in all dialogue and narration of a novel, all we learn about George is that he hates his mother, then George is a flat character. He might never actually utter the words “I hate you” to his mother, but if in all his dialogue, action and thoughts he has no existence outside that phrase, no private life like the rest of us, no other pleasure other then hating his mother, then George is as flat a character as he can be. In fact he is not a character but an idea personified. Anything more we learn about George, his physical description, his hobbies, his relationship with other people, etc, work to make him more round.

Sometimes a character seems complex but can be described in a single sentence because he reminds us of a social stereotype or a character from another book. For example, we may present a suave secret agent who has a license to kill, likes women and successfully foils colourful bad guys. James Bond in Ian Fleming's novels was a round character, but if we present a character who strongly reminds us of James Bond, then our character is flat. Literary characters like Philip Marlowe, Scarlett O'Hara, Sherlock Holmes, etc as well as social stereotypes are known as STOCK characters. Stock characters were first described by Theophrastus in 320 BC who also lists thirty examples. Stock characters are a key component of genre fiction and they are undeniably flat.

Flat characters can never surprise. They are shorthand. Because they are easily remembered and recognized, in a good novel they form the background. They can enhance the plot and other characters and add humour. In a bad novel they may be the main characters. If all we learn about the main characters can be described in a few sentences, and they seem to lead no life outside of those sentences, then they become thoroughly unconvincing and we lose interest. It's like cutting off a person painted on the back of a theatre stage and bringing it forward to centre stage. What was convincing as a background, up front is two dimensional cardboard, flat and unbelievable.

ROUND characters are like real people, complex. They have an appearance, a job and a place to stay. They are defined by their behaviour and dialogue with the other characters (what we call “character interaction”.) They have fortes, weaknesses and faults. The circumstances in the novel may change them in a believable way, if for example they learn from their mistakes to amend or extend their faults (“character development”). Round characters consume pages but they are a sound and necessary investment which always pays off to make the story believable.

So think about the main characters of the novel you are reading. If they never surprise you and don't change, they are flat. If they don't convince you or they behave randomly, they are flat pretending to be round. If they don't interact in a way that defines them as persons and they are not easily distinguishable they are weak. And if they are all of the above then you are reading a bad novel.

In a good novel all the main characters, and some of the more important secondary ones have strong and distinguishing fortes and faults. They are defined by their interaction with other characters or the environment so that we begin to sympathize with them. They develop in ways that affect us emotionally and they surprise us in a believable way. We thus believe in them and as a result the novel is enjoyable and memorable.

What if you find however that all the characters are fully described even though they have no bearing to the plot of the novel? In other words what if the background characters are all round? (This would be the equivalent of moving an entire theatre on location so that the normally painted background becomes the real background.) Then you are probably reading a good novel written in the last century by an overindulging author. The round background characters will make the story more convincing, but round characters need time to be developed so we will most likely have a two thousand page book in which little happens. This was fine two hundred years ago when people were isolated by a long harsh winter (as in Russia or England) with little to do and with a thirst for new acquaintances but it is boring in today's fast moving world. Convincing round characters that are not used in the story today appear as “gossip”. (See my article on Jane Austen's Emma).

Has a working family person time for War and Peace now?