A guest post by Linda Craig
Take a moment to think about the best book you have ever read. Why were you so hooked on it? You couldn’t leave it for days… you sympathized with every emotion the main characters went through. You laughed, cried, and suffered with them. That’s what distinguishes a brilliant author from a mediocre one – that author builds an emotional connection with the readers.
Don’t you want to achieve the same influence over your readers? You want to hypnotize them and make them beg for more. There are certain aspects you can pay attention to.
- Develop strong characters
You may think of great situations and dialogues, but if the characters are not well-developed, you won’t leave a powerful impression. Let’s take Guillaume Musso as an example. He is a popular novelist, who mainly attracts people that want a quick read. Yes, he has some intriguing ideas, but do you remember his characters a year after reading the book? Hardly. They are sympathetic, but they don’t make you emotional.
Let’s learn from this example: your characters have to be empathetic. The reader needs to understand them. Real life can be your greatest inspiration. Dostoevsky, for example, got inspired by suicides and criminal cases. He analyzed the background and the reasons that brought people to such act. As a result, you can understand why the characters in his books did what they did. Nabokov was another masterful writer, who somehow managed to evoke compassion for a person we would usually judge.
A sympathetic character, on the other hand, is someone we like, but we don’t get emotionally involved with. For example, Pablo from Hesse’s Steppenwolf is a sympathetic character, but Harry Haller and Hermine engage the reader on a deeper level. The conclusion is: you need both types of characters in your story.
- The story is important too!
You developed really powerful characters with burdening emotional background? You need to put them in an unusual situation that will hook the reader. Clearly, you understand the importance of the plot. The last thing you would like to do is describe people’s family history and leave the reader disappointed when he realizes that nothing important happens in your book.
When you arrange the characters in a particular situation, make sure their reactions are adequate to the personalities you developed. Make the reader wonder: “What made her choose x over y? Did she make the right choice?” When the readers start asking questions, you’ll have them hooked.
- Make it real
Let’s take Guillaume Musso as an example again. In The Girl on Paper, he brings a character from a writer’s novels to life. In the moment when she appears naked in his house and you realize that she is an imaginary personality, you realize: “okay, this is a book that won’t teach me a valuable lesson.” In fact, you can learn something from it: you should always, always make your characters realistic, even when you are writing a fantasy novel!
Even when people want to escape their daily lives, they still thrive off of reality. We want to recognize pieces of ourselves in the literature we read. When we can imagine a certain character as a part of our lives, he/she starts evoking rage, joy, happiness and despair. Do you remember Andrei Bolkonsky from War and Peace? Enough said.
You Found Your Calling? Now Discover the Purpose!
The real purpose of a writer is to make readers feel. You want to make them angry, ecstatic, disappointed and hopeful with a single book. You want them to reconsider their values and get out of the comfort zone. A reader can achieve catharsis if he develops an emotional connection with the characters and plot you serve.
Linda Craig has a master’s degree in literature. She is currently working at assignment writing service Assignmentmasters as a freelance blogger.
*****
Larry is currently away on an anniversary vacation with his wife. Until then Storyfix.com will feature several much appreciated guest posts, and a couple of surprise pre-scheduled visits by Larry, as well.
Larry’s new writing book, “Story Fix: Transform Your Novel From Broken To Brilliant,” has just been released and is available on all online venues, as well as most bookstores. If they don’t have it in stock yet, ask them to reserve a copy for you.
4 Responses
Great article!
I’m in the last quarter of Larry’s StoryFix book, going through the Story Questionnaire Feedback examples.
Your creating Emotional Connections with Your Readers article made me think of the question, “What are you asking your reader to ROOT for in this story?” Rooting means you are emotionally tied to the characters and outcome they’re in. Otherwise you are ambivalent, bored, or waiting for something to happen.
Regarding the above–HOW are you going to get your reader rooting and for what specifically? That would be through the characters, and “get your reader” really is “INVOLVE your reader”. In other words, you have to get the reader involved–just like in real life.
Empathy or rooting will come out if I am successful in involving the reader to experience the hero as if they were interacting with him themselves. This will be done via the hero’s interactions with other characters, antagonists and people sympathetic to his side, or at least sharing an interest in keeping his goals alive. These interactions are the make or break of empathy/sympathy/emotional-resonance in my opinion and what I have experienced as a reader and viewer of TV-movie-stories. The scenes that succeed in this regard, dedicate enough character interaction in that you get to know the hero, what he is made of, plus what the other character is made of.
Just like in real life, you have to spend enough “quality time” with someone, and ONLY through this kind of experience (scenes) do you really get to know them, and thus root for them–or dislike them. People (characters) that you don’t spend this quality time with–you won’t care about because you didn’t get to know them. In real life, these people aren’t making themselves “available” for you to get to know them, or understand what they’re about, what’s important to them, etc. This can be as simple as getting to know the people you work with and as you are working with them, you discuss your job: how you feel about it, what you like, don’t like, your goals and regrets. It’s done in this sharing, this “vulnerability” that creates either the bond of empathy (you like them), sympathy, or your realize you don’t like this person for what they have revealed to you. ***It stands to reason this is an interaction where the both of you share, not a monologue. Many people hate being this “intimate” and would rather not disclose their feelings. However, for your book, you must provide this information for key characters—or your readers will never bond.
Question: do you learn about a coworker in a single hour? Maybe, but usually it takes place over a period of time. In a story, that means over several of these types of scenes, your reader will develop a bond, or dislike, as if they were the character themselves. But, as in real life, the scenes require the characters to question each other, and perhaps to share an experience where they realize they are kindred spirits (share the same values) or that only one of them cares, and the other is a charlatan.
