How to improve the voice of my characters?
Fleis92
I realize there are books and articles covering this, I don't feel
like my characters have a great voice. Can anyone offer any tips or
insights?
Alan Brooks
* Read your screenplay out loud.
* Imagine each character as a friend or family member whose voice you're
familiar with.
* Write each character with a specific actor in mind, and try to hear it in
their voice.
* Rewrite like crazy. Don't lie to yourself that something's working if
you can hear that it's not.
* Over-write. Exaggerate every emotion, every stance, every statement.
Force your characters into extreme views that you, yourself don't hold. You
can always pull back from an over-written piece, but you'll find it harder
to push forward from a tame one.
* Prime your emotional pump with the kind of voice you want to hear. Read
"Trainspotting" or some Jane Austen or Charles Bukowski or whoever's voice
you'd like to hear in your own dialogue.
Alan Brooks
---------------------------
A Schmuck with an Underwood
-- Dialogue Hard
MWSM FAQ: http://www.panix.com/~mwsm/faq.html
Filtering Trolls: http://www.panix.com/~mwsm/trolls.html
Paulo Joe Jingy
If you do, you have to listen to a lot of it and write a lot of it.
Before I start any story I'll normally write pages of my characters
talking to each other. Nothing else. Straight dialogue.
Be selective of what you listen to. Two girls in a mall saying: "Like,
you know" to each other over and over again, isn't going to help much.
Consciously differentiate the dialogue. If you have two characters
talking, and you can't tell who's who when you remove the character
names, they aren't different enough. (You have exaggerate on real life.
In real life people often sound a lot alike.)
One easy short cut (at least when you're developing the characters) is
to have one talk in longer sentences and the other one talk in shorter
sentences.
Usually, my characters don't really pick up their own characteristics
and speech patterns until about 30 or 40 pages into the script (story).
Then when they start to click, go back and rewrite the first 30 or 40
pages.
Good luck.
--
Paulo Joe Jingy
"I just couldn't live in a world without me."
Paulo Joe Jingy
yourself, repeating almost the same thing but in slightly different
ways, over and over again, you're not working at it hard enough.
Paulo Joe Jingy
with your characters, writing down what THEY'RE saying.
(Am I scaring you yet?)
Paulo Joe Jingy
> p.s.s. When you're really into it, you're no longer at your desk, your
> with your characters, writing down what THEY'RE saying.
>
> (Am I scaring you yet?)
>
p.s.s.s. "...you're with your characters" Arrrggg.
Skipper
<fleis...@gmail.com> wrote:
Do a staged reading of your script. That's what the pros do. You'll be
amazed at what people will think is funny that you didn't, and vice
versa. There's a whole chapter about this in one of my books.
nmstevens
It's very easy to become lost in surface stuff when you're talking
about "voice" -- and by surface stuff I mean things like accent and
background -- rich, poor, Northern, Southern, city boy, country boy.
And yes, obviously those things are going to affect the "voice" of
your character to some degree.
But that's not the fundamental stuff.
What I'm talking about is the difference between personality and
character.
Personality is the gloss. Character defines the fundamentals.
Let me explain this way.
You could easily write a villain that is dour and aggressive and
pugnacious -- but you could also just as easily write a villainous
character that is cheerful and outgoing and loquacious -- sort of a
hail-fellow well met.
You could just as easily write a hero that is either of those two
things. That's because those describe "personality" -- not character.
"Character" within a story describes the fundamental need -- or more
often the conflicting needs that drive a character through the story.
The interplay of someone's fundamental need and what stands in the way
of his achieving it that will define his character. That will
determine what he does, how he does it -- what he says, how he says
it. It will set his agenda in each scene and cohesively across the
story.
I've read countless scripts where you don't know who's who, where
you've got scenes where everybody sounds the same.
