Avoiding The Archetype

When a writer conceptualizes a character, they often start with a basic archetype. It may be almost impossible not to, afterall, we find inspiration in characters from other works and actual people, and perhaps we sum them all up into one, partially realized, fictional person. Even famous persons long dead exist as caricatures for creatives to pick apart and analyze; it feels natural that we would use these as building blocks for new archetypes.

Now, I'm not obsessed with creating original characters that have "never been done" before. Rather, I would like my characters to have fully realized personalities, but I believe this process starts with acknowledging one fundamental truth about all people, fictional or otherwise.

We all want the same basic things, and we all have problems and weaknesses.

Now, I am thoroughly convinced that motive is the most important thing for any character, but this simple truth takes a close second. The strengths of a character are almost always at the front of the fiction, and though there are typically glances into the negatives, there's usually very little focus on their appreciation. I mean to say, the writer is not appreciating their weaker traits, and will even leverage them as something for the character to "overcome" before they'll acknowledge them at face value.

If motive is the what drives a character to act, then insecurities and basic needs are what ground them and make them real. It isn't glamorous, but it's important, and I should not focus on trying to fix them any more than I should attempt to make them perfect.

So once again, I shouldn't be surprised that the answer to building my characters well is to let them do what they will. It's disrespectful to force them to "grow" or be "interesting". They will find ways to break their archetypes on their own.