As I had stated in different posts that developing the characters of a story is important and an author should never do it halfheartedly. When the characters of a story are created they need flaws that fit with the type of person they are. These flaws also don't have to be traits that are viewed negatively either. An example of a common negative trait would be cockiness. On the flip side kindness is a positive trait that can be worked into being a tragic flaw. How you go about this depends on the writer. Common traits that lead to a character's downfall are:
- Revenge
- Lust for power
- Depression
- An unjust government
- Love
- Pride
- Greed
- A lust for war
- Trusting those who will cause you harm
- Going mad
- Not being able to figure out what you want in life
- Being a liar
- Being two-faced
As I stated in Life's Full of Expectations traditional tragedies were about people of high status. Their downfall comes about through different elements that are unavoidable. The reason for their unavoidable ending is because of fate. Fate (the author) brings characters with different agendas and conflicting personalities to a setting where tensions are high. This brings out the worse in the characters and allows them to fight for whatever their cause is until there is only one left standing. The chaotic energy that is unleashed through the actions of the character makes the story memorable. And whoever is left is only a broken reflection of themselves with little to no hope of being fixed.
The people who manage to still be alive at the end of a tragedy are important. At least when they play a large role in the story. Their connection to that main character whether it was positive or negative matters. These characters are what is left when hell has finally left the stage. Those that are alive are the ones who have to fix the damage that was done. But more often in tragedies, the remaining characters are just meant to live with the trauma. The reader, in my opinion, must be able to feel how hollow the remaining characters are now. At least when they are written well.
The characters who died in the tragedy become the message that the author wants to tell the reader. That message could be about how greed will lead to your downfall. Trusting everyone without thought can lead to serious conquests. Or that sometimes you just can't help being in the wrong place at the wrong time. When a character dies is also important along with when they die in the story. If a character dies at the beginning of the story it is usually to raise the tension of the characters. If characters are dying in the middle of the story that is the height of the conflict. Finally, if there are character deaths near or at the end of the story it could mean that most of the major players of the story's conflict have lost their power and status.
The characters in a tragedy need to be engaging. Their goals, relationships, and eventual end have to keep the readers invested. It helps when the driving forces of the story are interesting. The reader should probably be able to tell what is the reason for the fall of a character. The ones that are the most important need to be active in the conflict of the story. No one wants to see a duck sitting in the middle of a battlefield.
A tragedy's job is to be entertaining to the reader. A reader should want to view the story repeatedly and look at it from different angles and see elements of the story in a different light. Now does that mean the author has to continually think of different ways their story can be interpreted? No, that's something the reader does themself. That's why everyone can see and read the same movie or book and have different opinions about them. This is a good if not troublesome thing. Because negative elements of a book can lead to being read as positive. Which is something that you most likely don't want to happen with a tragedy.
Something that I think is important to note is that the characters' flaws are what makes them relatable. A characters' success is what makes them respectable. I wanted to state this because no one can honestly relate to someone who on paper is perfect. We all have problems that are and aren't worth a large amount of drama. Stories in a sense, comment on these problems. The problems in the world that an author takes issue with are retold in a controlled and structured story. Conversations that are not normally had at the table can be brought up and exposed. Things that are not a concern for one group of people can be shown to them. The issues of the world can be made to look different than themselves in reality. Our flaws can be simplified and put in a narrative that can lead to the characters' downfall.
Tragedies can teach us many things about ourselves and the world we live in. When they're written well that is. Giving characters tragic flaws helps with making the story believable because we can't see fate pull the strings that connect the characters. But we can see the results of what flaws do to the characters' relationships and livelihood. And with that, we end this conversation. Don't forget to Google+ this post and come back for the third and last part of this miniseries. Also, check out earlier posts on my blog and leave a comment because I do read all the comments that you post on this blog.
