Character Creation (How to Write a Script)

Now that we've got a decent sense of the concept we want to write, it's time to start filling in the details, starting out with the important act of character creation, since most scripts without characters in them tend to be on the less interesting side.

We go over the roles a character may play in the story, where to take character inspiration from and how to develop their psychology, plus the question of whose story you are telling. All this plus a cheeky section on setting too.

If you're writing along at home (Not during the show, presumably) then this week is your chance to come up with some enticing character descriptions. Maybe someone who likes to wear a hat? That's interesting, isn't it?

You can follow the podcast on social media: x.com/writing_pod
instagram.com/writing_pod
Or search for Thinking About Writing on Facebook.

Find out more about Robin and even make an enquiry about getting notes on your script at robinleetaylor.com

And if you want to support the show you can become a Patron via patreon.com/Thinking About Writing (Eventually! I'm in the midst of figuring that out)

Music by Chris Stamper
Illustration by Matt Miles https://www.instagram.com/datmattmiles/
Design by Adam Smith

Transcript

Hello, righteous writers. How are your creative juices today? Juicy, I hope. Welcome to part two of this series on how to write a script. Last time we covered the essentials of idea formulation, beginning the process of deciding what you’re writing, what it’s fundamentally about and why you’d be excited about writing it. This time we’re going to carry on in this pre-actual writing period by looking at filling in some of the essential details of your idea, most importantly character creation, which I specified as the episode title just to make it sounds more alluring and specific than calling it “Details”. We’ll also continue applying these ideas to our own concept of something set in a launderette, as I wonder why I made that particular choice. So rev up your writing engines, check the oil pressure of creativity, and some other car metaphor that doesn’t fully make sense, as we continue thinking about how to write a script.

Thinking About Writing: How to Write a Script. Part Four, Character Creation.

Hi, I’m Robin Taylor, comedy writer and script editor unextraordinaire, and this is Thinking About Writing, the podcast for anyone who is writing, or maybe just thinking about writing, for theatre, audio, film or TV, as well as any future civilisations who discover ancient podcasts in the ruins of our post apocalyptic world. Hello, sorry for the mess! 

So yes, let’s keep going with the brain-storming, developmental, beefing up of a concept. The same rules apply here that different elements may come to you in different orders or at later stages in the creation of your script, but the basic principle remains that doing some ground work before you dig into the writing itself should hopefully make the overall process easier in the grand scheme of things. There’s also a caveat that some aspects may be more significant than others, or indeed more challenging to deal with if you don’t plan them out beforehand. One detail which we’ll go over before chomping into character and which can be important but could vary in how much planning and incorporation it requires is the setting.

Setting

As was mentioned last time, a big part of making a script interesting is giving it identity and distinctiveness, and the setting can of course play a big part in that. Many writers write about where they are from and its part of the lifeblood of their work. It’s also a smart general bit of advice to play to your strengths, so if you have an understanding and perspective of somewhere then that’s a great tool to utilise. If you don’t necessarily feel that way, and hands up, I’m not from the most exciting part of the world myself, then that may not be such a prominent element of the story. But taking this to point of having no clear setting can be detrimental, as tempting as it may be to say “It’s a universal story, it could be anywhere.” Sure, there are instance where that could work, but usually in more abstract work. Because if it is to be produced it will either be filmed somewhere or the geographical information should influence how it is produced. Audio can use soundscapes to conjure up locations and take an audience away to the atmospheric universe of Kuala Lumpur or Basingstoke. Without that, an element can feel lacking. Casting and performance choices will be influenced by where the characters are from. And it’s worth acknowledging the inherent information that’s contained in location - city life is very different from rural life, being on the coast or in a heartland, north and south, different countries and regions carry different cultural understandings with them. Sure, there can be a universal humanity, but also flavourful variations which give a script another layer of interest. And there may well be simple necessity - something set in a shipping yard would need to be in a city with a port. A story about a highly contested local election might not make a lot of sense in somewhere that’s an extremely safe Labour or Conservative seat, unless that’s a particular intrigue within the story.

So as ever there are different directions to take. If you have a story in mind then consider what kind of setting suits it. A police drama about drug gangs would be very different were it to be set in either a bustling city or a sleepy village. Alternatively there may be a certain area you want to write about and then it’s a matter of thinking of the kind of interesting stories that exist in that location. It’s obviously wise to make sure you have an awareness of the location, places you’ve lived in or have researched extensively, particularly if you’re writing about something which requires sensitivity and cultural understanding. And continuing our acknowledgement of the different tiers of projects, if you’re looking to get something made you might be working with certain producers who focus on particular regions or have gaps in their national representation that they’re looking to fill which could influence the direction you take, or if it feels like the right fit for a project you’ve completed.

