Characters. They're what make a story move and a reader care, but how many characters are too many?
When I was learning how to write flash, the rule of thumb was no more than two characters, though you can sometimes manage a third if you're heading towards the thousand word mark. For me, anything under 600 words is just too crowded and too confusing, especially with dialogue, if you try to slip in a cast of three or four.
Once I started writing longer stories, I knew I could add more characters, but the story still felt too crowded. Walk on characters are fine, they're there and gone when their usefulness is fulfilled. But for main characters, especially in shorts I prefer only two or three characters. Why? Because it's easier for me to keep track of who is who and who's doing what to who. And that applies to both reading and writing.
So, you're probably wondering what brought this line of thought about. Well, I'll tell you, I'm up to chapter five in the current novel I'm reading and have already been introduced to no fewer than thirty characters, along with all of the details of how they're related and who is sleeping with who, not to mention the twenty years of back story the author feels obliged to fill in for me. Even more confusing is the fact that he keeps dropping me into the heads of different characters. I've reached the point where I don't really care about any one of them. It's rather like that screwing in a light bulb joke. But here, it's how many characters does it take to tell a story?
What about you? How many characters are too many?
7 comments:
Anything more than two main characters and three secondary character becomes a problem to track.
I actually write that way myself. Last book I wrote I had two main characters and three secondary characters, which worked out just fine. I was able to keep track of all five while weaving a few minors in an out as needed.
I think in any story that you write, a limit of five should be applied as a standard.
Unless you're writing one of those historical type fictions that require about twenty five main characters to play with (Larry McMurtry and Edward Rutherford spring to mind as two prime examples of that kind of writing).
Some authors can handle a large cast of characters and make it look easy, G. I guess I'm just not one of them. Five seems a good number though.
I am prone to write stories with very few characters and even when attempting a novel, there are less than a dozen. And really only four or five real characters. So I am with you on this. I have also ditched many books because of too large a cast.
Totally agree, Sandra. I stick to two or three, plus peripheral ones when required. Sometimes I just have one in flash with the circumstances being the second 'character'.
I read The Murder Exchange by Simon Kernick and became a tad confused as character after character entered the fray. I found the book compelling enough to continue and the author's prowess weaved it all together satisfactorily. I guess, that's the difference.
Regards,
Col
Another thing that gets confusing besides a large cast of characters is the habit some writers have of giving those characters similar names, Col.
I hate ditching books, Patti, but sometimes it has to be done. My brain is confused enough some days without a book adding to it :)
My feeling is that it depends on the writer's ability to make each character vivid.
My own solution to "character control" is to minimize the number of characters who appear only once. Even for walk-ons I will always try to reuse a character rather than invent a new one.
Using the same "walk-on" character is a good idea, Al! And you're very right about the author's ability. Some can do it masterfully and you never get lost.
Post a Comment