I recently finished watching the first season of Star Trek Discovery. When I was only a few episodes in, I felt a little betrayed, as it seemed this particular Star Trek iteration was discarding what I loved about the show: its idealism and optimism for the future. But I stuck with it, and eventually realized the show was inspecting the very existential roots of how Star Trek (or Starfleet) ended up that way in the first place.
As part of that inspection, we see two different versions of a few key characters: a Starfleet version and then the “evil” version. But regardless of whether we’re watching the “good” or the “evil” version, it’s clear that the character, at their core, is the same. It’s just that the forces that have been applied to them over time have created different outcomes.
Which brings me, in a rather roundabout way, to Bret Anthony Johnston’s insights into how to know your character. He says:
When the [character] “change” feels beautiful … I think it’s because the character has confirmed what we’ve hoped or suspected all along. Maybe the character hasn’t changed at all, but rather has finally been put in a situation where her truest self can be revealed. … Stories, to my mind, are never about change. They are always and only about the possibility of change.
His thoughts about character development feel particularly appropriate for our times. Read the entire essay.
For more from the latest Glimmer Train bulletin:
- It Is All Ours to Make by Laura van den Berg
- Writing Advice by Baird Harper
Jane Friedman has spent her entire career working in the publishing industry, with a focus on business reporting and author education. Established in 2015, her newsletter The Bottom Line provides nuanced market intelligence to thousands of authors and industry professionals; in 2023, she was named Publishing Commentator of the Year by Digital Book World.
Jane’s expertise regularly features in major media outlets such as The New York Times, The Atlantic, NPR, The Today Show, Wired, The Guardian, Fox News, and BBC. Her book, The Business of Being a Writer, Second Edition (The University of Chicago Press), is used as a classroom text by many writing and publishing degree programs. She reaches thousands through speaking engagements and workshops at diverse venues worldwide, including NYU’s Advanced Publishing Institute, Frankfurt Book Fair, and numerous MFA programs.
I love those characters who, you realize based on who they are and their environment, were always going to do [X], you just didn’t see it coming.
That “oh? Of course!” moment is what I strive for.
A note from the original Star Trek. (No I’m not going to write about Bradberry’s great split infinitive.) To the point, Spock was unchangeable. That’s fine. His steadfast character benefitted the mission. But not the Captain. He should have been affected by experience while remaining his intrepid self. But, then, Star Trek would have been a serial. Its episodic charm would have been lost.
[…] Structure may be hidden, but your character is the public face of your story. Lesley Nneha Arimah sketches how to create a character in short fiction, Melissa Bowersock reminds us to be true to our characters, Tamar Sloan recommends deepening character complexity with the help of psychology, and Jane Friedman says your characters don’t have to change to be compelling. […]
[…] Jane Friedman: Your Characters Don’t Have to Change to Be Compelling […]