Editing Character (arts)

{{Short description|Fictional being in a narrative}}
{{for|the concise literary profile|Character sketch}}
[[File:Four Commedia dell’Arte Figures claude-gillot.jpg|thumb|right|Four ''[[commedia dell'arte]]'' characters, whose costumes and demeanor indicate the [[stock character]] roles that they portray in this genre]] 
In [[fiction]], a '''character''' or '''role''' is a [[person]] or other being in a [[narrative]] (such as a [[novel]], [[Play (theatre)|play]], [[Radio series|radio]] or [[television series]], [[music]], [[film]], or [[video game]]).<ref name="Freeman">{{cite book|author=Matthew Freeman|title=Historicising Transmedia Storytelling: Early Twentieth-Century Transmedia Story Worlds|isbn =978-1315439501|publisher=[[Routledge]]|year=2016|pages=31–34|access-date=January 19, 2017 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=rDBuDQAAQBAJ&pg=PT31}}</ref><ref name="DiBattista">{{cite book|author=Maria DiBattista|title=Novel Characters: A Genealogy|isbn =978-1444351552|publisher=[[John Wiley & Sons]]|year=2011|pages=14–20|access-date=January 19, 2017|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=5uATBJUxMqEC&pg=PT14}}</ref><ref>Baldick (2001, 37) and Childs and Fowler (2006, 23). See also "character, 10b" in Trumble and Stevenson (2003, 381): "A person portrayed in a novel, a drama, etc; a part played by an actor".</ref> The character may be entirely fictional or based on a real-life person, in which case the distinction of a "fictional" versus "real" character may be made.<ref name="DiBattista"/> Derived from the [[Ancient Greek]] word {{Lang|grc|χαρακτήρ|italic=no}}, the English word dates from the [[English Restoration|Restoration]],<ref>''OED'' "character" sense 17.a citing, ''inter alia'', [[John Dryden|Dryden's]] 1679 preface to ''[[Troilus and Cressida]]'': "The chief character or Hero in a Tragedy ... ought in prudence to be such a man, who has so much more in him of Virtue than of Vice... If Creon had been the chief character in ''Œdipus''..."</ref> although it became widely used after its appearance in ''[[The History of Tom Jones, a Foundling|Tom Jones]]'' by Henry Fielding in 1749.<ref>Aston and Savona (1991, 34), quotation: {{quotation|[...] is first used in English to denote 'a personality in a novel or a play' in 1749 (''The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary'', s.v.).}}</ref><ref name=Harrison1998p51/> From this, the sense of "a part played by an [[actor]]" developed.<ref name=Harrison1998p51>Harrison (1998, 51-2) quotation: {{quotation|Its use as 'the sum of the qualities which constitute an individual' is a mC17 development. The modern literary and theatrical sense of 'an individual created in a fictitious work' is not attested in OED until mC18: 'Whatever characters any... have for the jestsake personated... are now thrown off' (1749, Fielding, ''Tom Jones'').}}</ref> (Before this development, the term ''[[dramatis personae]]'', naturalized in English from Latin and meaning "masks of the drama", encapsulated the notion of characters from the literal aspect of [[mask]]s.) A character, particularly when enacted by an actor in the [[theatre|theater]] or cinema, involves "the illusion of being a human person".<ref>Pavis (1998, 47).</ref> In literature, characters guide readers through their stories, helping them to understand plots and ponder themes.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Roser |first=Nancy |author2=Miriam Martinez |author3=Charles Fuhrken |author4=Kathleen McDonnold |title=Characters as Guides to Meaning |journal=The Reading Teacher |year=2007 |volume=60 |issue=6 |pages=548–559 |doi=10.1598/RT.60.6.5}}</ref> Since the end of the 18th century, the phrase "[[wiktionary:in_character|in character]]" has been used to describe an effective [[impersonation]] by an actor.<ref name=Harrison1998p51/> Since the 19th century, the [[Art (skill)|art]] of creating characters, as practiced by actors or [[writers]], has been called [[characterization]].<ref name=Harrison1998p51/>  

