Checking Out Of Checkboxes

Nothing is quite so disrespectful as rendering a character into existence for the sole purpose of lightening tension and slap-sticking it up about the whole novel like a rodeo clown. Here's the thing about rodeo clowns, though: they are people before they are clowns. When the makeup comes off and the zany persona is dropped, they are just as fragile and strong and wicked and potentially empathetic as everyone else. Making a character that exists only to check a box is akin to the same atrocity as making a villain that only exists to be an antagonist. It's the same as making a character just to kill off in order move a plot (affectionately known as 'fridging') or creating a 'diverse' character for the sake of diversity. It's terrible writing and I'm not going to do it. Obviously, I feel very passionate about this. Don't misunderstand me, I'm not saying stories shouldn't involve clowns or diversity or the death of characters, I am saying, if that's all they are and they were only conceived for a singular purpose that ultimately exists outside of the story, they shouldn't exist at all. I'll say, when it comes to 'one-off' and/or side characters, it is extremely difficult to pen them without thinking of them as disposable or one dimensional. But even a little thought given to their humanity can make a huge difference in how they are represented. This is something I have to practice constantly, because it is such an easy trap to fall into. The shopkeeper is not just a shopkeeper. The jerky guy heckling the main character is not just a jerky guy. The assassin waiting to spring a trap on an unsuspecting victim isn't just an assassin. The person writing a blog about their novel writing process isn't just a blog writer. What we see from these fly-by-night characters may be very little, but it is possible to depict their words and actions as the tip of the iceberg.

Often, a single thought given to the usually thoughtless can make all the difference in the world.