Falling in love with a character

No, not literally - that would be rather sad.

What I mean is, have you ever a written a character that was originally intended to be either a one-off side-character, or a supporting character who you later reused and developed into a main or gave a much more prominent role to, or who somehow you liked and developed their role a lot more than you intended, up to and including the point where they usurped the main character?

 

I've not had anyone usurp a main character, yet, but I have side characters who became far more prominent in the story than originally intended.

Edit: also, clickbait title

 

I don't think I've ever done that. I come up with a new set of characters for each story, unless it's in a series of course.

Now ideas on the other hand—I have an annoying tendency to recycle ideas, which can get really frustrating if later I go back and develop the story the idea originally came from.

 

Sounds like a pantser phenomenon to me. I've had characters who grew from their initial concept, but that was during the plotting and outlining phase.

I have however fallen in love with a character a little bit. She was based on an ex, and I was heartbroken all over again after the thing was written. And you're right, it was rather sad, lol.

 

Who, me?

 

I don't know about the side character taking over. But I do know there are some characters that are such a joy to write they are like slipping on a second skin. I view it more as an actor slipping into a role. They become such a part of you that you think like them while writing.

 

I actually had this happen with a villain of one of my stories. He ended up being more interesting than the main character and so I swapped their places. Also, I actually didn't want him to die, which was odd. But the story has him as the main character now and the former is still part of the story. The former is actually still the main focus of the plot later on.

 

I'm not sure this qualifies but...

One of the first stories I wrote (second ever, I think) has a benign policeman play an incidental role. It's a real life setting, based in Limerick city. I later wrote another piece also based in the city with similar need for incidental intervention from a benign policeman, so used the same identity. In neither case was he drawn in any great detail, so no great shakes just using the name really. In the story I've most recently finished, story 3, an antagonist from story 2 plays a bigger, more central role, mc and another character from 2 also make a cameo. Each story of the three stands alone but I thought it would be interesting to loosely tie them together. My initial idea for antagonist in 3 was different to the character from 2 but I changed it after starting and found him a good fit for what was needed. Each story has a different POV and voice, I think, and are quite different in tone and perspective. I may well mine the little world, create something of a collection. The policeman would be a good fit as mc for a story I've a mind to do at some stage.

I did find, writing story 3, that I knew the antagonist from his previous escapades in 2, and I think he came together with less description taking up the page. Maybe that's an exercise to help tighten prose?

 

Nope, it happens with planners too.

That's how my WIP ended up with a snarky elf king, who was originally only supposed to be in two chapters (and you don't even see him in the first one!), but who ended up being a major character in the second part of the book.

 

Did you at least have to redo your outline? Because inserting a major character into the second half of a book would normally require major replotting, unless they had no personal arc and didn't affect the story. Either that, or having to pants from the point the book deviated from the original plot/outline.

Although, now that I look at it, you did say "planner" instead of plotter or architect, so maybe you're one of those writers who has a plan for the end but not a plot or outline? That might make sense. Changing the character lineup might not change the end plan the way it would a actual outline.

 

Even planners and plotters deviate from their original outline. Stories often evolve as they're being written - it would be rather unfortunate if they did not, once characters and events are fleshed out beyond mere concepts.

 

There are two kinds of people in the world: people who divide people into two different kinds of people and people who don't.

One of my favorite characters evolved from being a figment in a flashback to being an essential member of the cast. A lot of work goes on in my subconscious, and it usually behooves me to change the story to accommodate the results of that work.

 

Yeah, I'm aware, since, you know, I write. I've changed outlines to fit new concepts and whatnot. I have not, however added what I would consider a major character without having to change the plot enough to require altering the outline. If they just fit right in with everything I already had plotted, then either they weren't that major or they had no individual arc. My point a moment ago was more that having a plan for how the book turns out is not the same thing as plotting out the story, and I was curious as to which was the case.

Edit: Also, my characters and events are far more fleshed out than mere concepts by the time I start writing. That's part of what makes me an architect/plotter/whatever writer.

 

I just can't help but feel that your posts seem a little contemptuous of people who don't plot in great detail.

If that's not the case, I apologise. That's just how they come across to me.

 

Plotting and pantsing are two different approaches and we have to find the one that works best. I am forcing myself to do more planning with my own work. And one thing that I have found helps is instead of planning everything about the story. I sit down and plan out a list of complications for the characters, in the order they will happen. Then as I write I make sure those complications occur and and free to deal with them however I want. Which sometimes adds to the list of complications. So far it seems a nice middle ground for me.

 

I'm sorry if it came off that way. My favorite writer is Stephen King. He's a pure pantser. I don't care how much detail someone puts together before they write, so long as it works for them. When I mentioned planning vs plotting, I was mostly talking semantics. I happen to get pretty detailed with my plot before I write, and I mentioned that because you made it sound like people only write with vague concepts in mind. I put a lot of thought into characters and story before I write. It's okay with me if others don't.

 

OK, thank you.

 

Gee, thanks for your permission. It is a choice each writer makes.

 

Don't be a jerk. I wasn't giving permission. Obviously. Naomasa thought I didn't like it. I said I was fine with it. Get over it.

 

The sarcasm was due to the tone of your post. It still read as condescending.

 

Read it however you want. Not only did I open with an apology, but I was being literal, not condescending. Frankly, I'm surprised someone as frequently hateful as you would have an opinion on whether or not someone else was being rude.

 

The book was originally supposed to finish at the end of what's now the first half, but I realised there would have been way too many loose ends and that certain things about the ending wouldn't have been believable if I finished things there... so I ended up continuing for eleven more chapters.

I know that doesn't sound like half a book, but each chapter is a contained short story (they all link up together and there are multiple wider plots that run through the whole thing) - so eleven chapters is more than it sounds.

I am both a planner and a plotter, and I had way more than just an outline before I started the actual writing. I'm just not very experienced at planning and plotting and outlining, so I got the timing of the ending a bit wrong.

 

Roger that