A character who stands as a representative of a particular [[Social class|class]] or group of people is known as a type.<ref name=b265>Baldick (2001, 265).</ref> Types include both [[stock character]]s and those that are more fully [[individual|individualized]].<ref name=b265/> The characters in [[Henrik Ibsen]]'s {{Lang|no|[[Hedda Gabler]]}} (1891) and [[August Strindberg]]'s ''[[Miss Julie]]'' (1888), for example, are representative of specific positions in the [[social relation]]s of class and [[gender]], such that the [[Conflict (narrative)|conflicts]] between the characters reveal [[Ideology|ideological]] conflicts.<ref>Aston and Savona (1991, 35).</ref>

The study of a character requires an analysis of its relations with all of the other characters in the work.<ref>Aston and Savona (1991, 41).</ref> The individual status of a character is defined through the network of oppositions (proairetic, [[Pragmatism|pragmatic]], [[Linguistics|linguistic]], [[Proxemics|proxemic]]) that it forms with the other characters.<ref>Elam (2002, 133).</ref> The relation between characters and the action of the story shifts historically, often [[Mimesis|miming]] shifts in society and its ideas about human individuality, [[self-determination]], and the [[social order]].<ref>Childs and Fowler (2006, 23).</ref>

==Creation==
In [[fiction writing]], authors create dynamic characters using various methods. Sometimes characters are conjured up from imagination; in other instances, they are created by amplifying the character trait of a real person into a new fictional creation.<ref name="Freeman"/><ref name="DiBattista"/>

=== Real people, in part or in full ===
An author or creator basing a character on a real person can use a person they know, a historical figure, a current figure whom they have not met, or themselves, with the latter being either an author-surrogate or an example of [[self-insertion]]. The use of a famous person easily identifiable with certain character traits as the base for a principal character is a feature of [[Allegory|allegorical]] works, such as ''[[Animal Farm]]'' by George Orwell, which portrays Soviet revolutionaries as pigs. Other authors, especially for [[historical fiction]], make use of real people and create fictional stories revolving around their lives, as with ''[[The Paris Wife]]'' which revolves around [[Ernest Hemingway]].

=== Archetypes and stock characters ===
[[File:Patrick Grant's Jungian View of LOTR.svg|thumb|upright=1.3|Literary scholar Patrick Grant matches characters from ''[[The Lord of the Rings]]'' with Jungian archetypes.<ref name="Grant 1973">{{cite journal|last=Grant|first=Patrick|date=1973|title=Tolkien: Archetype and Word|url=https://crosscurrents.org/tolkien.htm#_ednref9|journal=Cross Currents|issue=Winter 1973|pages=365–380}}</ref>]]
An author can create a character using the basic character [[archetype]]s which are common to many cultural traditions: the [[father figure]], mother figure, [[hero]], and so on. Some writers make use of [[Jungian archetypes|archetypes]] as presented by [[Carl Jung]] as the basis for character traits.<ref>{{Cite book|last1=Hauke|first1=Christopher|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Qbt3Kjd3nMYC|title=Jung and Film|last2=Alister|first2=Ian|date=2001|publisher=Psychology Press|isbn=978-1-58391-132-7|language=en}}</ref> Generally, when an archetype from some system (such as Jung's) is used, elements of the story also follow the system's expectations in terms of [[Plot (narrative)|storyline]].

An author can also create a fictional character using generic [[stock character]]s, which are generally flat. They tend to be used for [[Supporting character|supporting]] or minor characters. However, some authors have used stock characters as the starting point for building richly detailed characters, such as [[Shakespeare|William Shakespeare]]'s use of the boastful soldier character as the basis for [[Falstaff|John Falstaff]].

