I forgot how characterizations work, so can you tell me how I did?

[Warden-Yarn15]

Title says it all very bluntly, hopefully.

Over the years, and treating erotica as a straightforward execution of sex and actions, rather than any emotional attachment, I've forgotten how characterization works.

So apologies in advanced if you are to read this prompt here and be confused on what I've meant to do, well, the whole vibe I was going for was "People that knew each other in the past, realizing they have feelings for one another," as well as an unmarried Husband-Wife relationship, or just a resolution to 7 years worth of sexual tension.

I will be honest, right now, as I type this, it is 12:30 AM, and I forced myself to finish it, even when it's 12:25 AM, so the ending, I know for a fact, sucks, but nothing good can come out of me typing.

Also, I do believe, from what I can remember, that I hate how bipolar one of the characters is, as they go from nervous wreck to seductive after laughing their heart out. I believe I could do better, but at the risk of making the story longer, when the erotica section is barely four paragraphs long?

I also do not believe I've stuck the ending. It just feels off-putting to me and cancels out whatever I've actually accomplished and highlights whatever contemporary problems I was going through.

Possibly I'm my own worst critic, or possibly I'm a very honest person when it comes to my writing.

So please dear reader, may you tell me just as to how many migraines this story of mine gave you, and does it feel like that there's some meat in my characters, or do they just feel like the bare minimum of an archetype? If at all.

https://chyoa.com/chapter/[Prompt]-Second-Time's-A-Charm.1111607

 

[TheLowKing]

I don't think there's a problem with there being little erotic content in the earliest chapters of your story, though it should at least hint towards it, which it does. All good!

Writing people that have known each other forever can be hard, because there's a ton of backstory you have to at least imply, and you only have so many words to establish your characters and setting. Try asking yourself what you're trying to communicate. Who are your characters? What are their primary traits? Nuance isn't necessary at this stage, you can literally go full seven dwarfs. All you need is "this is the funny one, that's the flirty one, and that one over there is the evil one", and then just write everything they say with that in mind, at least initially.

Don't worry, as the story progresses, they'll start developing practically on their own. Maybe the flirty one tries seducing the evil one, and the latter eventually relents, showing that deep down, they do care, despite their rough exterior. Maybe the flirty one tries to strike back at the funny one by making a joke, but it hits a nerve and they have loving make-up sex, and we learn that the funny one has some deep-seeded insecurities or traumas that they have to work to overcome. Maybe the evil one gets fed up by the funny one's constant needling and sexually punishes the little brat until they apologize, revealing a whole new aspect to both of their characters. The possibilities are endless.

Hope that helps!

 

[parkingdiscount]

Characterization can be difficult since we tend to write characters similarly, a common sin of newbie writers is to have every character almost as confident as each other and talks almost the same level of language command so much so that readers think its the same person talking to themselves. If you do think about it realistically we often only talk the most to people who talk like us, look like us, act like us. So there is definitely going to be some similarity in how different characters communicate, although the differences are the sub personalities that dictate what they say. How they say it isn't as important as what they say. Sarcasm? Honesty? Fear?

If you're trying to show how people who know each other for a long time are familiar, utilize things such as codenames and slang, a husband probably calls his wife by a certain way that differs from other people. A certain way of talking, omitting stuff. People who are very close do not add time references when they talk about something iconic they both know. They just know. This would differ if they have a long time apart and grew some distance.

On the other hand forcing characterization through forced swapping of character emotions can be jarring without a proper catalyst. A very confident and egoistical character who loses that air of confidence just because the situation screwed up minorly makes no sense if he/she is more likely to just blow through it with their usual egoistical pride and then suffer the consequences later. In The Shining movie, Jack Torrence talks pretty much how you would expect throughout the entire movie. Yes, he becomes more unhinged as the show progresses, but even when he is cornering his wife with an axe, he doesn't go full murderer talk. He talks in the usual abusive husband form he does, telling her how he doesn't want to hurt her interspersed with the "I just want to bash your skull in" that still feels on character for him. He doesn't feel like a completely different man than he was at the start, he just feels more unhinged.

We as humans actually change a lot less than we think we do. Old habits die hard, and a lot of times we mistake being more our true selves as changing what we thought we were, when our previous states were just further from what we are.

 

[Dissonant Soundtrack]

I'll be honest, I couldn't really give you a good read on the characters because I was getting lost in the passive voice.

Take this:
Soon it was Morgan's turn to chuckle, and once Poppy had cleaned the last of his wounds, an uppercut was offered at his stomach, much to the fanciful delight of Morgan who had used such an opportune attack by retaliating with a bear hug and pulling themselves backward, from sitting on tree stumps and stools, and into the dirt.

That's a single sentence where both parties act and react, and it took me a couple readings to parse out who was doing what to whom. Characters are also developed by their actions so I think it's important to make it clearer what is happening here. I know sometimes it can feel a little bland to write short declarative sentences, but in a kinetic scene like a fistfight I think it's critical.

 

[SeriousBrainDamage]

I gave one quick read and I don't really feel like I'm in the position to give advice as a writer, so I'll speak as a reader, just because sometimes it's better to have a few stupid replies than no replies.
So here's my stupid one.