But the fact is, you walk into a bar in some neighborhood somewhere --
everybody grows up in the same part of town, they've gone to the same
school, they have the same ethnic and cultural background. In that
sense, they're all going to have the same sort of *voice.*
What distinguishes between them, when you write such a scene
successfully is that they will not have the same reasons for being
there in that place at that time. When each person has a clearly
defined reason that we understand -- a need that brings them there and
that drives their continued presence in the scene.
That need defines character. That need defines voice.
NMS
Martin B
> p.s.s.s. "...you're with your characters" Arrrggg.
That should be p.p.p.s.
post-post-post scriptum
--
Martin B
Ovum
Give each character the name of a famous comedian who has a really
unique way of talking. Write the comedian's name as the name of the
character.
So that means, when the mom is speaking, you literally slug her dialog
"Joan Rivers." When the dad is talking, you write "Jerry Seinfeld."
The bad guy is Dennis Miller, his henchmen are Larry the Cable Guy and
Dat Phan, and Larry's girlfriend is Paula Poundsone.
Before you write a scene with a lot of dialog by a particular person,
YouTube one of their stand-up routines so you get the voice firmly in
your head.
Later, after the script (and the rewrite) is done, just go back
through and do a "find and replace" on all the names so that you take
out the comedians' names and insert your real character names.
.
Ovum
pay attention to word choice.
For example, if someone wrote down a transcript of a stand-up routine
by Bill Engvall, and compared it to a stand-up routine by Dave
Chapelle, you could tell that two different people were talking.
And you could tell even without the transcript saying, "Here's yer
sahn" vs. "Here's yo sine" (by the way, don't do that. Don't try to
mimic accents). You could tell the difference by the choice of words.
Margaret Cho chooses different words to express herself than Roseanne
Barr or Ellen DeGeneres.
Even here on this newsgroup. If you gave me three posts with all the
names and sig files stripped out, I could probably tell if Oranse,
Weller or Jeri Jo wrote it.
In the same way, if you model the way your characters talk on
comedians with distinctive voices, you'll be able to make them "sound"
different, because they'll all use language differently.
.
Remysun
young, the advice of my teachers applies-- you have to get out and
live a life you haven't lived yet.
It's like the child development experiment where the experimenter
plays with toys to demonstrate a game of hide and seek, twice. The
second time, the toy who is hiding hides in another place, and the
experimenter asks the child where the toy that is seeking will look
first. The younger children always point to the hiding toy. The older
children point to the original hiding place, understanding the point
of view of the toy doing the seeking.
Often, the novice hasn't done their research, and mimics what he or
she has seen on movies and TV to compensate. The result is derivative
because the best research is original experience. All of us come from
a limited mold, and it is only by breaking out of it that we begin to
break out of our own weaknesses and flaws. In doing so, by gathering a
larger collection of useful experiences, we can begin to understand
the point of views of others who have experiences that we can't get
for ourselves. We become the older children, having mastered the point
of the exercise.
But maybe you aren't so young.
The other thing is that will help you is plot. A weak dramatic
situation does not reveal character. Conversational chit chat does not
reveal character. For the purposes of this story, character is a
defining moment. As Alvin Sargent said, IIRC, "I would never want to
write about someone who is not at the end of his rope."
A situation truly defines a character because we remember what that
person did at that moment. They often say memorable things: sometimes
understatement, sometimes overstatement, sometimes a dodge or lie. On
occasion, they may say the right thing for the right moment. And
sometimes the wrong thing at the wrong time. But you can't try to push
the dialogue-- it comes from the situation. It belongs to the
situation.
Every Aristotelean element is inseparable from the other elements.
They all work together to create a great story. Therefore, to master
the elements, one needs experience, whether that means practice or
life.
RonB
> I've read countless scripts where you don't know who's who, where
> you've got scenes where everybody sounds the same.
>
> But the fact is, you walk into a bar in some neighborhood somewhere --
> everybody grows up in the same part of town, they've gone to the same
> school, they have the same ethnic and cultural background. In that
> sense, they're all going to have the same sort of *voice.*
>
> What distinguishes between them, when you write such a scene
> successfully is that they will not have the same reasons for being
> there in that place at that time. When each person has a clearly
> defined reason that we understand -- a need that brings them there and
> that drives their continued presence in the scene.