Some authors create [[Aptronym|charactonyms]] for their characters. A charactonym is a name that implies the psychological makeup of the person, makes an allegorical allusion, or makes reference to their appearance. For example, Shakespeare has an emotional young male character named [[Mercutio]], John Steinbeck has a kind, sweet character named Candy in ''[[Of Mice and Men]]'', and Mervyn Peake has a Machiavellian, manipulative, and murderous villain in ''[[Gormenghast (series)|Gormenghast]]'' named [[Steerpike]]. The charactonym can also indicate appearance. For example, François Rabelais gave the name [[Gargantua]] to a giant, and the huge whale in ''[[Pinocchio (1940 film)|Pinocchio]]'' (1940) is named [[Monstro]].

==Types==
===Round vs. flat=== <!-- Characterization links here. -->
In his book ''Aspects of the Novel'', [[E. M. Forster]] defined two basic types of characters, their qualities, functions, and importance for the development of the novel: '''flat''' characters and '''round''' characters.<ref name="Hoffman">{{cite book |last=Hoffman |first=Michael J |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=zxFqVTxvNA4C&pg=PA36 |title=Essentials of the theory of fiction |author2=Patrick D. Murphy |publisher=Duke University Press, 1996 |year=1996 |isbn=978-0-8223-1823-1 |edition=2 |pages=36}}</ref> Flat characters are two-dimensional, in that they are relatively uncomplicated. By contrast, round characters are complex figures with many different characteristics, that undergo development, sometimes sufficiently to surprise the reader.<ref>{{cite book|last=Forster|first=E.M.|title=Aspects of the Novel|url=https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.509170|year=1927}}</ref>

In psychological terms, round or complex characters may be considered to have five personality dimensions under the [[Big Five personality traits|Big Five]] model of personality.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Pelican|first=Kira-Anne|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=NnabzQEACAAJ|title=The Science of Writing Characters: Using Psychology to Create Compelling Fictional Characters|date=2020|publisher=Bloomsbury Academic|isbn=978-1-5013-5722-0|language=en}}</ref> The five factors are:
* [[Extraversion and introversion|extraversion]] (outgoing/energetic vs. solitary/reserved)
* [[agreeableness]] (friendly/compassionate vs. critical/rational)
* [[openness to experience]] (inventive/curious vs. consistent/cautious)
* [[conscientiousness]] (efficient/organized vs. extravagant/careless)
* [[neuroticism]] (sensitive/nervous vs. resilient/confident)<ref>{{cite journal |url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0146167202289008 |title=The Big Five Personality Factors and Personal Values |vauthors=Roccas, Sonia, Sagiv, Lilach, Schwartz, Shalom H, et al. |journal=Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin |pages=789–801 |volume=28 |issue=6 |date=2002 |doi=10.1177/0146167202289008|s2cid=144611052 }}</ref>

[[Stock character]]s are usually one-dimensional and thin. [[Mary Sue]]s are characters that usually appear in [[fan fiction]] which are virtually devoid of flaws,<ref name="Bennett">{{cite book|vauthors=Bennett, Lucy, Booth, Paul |title=Seeing Fans: Representations of Fandom in Media and Popular Culture|isbn =978-1501318474|publisher=[[Bloomsbury Publishing]] US|year=2016|page=160|access-date=January 19, 2017|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ydwuDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA160}}</ref> and are therefore considered flat characters.

Another type of flat character is a "walk-on", a term used by [[Seymour Chatman]] for characters that are not fully delineated and individualized; rather they are part of the background or the setting of the narrative.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Chatman|first=Seymour Benjamin|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ewrOp9uPjYUC&pg=PA139|title=Story and Discourse: Narrative Structure in Fiction and Film|date=1980|publisher=Cornell University Press|isbn=978-0-8014-9186-3|page=139}}</ref>

===Dynamic vs. static===
{{see|Character arc}}
'''Dynamic''' characters are those that change over the course of the story, while '''static''' characters remain the same throughout. An example of a popular dynamic character in literature is [[Ebenezer Scrooge]], the protagonist of ''[[A Christmas Carol]]'' by Charles Dickens. At the start of the story, he is a bitter miser, but by the end of the tale, he transforms into a kindhearted, generous man.