I think the lack of a physical description of the characters doesn't help you to characterize them. The guy has a notable six-pack. The boy is unsurprisingly young. The girl has (supposedly, not sure as they go at it from the back door...) a pussy?
Other than that, are there any other meaningful details that could help us to picture them? Did I miss something?

I get it that sometimes it feels dull to drop an entire paragraph describing height, hair, boobs, etc..., and this is especially true for a short story, but you still got to give your audience something.
A puffy nose? A scar? A contagious smile? Leaving it all blank is just as bad as doing a body scan with your tape measure.

Also, while I think I get the motivations of your characters, I'm not sure I get the outcome.
That "I think I'm in love" doesn't feel ironic at all, but then it just leads to a secretive anal quickie in the middle of the forest.
After ten years of repressed or conflicted feelings?
I found it to be a little anti-climatic and not very compelling to read.

All in all, I kind of liked it, and I think it has the potential to develop nicely.

 

[CurvyLinesEverywhere]

Well, you gave them traits. Lots and lots of traits. And a group dynamic. And banter! And I applaud your effort. But what we're really looking for in characterization is the character's personality. Their reasons for doing the things they do. Not just cause and effect, but glimpses of the driving force inside of them.

Their past. Their fears. Their needs. Their very soul.

And once you know what those driving forces are for each character, you can't just walk the characters on-stage and have them announce their innermost thoughts and feelings. (Unless you're writing a musical.) We have to find out about those things organically while we're reading a story.

"Show, don't tell," as they say.

I do respect that you tried to do that with the characters mock-fighting each other around the campfire, and then laughing about it, implying the group dynamic of the party. But it felt forced. Possibly because you opened on descriptions of the characters' injuries. In fact, tonally, it went from body horror to slice-of-life to action to sitcom to light romance while the reader was still figuring out what the story was about. You need to set the tone of the piece in the first paragraph, ideally even the first sentence, and then stick to it. (Ironically, that's usually erotica's biggest strength, even when everything else falls apart: consistent mood.)

Later on, during the sex scene, the banter suffers from the same sort of mood-whiplash. Affection, disgust... threats of poison ivy? It just jumps around with no rhyme or reason to it. Part of it might be that this is just their flirting style? But if so, I'm not deep enough into the characters' heads to pick up on it.

I like that these characters are having a good time, I just don't understand why they are having a good time.

I'm not sure why the character Alexion even exists. I can't get a read on his personality or mental state. Is he supposed to be a kid? An adult? Is he ace? Is he the camping version of being a wingman? It's like you created an archetypal everyman, just to send him away during the main action of the story. "Poppy and Morgan gathered firewood and started a campfire." There. I just saved you writing an entire character. You can even keep the alternate title pun!

Fortunately, there's a simple fix for all of this. It's not easy, because it would require a lot of work... basically, a complete rewrite... but it is simple.

From the very first line of your story, you need to always give the readers someone to root for.

Here is a simple way of doing this that I think any writer can probably execute on:

• Before you begin writing, play "20 Questions" with your characters. Find out their goals, dreams, fears, strengths, weaknesses, regrets, etc. List them out in a separate character design document. You'll refer back to this later when writing.
• Pick one of these characters to be the Main Character. The story will mostly concern itself with this character's point of view. If the MC can't read minds, the audience won't know what the other characters are thinking, just the MC's understanding of what the other characters are thinking, based on the MC's preconceptions and what the other characters are saying and doing.
  
• Now that you've laid the groundwork, follow this simple pattern:

1. In the first sentence, reveal what the MC wants. (this gives them a goal, which means the audience can root for them later, if they like the character.)
   
2. The MC does the smartest thing they can think of to try and solve their problem. (This makes them seem competent, which makes the audience like them.) Unfortunately, one of two things happens, 3 or 4:
3. The thing they tried fails, but they learn something from the failure which they can use to try again. (This makes the character seem scrappy and determined, which makes the audience like them.) ~or~
4. The thing they tried works, but once they have what they wanted, they realize that it won't actually solve a bigger, more underlying problem, and so now they want a different thing (This makes the character seem smart and/or deep, which makes the audience like them.)
5. After 3 or 4, go back to 2. Continue this pattern all the way up until the very last line of your story. At which point, the MC either gets what they wanted, if it's a comedy, or else the thing they wanted is now gone forever, if it's a tragedy.

And not just the focal character does this, but all of the characters do. This is how you get charismatic villains the audience loves to hate. This is how you get memorable side-characters that the audience is delighted to see again. What differentiates characters is what they would think to try in #2, how they bounce back from failure in #3, and their view of the big picture in #4. Write them out of the story when they hit their personal #5. If they're needed in the story again as anything more than background dressing or a callback, give them a new #1 in the sentence where they show up.

(Juicy rivalries between friends, uneasy alliances between enemies, and opportunities for character-turns and double-crosses all start to emerge organically from this framework, depending on which characters' #1s conflict or align with other characters' #1s. But wrangling these conflicts of interest is outside the scope of this post. My advice is to keep it simple until you have a good reason to ramp up the intrigue.)

This is not the only way to do it, but this is the easiest consistent way to do it. It's hard to mess this pattern up. Worst case scenario, your story reads like vaguely watchable television. Done well, it's a page-turner.

Why am I talking about tone, point of view, and advancing the action when your question was about characterization?

Because you need to reveal these traits while the audience is reading a story about a character that they care about.

It's all in how you do the revealing.

Good luck!