I'm starting to visualize the endgame of my story, and a thought came to me - I'm going to have to kill one of these characters, aren't I? And that got me to thinking, well, why do I think I need to do that? Why are main character deaths so important for a narrative? I can picture a scenario where at least one of them sacrifices themselves for the greater good, but do I really have to do it? For context, this story is a speculative fiction satire, however it also has quite a bit of romance, drama, and action. I really like my characters, and I want them to live happily ever after. There will probably be something where it's thought that one of them is dead, but then it turns out that they're actually going to make it. Is that enough? Do I really have to quite literally "kill my darlings?"
I think if it makes sense that a character would die then they need to die. If you have to really conjure up a way for them to survive then they need to die. I come from the perspective that characters cannot be invincible under any circumstances, unless they're invincible I guess. If they're in a situation where they'd die in real life then they need to die, idc who they are in the story
Is the character you want to kill adding something in the story? Is he/she 'just standing' around while your MC does most of the work at one point, like say, the climax? That's basically why you should kill the character. Faking the death would solve that. You remove that character after its served its purpose and you bring him back for a nice conclusion. That's done so much it's a trope though, so be very careful. Otherwise, if your character has got something to add, don't kill him/her. There's just no reason to. Plus, if strong romance is involved, you could actually anger your audience by doing so. P.S. please mention a gender next time... writing this post had a bit of a pronoun nightmare to it.
What a fabulous question! Trust your gut instinct. Is the character's death a natural outcome of the plot? Is it a noble death? What do the characters left behind learn from it? Does the death serve a higher purpose? Just a few questions you might want to consider.
Yeah, I suppose it's hard to say if a death or deaths would be appropriate without knowing more specifics about the particular story. I guess I meant it as more of an overarching question. It just seems very common for there to be shocking deaths of characters in stories, and I was wondering if there really need to be. There's a couple of scenarios that I considered, but I don't think they're really necessary to the story, and would mostly serve to add more drama and emotion. Maybe it's because I feel bad about killing off the MC's romantic partner in my last novel? That death at least did serve the plot and realigned the MC's motivations. In this case my gut tells me to allow everyone to stay alive, even the AI romantic partner of the lonely prisoner. I'm a sucker for happy endings, anyway !
Is this more about emotional impact or a sense of sacrifice? I guess it's a mix of both. Battle of Yavin would feel cheap if it had no cost of life from the rebels. I guess it's also an important consequence to leadership, is having harm come to the people the hero inspires into action. I suppose a lack of death feels dishonest depending on the context or stakes. I don't know. Death seems extreme some times. Why can't someone just have his arms and legs ripped off instead? That's plenty sacrifice. Or lose a toe or something, you know. Getting an eye put out or becoming scarred doesn't work, however, because that just makes him cooler. It's okay to just pick one pronoun and use that. English knows you mean he or she, him or her implicitly when the singular third is actually unknown. "If one wants to hunt a tyrannosaurus, she should first arm herself." But there's nothing wrong with saying him or her either if you really prefer it.
I'm not big on killing characters. In some ways death has been done to death. And there are other ways to have a big emotional impact, maybe even more so than a character's death. That said many stories kill off characters. I went to a zoom lecture where this talked about. The editor of a prominent literary journal was on the panel. He had added up all the character deaths they had published in a year or maybe it was five years. I don't exactly remember, but the number was pretty high. And he was saying that they wanted to see more stories without death, admitting at the same time that they do publish good stories where a character(s) are killed off. So, it's pretty much a tossup. I think if you can write a better ending without killing your character, I would go with that. I totally understand you've got to give a story what it needs. Maybe give that a little more thought.
I think killing characters is up to the plot. If it's called for and makes sense then feed the muse her blood sacrifice. Otherwise, there's nothing wrong with everyone coming through more or less unscathed. I would expect less death in a satire, anyway, but again, I think it's up to the plot you've written whether it's needed, earned, etc. Earned is actually a big point. You don't want to off characters at random (unless you're writing a slasher or something.)
Character deaths are a way to up the stakes of a story, but can be over done. A single death can set the stakes, and have an emotional impact as the other characters deal with the event.
It really depends on the plot, in my Battle of Britain book about half the cast die because that was the reality of being a fighter pilot in 1940 On the other hand I have written books with no deaths at all, end of the day there is no ‘ have’ about it, you as authors do whatever is right for the plot
Lots of good replies- I say character deaths aren’t necessary unless the death adds something to the story, like changing how the plot plays out, or how the other characters behave going forward, etc. and I say that as someone with quite the kill count Remember: You can sacrifice more than just your life!
Only kill characters if it makes sense for them to die. I mean, there should be a balance of stories that have everyone live and everyone die. I mean, I have a bad habit of killing a lot of characters, but it makes sense for some to die and others are historical characters I will not salvage.
I'm always reluctant to kill off one of my mains, but for the sake of the strength of the story, sometimes it is, and should be, unavoidable. Done right it can add a lot of emotional weight, esp if you have put in the time and effort to make that character likable. Killing off a secondary character is easy and usually offers nothing to the story, so it should mean something in the grander scheme. It can change the entire outcome. Consider how the Disney movie Tangled would have ended if Eugene had not been saved? A death done right, with the right character, can completely alter a story.