===Regular, recurring and guest characters===
{{See also|Bit part}}

In television, a regular, main or ongoing character is a character who appears in all or a majority of episodes, or in a significant chain of episodes of the series.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Sandler|first=Ellen|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=0YeCet_B_-IC&pg=PA40|title=The TV Writer's Workbook: A Creative Approach To Television Scripts|date=2008|publisher=Random House Publishing Group|isbn=978-0-307-49221-0|page=40}}</ref> Regular characters may be both core and secondary ones.

A [[recurring character]] or supporting character often and frequently appears from time to time during the series' run.<ref name="Crafty">{{cite book |last=Epstein |first=Alex |title=Crafty TV Writing: Thinking Inside the Box |publisher=[[Macmillan Publishers]] |year=2006 |isbn=0-8050-8028-7 |pages=[https://archive.org/details/craftytvwritingt00epst/page/27 27–28] |url=https://archive.org/details/craftytvwritingt00epst/page/27 }}</ref> Recurring characters often play major roles in more than one episode, sometimes being the main focus.

A guest or minor character is one who acts only in a few episodes or scenes. Unlike regular characters, the guest ones do not need to be carefully incorporated into the storyline with all its ramifications: they create a piece of drama and then disappear without consequences to the narrative structure, unlike core characters, for which any significant conflict must be traced during a considerable time, which is often seen as an unjustified waste of resources.<ref name=mcbeal>{{Cite book|last=Smith|first=Greg M.|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=joaM7TvhSzUC|title=Beautiful TV: The Art and Argument of Ally McBeal|date=2009|publisher=University of Texas Press|isbn=978-0-292-77784-2|pages=147, 151}}</ref>{{rp|147}} There may also be a continuing or recurring guest character.<ref name=mcbeal />{{rp|151}} Sometimes a guest or minor character may gain unanticipated popularity and turn into a regular or main one;<ref>{{Cite book|last=Kukoff|first=David|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=T9zj0AqB6bUC&pg=PA62|title=Vault Guide to Television Writing Careers|date=2006|publisher=Vault Inc.|isbn=978-1-58131-371-0|page=62}}</ref> this is known as a [[list of breakout characters|breakout character]].<ref name=ESL>{{cite web|url=http://eslnotes.com./movies/html/man-on-the-moon.html|work=English Learner Movie Guides|title=Man on the Moon|year=2000|first=Raymond|last=Weschler}}</ref><ref name="This definition">{{cite web|last=Miller|first=Ron|title=They really were a great bunch of happy people|url=http://www.thecolumnists.com/miller/miller426.html|publisher=TheColumnists.com|year=2005|quote=Originally, the Arthur 'Fonzie' Fonzarelli character was to be a comic relief dropout type, put there for comic contrast to the whitebread Richie and his pals. He was a tall, lanky guy, but when Henry Winkler blew everybody away at his reading, they decided to cut Fonzie down to Henry's size. Ultimately, Winkler molded the character around himself and everybody, including Ron Howard, realized this would be the show's 'breakout' character.|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110716055123/http://www.thecolumnists.com/miller/miller426.html|archive-date=July 16, 2011}}</ref>