>
> That need defines character. That need defines voice.
What I've found in reading newbie scripts (including my own) is that
there seems to be a tendency to create too many unnecessary characters.
So you get bogged down in trying to give them each a "voice" when they
either shouldn't be there in the first place, or should just be treated
as part of the scene.
For example, most scripts I've read lately seem to start with a group of
teenagers sitting around a table at the mall and "shooting the shit."
It's like the writer thinks his protagonist can't exist without at least
three or four friends who serve no real purpose and are usually only
there for exposition. And, yeah, they all sound the same. If you want to
show that the main character has friends he hangs with, that's fine --
but it's more of a setting than anything else and you probably don't
even have to have all of them speak. (And, for anyone who thinks a
script should start with friends sitting around a table telling each
other what they already know, you've probably got bigger problems than
"voice" anyhow.)
At any rate, I guess what I'm trying to say, consider whether or not
some of the characters you're trying to give a "voice" to really need to
be there in the first place. Because, as Neal mentions, if they have a
reason to be there (a need) "voice" will probably come automatically.
--
RonB
"There's a story there...somewhere"
Steven J. Weller
Table readings, table readings, table readings. Get the dialogue up
on its feet and into other people's mouths, and listen to it. Rewrite
from there.
--
Life Continues, Despite
Evidence to the Contrary
Steven
Remysun
> Margaret Cho chooses different words to express herself than Roseanne
> Barr or Ellen DeGeneres.
> Even here on this newsgroup. If you gave me three posts with all the
> names and sig files stripped out, I could probably tell if Oranse,
> Weller or Jeri Jo wrote it.
This sounds like fun. How big of a sample would you need?
Paulo Joe Jingy
> "Paulo Joe Jingy"
>
>> p.s.s.s. "...you're with your characters" Arrrggg.
>
> That should be p.p.p.s.
>
> post-post-post scriptum
>
scared 'em off.
Wordsmith
> p.s.s. When you're really into it, you're no longer at your desk, your
> with your characters, writing down what THEY'RE saying.
>
> (Am I scaring you yet?)
"Yes, Mother."
W ; )
Ovum
I can name that MWSm writer in five lines! Bring it on.
:-)
Remysun
Working on it, but Jeri doesn't allow the archive, so it's a bit
tricky.
Remysun
Can I talk you down to three or four?
Ovum
Sure! Go for it.
.
Mysti Anne
Dr. Lizardo says it is whatta you are in da dark. I think he means the
same thing though.
Mysti
Mysti Anne
Clarice needs...confidence? (young woman, difficult past, trying to do
something hard in a boys' club type world).
Hannibal needs...victims. What's worse for a person trying to gain
confidence than being manipulated by someone who wants to victimize them?
I always thought of the older cop as part of a triangle, but I can't
remember his need to save me. We see them grow and reach beyond their
current capabilities by the incredible obstacles you put in their way.
But the needs must be different, the "place they're coming from" must be
different, as is said in the previous post, before you can do that.
Also, it helps to think from each character's point of view. One of my
brother can only think in black and white (morally, ethically, etc.), so
he'll never write ;) Ayn Rand's characters were a little weak from this
same thing, I think. If you can imagine really believing that the only
solution to your problem is to kill your two year old, for example, then
the voice of your mom-turned-killer will be clearer.
sorry for all the downer examples. Screenwriters reach for death because
it's an easy conflict to write ;)
Mysti
Steven J. Weller
"History is made at night. Character is what you are in the dark."
For an altogether goofy comedy (one of my favorites, to be sure)
that's actually a really cool line.
Remysun
> Clarice needs...confidence? (young woman, difficult past, trying to do
> something hard in a boys' club type world).
>
> Hannibal needs...victims. What's worse for a person trying to gain
> confidence than being manipulated by someone who wants to victimize them?