For example, you could have a scene where there’s a fire in the building, smoke is coming from down the hall, and you hear someone crying for help from the direction of the smoke. You and your coworker both hear it. If you both run to the smoke, save the person, then you will have an experiential positive bond. If you say to your coworker, “Let’s go see who needs help,” and your coworker gives you a look, shakes his head and says “I gotta grab my laptop…you’re on your own,”–then how would you feel then? Would you like your coworker? This only matters if you actually go seek out the source of the person in the smoke.
The point here, and I’m hammering on it because I see Hollywood screwing this up all the time: they rush these scenes, not letting the audience have the TIME to develop their feelings in regards to this bonding. This error is also done in books. OR—there are NONE of these scenes.
Why do I believe I know what I’m talking about? Simple, the unconscious mind will view another person’s detailed scene’s experience–as their own experience. It’s psychology, how we are wired. Sales and advertising companies know this. Time, repetition, are a couple of components of getting someone to feel what you want–unless they don’t like what you’re selling, and now you have pissed someone off (also good to know if you want to upset your reader via the evil antagonist).
Case in point, is the TV series, Sense8 where the directors are doing everything too fast with too many people in the FIRST episode. I’m watching it last night, and while there are very graphic scenes of violence and sex, as far as any story goes I’m asking WTF is this all about? Boring, and Sense8 LOST me as a viewer.
Which leads me to this: You should consider what your audience’s depth is that you want to appeal to. ***Linda Craig’s fine article here brings that up in regards to some people want an easy read. Or a movie with giant robotic special effects, or the Fast & Furious ultra-ridiculous (and really boring) flying cars. In other words, you can’t please everyone, so decide what kind of reader you are going for.
Speaking of an easy read, people that read Jack Reacher don’t want depth, they want a bullet proof hero that NEVER loses, gets hurt, and beats up everyone. The author sells a ton of those books, and I’m not his kind of reader. I tried one of the books after the Tom Cruise movie of the same name (Cruise really made Jack Reacher more empathetic than the books, 1000%), but was bored outta my mind. The entire story is in part 3 and 4.
Okay, to give a comparison between light and heavy, I’ll compare last 8 years of the shallow James Bond movies vs the first Jason Bourne movie, The Bourne Identity. Linda Craig wrote about “emotional connection with your readers”. Emotion is NOT being hyped up on special effects, and never ending impossible fight scenes.
Honestly, I NEVER rooted for James Bond. I didn’t know the character. Nobody knows Bond. He’s all flash and technology, throw in some brooding (or maybe whining). The first Bond with Daniel Craig had a few scenes showing us more depth, but then that was over and it’s back to the technology. Roger Moore and Sean Connery said that stuff was getting out of hand. Connery’s favorite was From Russia With Love–for the emotional connection, the human factor. But the current run of Bond movies, I can’t even watch them–what story? It’s a stuntman’s dream + special effects team.
Jason Bourne on the other hand, especially the first movie in that Matt Damon’s scenes with the girl Marie (met her at the bank), who is helping him out–THAT makes you root for Bourne! These scenes have Bourne and Marie in her car, running from the law and Bourne’s pursuers. That part is well done, believable, and not too long. But the scenes that get you emotionally involved with Bourne, are when he shares with Marie about what he is going through. NOTE: Marie started this outside the bank, in her car. They haven’t left yet, still in her car outside the bank, and Marie says, “Who pays $10k (whatever it was) for a ride to Paris?” Marie acts like anyone would in real life (take note—realism). Sure, it’s a jackpot to her, she needs the money, but her intuition says this is crazy–what’s the catch? Bourne, due to memory loss–has no answers. Finally he just takes a chance on her and says, “ F-it”. Then he shares with her what is going on. You really FEEL the loss and bewilderment of the Bourne character: he is lost, he doesn’t know who he is, what he was, and worse, people are chasing him. The director/writers of this movie are asking the audience to feel his emotions. BUT this feeling of emotion ONLY happens due to these types of scenes, and that these scenes are repetitive in the movie.
Bourne is upset, and shares with her that he doesn’t know who he is but he wants to know, and the more he learns about himself, the more he is disliking himself. Bourne uses questions to get the reader (it’s the best way) to feel what he is going through: “What kind of guy has all these IDs in a bank, money, gun, knows how to fight and is sizing up everybody, plus looking for escape routes in a restaurant? That behavior is not normal. (Bourne feels it is not normal and approaching neurotic).” ***If the character didn’t ask these questions—would your reader BE empathetic to him? If no, then how? “Showing” IS having your characters explain themselves…what they are going through. Just like in real life with your children, your friends and important others. If you do NOT share—you are NEVER understood. The rest of us have to guess what is going on inside your head, and we won’t understand you.
At one point Bourne tells Marie he doesn’t want to know who he is anymore–he wants to be someone else. (Later) he learns that he was a bad person, a killer. He believes he doesn’t deserve to live! Marie tries to convince him not to kill himself or turn himself in. That he IS good. Marie is rooting for Bourne! And so does the audience. This is a HUGE reason the Bourne Identity was a major success. Sure it had great action, but it was personal and vulnerable. Something you could relate to. ***In the book series, Marie was there in Bourne’s life for the other two books, but the idiots of Hollywood killed off her character, thus turning the next movies into Jack Reacher films, entertaining as they were.
In closing, we must–write our scenes to make our main characters personal and vulnerable (as in real life), but relevant to the core story. Same goes for those he interacts with. Even some of the antagonists can reveal personal and vulnerable information, but in this case they differ on the goals–hence they are on the opposite sides. Another way to say it, is we don’t care about Demur until we learn what is important to him, his values, and how that conflicts with the antagonist’s values.
Outstanding post, Linda. I’m hopping over to Assignmentmasters to follow you there.
Oops. Just visited Assignment Masters and realized it isn’t a blog. Do you have a website of your own?