==Classical analysis==
{{further|Poetics (Aristotle)}}

In the earliest surviving work of [[dramatic theory]], ''[[Poetics (Aristotle)|Poetics]]'' ({{circa|335 BCE}}), the [[Greek philosophy|Classical Greek philosopher]] [[Aristotle]] states that character (''[[ethos]]'') is one of six qualitative parts of [[Classical Athens|Athenian]] tragedy and one of the three objects that it [[Mimesis|represents]] (1450a12).<ref>Janko (1987, 8). Aristotle defines the six qualitative elements of tragedy as "plot, character, diction, reasoning, spectacle and song" (1450a10); the three objects are plot (''[[Mythos (Aristotle)|mythos]]''), character (''[[ethos]]''), and reasoning (''[[dianoia]]'').</ref> He understands character not to denote a fictional person, but the quality of the person acting in the story and reacting to its situations (1450a5).<ref name=j984>Janko (1987, 9, 84).</ref> He defines character as "that which reveals [[Decision making|decision]], of whatever sort" (1450b8).<ref name=j984/> It is possible, therefore, to have stories that do not contain "characters" in Aristotle's sense of the word, since character necessarily involves making the [[Ethics|ethical]] dispositions of those performing the action clear.<ref>Aristotle writes: "Again, without action, a tragedy cannot exist, but without characters, it may. For the tragedies of most recent [poets] lack character, and in general, there are many such poets" (1450a24-25); see Janko (1987, 9, 86).</ref> If, in speeches, the speaker "decides or avoids nothing at all", then those speeches "do not have character" (1450b9—11).<ref>Janko (1987, 9).</ref> Aristotle argues for the primacy of [[Plot (narrative)|plot]] (''[[Mythos (Aristotle)|mythos]]'') over character (''ethos'').<ref>Aston and Savona (1991, 34) and Janko (1987, 8).</ref> He writes:
{{blockquote|But the most important of these is the structure of the incidents. For (i) [[tragedy]] is a representation not of human beings but of action and life. Happiness and unhappiness lie in action, and the end [of life] is a sort of action, not a quality; people are of a certain sort according to their characters, but happy or the opposite according to their actions. So [the actors] do not act in order to represent the characters, but they include the characters for the sake of their actions" (1450a15-23).<ref>Janko (1987, 8).</ref>}}
Aristotle suggests that works were distinguished in the first instance according to the nature of the person who created them: "the grander people represented fine actions, i.e. those of fine persons" by producing "hymns and praise-poems", while "ordinary people represented those of inferior ones" by "composing invectives" (1448b20—1449a5).<ref>Janko (1987, 5). This distinction, Aristotle argues, arises from two causes that are natural and common to all humans—the delight taken in experiencing representations and the way in which we learn through imitation (1448b4—19); see Janko (1987, 4—5).</ref> On this basis, a distinction between the individuals represented in tragedy and in comedy arose: tragedy, along with [[epic poetry]], is "a representation of serious people" (1449b9—10), while [[Comedy (drama)|comedy]] is "a representation of people who are rather inferior" (1449a32—33).<ref>Janko (1987, 6—7). Aristotle specifies that comedy does not represent all kinds of ugliness and vice, but only that which is laughable (1449a32—1449a37).</ref>

In the ''[[Tractatus coislinianus]]'' (which may or may not be by Aristotle), [[Ancient Greek comedy]] is defined as involving three types of characters: the [[buffoon]] (''{{Lang|grc-latn|[[bômolochus]]}}''), the [[Irony|ironist]] (''{{Lang|grc-latn|[[Eiron|eirōn]]}}''), and the [[imposter]] or boaster ({{Lang|grc-latn|[[Alazon|alazṓn]]}}).<ref>Carlson (1993, 23) and Janko (1987, 45, 170).</ref> All three are central to [[Aristophanes]]' [[old comedy|Old Comedy]].<ref>Janko (1987, 170).</ref>

By the time the [[Roman Empire|Roman]] comic playwright [[Plautus]] wrote his plays two centuries later, the use of characters to define dramatic [[genre]]s was well established.<ref>Carlson (1993, 22).</ref> His ''[[Amphitryon (Plautus play)|Amphitryon]]'' begins with a [[prologue]] in which [[Mercury (mythology)|Mercury]] claims that since the play contains kings and gods, it cannot be a comedy and must be a [[tragicomedy]].<ref>''Amphritruo'', line 59.</ref>