I think I had this conversation with Neal or MC already, but the books
give a bit of insight into Lecter, drawing a parallel between his
cannibalized sister and the innocence he sees in Clarice. So the
manipulated by a victimizer doesn't hold, because Lecter says that the
world is a better place with Clarice in it.
There's gotta be an accurate example for what you describe, Mysti, but
I can't think of it right now.
Betterduck
> Table readings, table readings, table readings. �Get the dialogue up
> on its feet and into other people's mouths, and listen to it. �Rewrite
> from there.
In LA sure. If you think golden age of MWS had an over sample of first
time writers that printed the first 120 pages they ever wrote, then
actors workshops are tenfold worse when it comes to alone time and
actual craft study put in before public performance. Good looking
people that think acting is memorizing, and not so good looking people
looking to conquer social awkwardness. Sometimes you get lucky and
meet another person that actually does filmmaking and gets it.
BD
Betterduck
> Even here on this newsgroup. If you gave me three posts with all the
> names and sig files stripped out, I could probably tell if Oranse,
> Weller or Jeri Jo wrote it.
Thats what makes coming here worthwhile. This group has always been
special to me, cause we all love words, and use them to express
ourselves. Unlike say a sports forum that his filled with people that
cant express themselves with words very well. I cant call out all of
you in the first sentence, and a whole bunch by subject.
BD
MacDaffy (Ron Drake)
> I struggle with giving each of my characters a unique voice and while
> I realize there are books and articles covering this, I don't feel
> like my characters have a great voice. Can anyone offer any tips or
> insights?
I'm doing something that I've never done with a project: I'm writing a
treatment. (Those of you muttering "about goddamned time" can just
save it). The subject of the screenplay is immediate and is something
that's going on in my life. What I've found is that starting with the
protagonist--the person the screenplay's about--has given the
treatment a life that some of my other screenplays didn't have. The
specs I've written for "The Simpsons", "Columbo", and "House" wrote
themselves because--except for the characters I introduced--the voices
are all there. This project is different. The characters that are
necessary to the story come to me in writing the treatment.
One of the keys to writing characters is to visualize the person who
needs to be there to serve your story. In "Die Hard," John McClain
needs Hans Gruber. He needs Argyle and The Johnsons and Dwayne
Robinson. He needs Holly and Powell and Karl. His interactions with
them define for the audience who John McClain is. You define his
character by conflicting him against others.
As a writer, you have to supply the kind of people who will propel
your story. Take "Hamlet", for instance. A Hamlet with no fire or
filial loyalty? No play. A kind, doting Claudius who loves his
brother? No play. A Gertrude not amiable to bedding anyone who'll keep
her queen--even if she suspects that person killed her husband? No
play. No Ghost determined to be avenged? No play. Other characters
serve to reveal the moods and motives of the antagonist and
protagonist (e.g. Ophelia, Rosencrantz & Gildenstern, Polonius, etc.).
But differing characters with conflicting interests are what drive any
good story.
Another thing you can use to create character is to fashion the
character after someone who embodies what you're trying to convey. I
met someone recently who was an imperious, inconsiderate bastard. It
was all I could do to keep from throwing him out of my office. But I
used that infuriating personality to create one of the most lively
characters in my screenplay. And--because he was so like the
protagonist--they butted heads immediately. That's a situation where
you're "reporting" rather than writing. The lines come to you whole
and organic from the conflict you've created.
The screenplay is your universe. If you don't create someone you love,
hate, or laugh at, you probably don't have a good character.
Just my opinion. Hope it helps.
MC
Hawaii Ron?
Hey! Good to see you.
--
"If you can, tell me something happy."
- Marybones
MacDaffy (Ron Drake)
Aloha! Good to be seen!
--Ron
Paulo Joe Jingy
One of the long-lost Rons returns.
Welcome back.
MC
Paulo Joe Jingy <pa...@royalcool.com> wrote:
> > Aloha! Good to be seen!
>
> One of the long-lost Rons returns.
>
> Welcome bac
Da-doo-ron-ron