== See also ==
{{Div col|colwidth=10em|content=
* [[Advertising character]]
* [[Antagonist]]
* [[Breaking character]]
* [[Character actor]]
* [[Character animation]]
* [[Character comedy]]
* [[Character dance]]
* [[Character flaw]]
* [[Characterization]]
* [[Character piece]]
* [[Character sketch]]
* [[Composite character]]
* [[Costumed character]]
* [[Declamation]]
* [[Focal character]]
* [[Gag character]]
* [[Ghost character]]
* [[Non-player character]]
* [[Out of character]]
* [[Persona]]
* [[Player character]]
* [[Protagonist]]
* [[Secret character (video games)]]
* [[Supporting character]]
* [[Sympathetic character]]
* [[Unseen character]]
* [[Virtual actor]]
}}

==Notes==
{{reflist|30em}}

==References==
{{refbegin|30em}}
* Aston, Elaine, and George Savona. 1991. ''Theatre as Sign-System: A Semiotics of Text and Performance''. London and New York: Routledge. {{ISBN|0-415-04932-6}}.
* Baldick, Chris. 2001. ''The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms.'' 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford UP. {{ISBN|0-19-280118-X}}.
* Burke, Kenneth. 1945. ''A Grammar of Motives''. California edition. Berkeley: U of California P, 1969. {{ISBN|0-520-01544-4}}.
* Carlson, Marvin. 1993. ''Theories of the Theatre: A Historical and Critical Survey from the Greeks to the Present.'' Expanded ed. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press. {{ISBN|978-0-8014-8154-3}}.
* Childs, Peter, and Roger Fowler. 2006. ''The Routledge Dictionary of Literary Terms.'' London and New York: Routledge. {{ISBN|0-415-34017-9}}.
* Eco, Umberto. 2009. [http://sss.ut.ee/index.php/sss/article/view/SSS.2009.37.1-2.04/218 On the ontology of fictional characters: A semiotic approach.] ''[[Sign Systems Studies]]'' 37(1/2): 82–98.
* Elam, Keir. 2002. ''The Semiotics of Theatre and Drama''. 2nd edition. New Accents Ser. London and New York: Routledge. {{ISBN|0-415-28018-4}}. Originally published in 1980.
* Goring, Rosemary, ed. 1994. ''Larousse Dictionary of Literary Characters.'' Edinburgh and New York: Larousse. {{ISBN|0-7523-0001-6}}.
* Harrison, Martin. 1998. ''The Language of Theatre''. London: Routledge. {{ISBN|0-87830-087-2}}.
* Hodgson, Terry. 1988. ''The Batsford Dictionary of Drama.'' London: Batsford. {{ISBN|0-7134-4694-3}}.
* Janko, Richard, trans. 1987. ''Poetics with Tractatus Coislinianus, Reconstruction of Poetics II and the Fragments of the On Poets.'' By [[Aristotle]]. Cambridge: Hackett. {{ISBN|0-87220-033-7}}.
* McGovern, Una, ed. 2004. ''Dictionary of Literary Characters.'' Edinburgh: Chambers. {{ISBN|0-550-10127-6}}.
* Pavis, Patrice. 1998. ''Dictionary of the Theatre: Terms, Concepts, and Analysis.'' Trans. Christine Shantz. Toronto and Buffalo: U of Toronto P. {{ISBN|0-8020-8163-0}}.
* Pringle, David. 1987. ''Imaginary People: A Who's Who of Modern Fictional Characters.'' London: Grafton. {{ISBN|0-246-12968-9}}.
* Rayner, Alice. 1994. ''To Act, To Do, To Perform: Drama and the Phenomenology of Action.'' Theater: Theory/Text/Performance Ser. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. {{ISBN|0-472-10537-X}}.
* Trumble, William R, and Angus Stevenson, ed. 2002. ''Shorter Oxford English Dictionary on Historical Principles.'' 5th ed. Oxford: Oxford UP. {{ISBN|0-19-860575-7}}..
* {{cite journal|url=http://philpapers.org/rec/SAUPPO |author1=Paisley Livingston |author2= Andrea Sauchelli|title=Philosophical Perspectives on Fictional Characters|journal= New Literary History|volume= 42, 2 |year=2011|issue=2 |pages=337–60}}
{{refend}}

{{Fiction writing}}

{{Authority control}}

[[Category:Fictional characters| ]]