It’s also a matter of thinking about how you’d convey this setting in the writing - which locations might you utilise which again offers you something distinctive? Obviously you don’t want it to feel like an open top bus tour, where every scene is set next to or on top of a prominent landmark, but then again someone driving past the Angel of the North once might feel a little obvious, half-hearted or insincere. It’s possible to argue that choosing the location late on in the process of writing isn’t the biggest deal, it’d mostly be a matter of adding in some particulars to scene settings or throwing in a couple of particular references. But if it is a big, important part of the story then it obviously helps to weave in that representation and understanding as much as possible. And that’s particularly relevant if you suddenly decide all your characters should be speaking in a more pronounced dialect, which is something we’ll cover more when we get to writing dialogue itself in episode five. You may be thinking ‘I’m just going to make up a setting, all this doesn’t matter’, but the same kind of principles apply, what makes the world interesting and distinctive and how do you convincingly convey that to the audience? Sure, you don’t have to be so concerned about factual accuracy, but it does mean you’ve got to invent a lot of stuff in your mind instead.

So applying these principles to our launderette project, Dirty Laundry, well a launderette could be anywhere, and as mentioned, where it’s set could potentially influence the story. Whether the area is busy or quiet, affluent or deprived, and just the general locality is going to shape the environment and ambience of the story. If someone’s rushed off their feet working there, that’s different from if they’ve got nothing to do naturally. Equally it might determine how well they know their customers or not, are there those strong regulars or every day is a new face? We suggested last episode there could be a plot about money laundering or a serial killer, do those ring quite so true in a quiet village? Possibly. But this is another opportunity to stress test the logic and workings of your idea, to think ‘well it’d make more sense if…’ or ‘I’ve got more options if…’ I’d also have a think about the places I’ve lived and known in my life, the voices I feel more comfortable writing in, maybe certain actors I’ve worked with or would want to write for, all of which could help me decide where feels like the right place for this story to happen and give it an identity I’d feel confident and happy with. And even as I’m saying this, you’re probably picking up that I keep saying it depends on the story and thinking “Well why aren’t we talking about the story first?!” and we will next episode, and I’ll explain why I’ve taken this particular route, honest, because first we’ll look at what I’d suggest is the most important detail of any script: The characters.

Character Creation

Let it be no secret that I think character is ultra important - I mean, it’s not really at risk of being a secret, I literally just said that, and I’ve already done one episode on Protagonists, another on character, and one on character motivation, so you know, it’s a bit obvious. The incredibly brief summation of those episodes is that a great character has presence, purpose and a perspective, and that this can be surprisingly tricky with your lead, who often has the burden of carrying the story, but if you can nail that and apply the principle across your full character roster, that’s flipping ideal really. So that’s why I think it’s good to start getting as strong an understanding of your characters as quickly as you can, as you’ll only add on more layers as you write, thus making them even richer.  But also because often the best stories come from the characters. 

Of course, it could be possible to plot out your story and then decide which characters best allow that to be realised. But the risk is that they can be quite apparent puppets, facilitating events more than truly causing and reacting to them. They may only need to perform certain actions and consequently don’t get an opportunity to grow the depth that makes them feel fully realised. You can have a situation in mind certainly, but I’d suggest it’s more interesting to then wonder how would the characters behave in that situation and how that would then determine the story, rather than having the story determine what the characters do. If you only have a scant idea of who your character is, a lot of the writing process will require figuring that out, and within that there’s the risk that rather than adding in layers and colours of detail, you may end up with just the bare fundamentals. Which is better than nothing, but not exactly great. And I’d make the bold-ish claim that interesting things happening to rather flat, dull characters going through the motions of the plot is a less engaging option when it’s entirely possible to have interesting things happen to and because of the interesting people involved in them. 

So how do we generate characters? Well if you have your setup or premise in mind then the question to ask is who would be in that world? Certain situations come with established notions of the people within them. If you were writing a workplace environment, not that I’m suggesting that because, you know, but there’d be a boss, managers, underlings, probably a receptionist, maybe a cleaner or some such. While these bring natural power structures with them, which can be useful in forming character relationships, hierarchies and conflicts, it can also lead to very familiar or trite characterisation. If the boss is a bossy character, that makes sense, but is equally obvious. David Brent is interesting because he isn’t a stereotypical boss, he’s more concerned about being popular and famous, but also has incredibly limited people skills. Now this isn’t far-fetched or anything, based on some of the bosses I’ve had over the years, but it’s unconventional in terms of where your mind might first go. 

It’s similar with family units, we might think of a mum and a dad and their kids, because that’s generally the setup. It might be tempting to just change that in order to be more original, but really such decisions should come from a more authentic and purposeful place. Single or same sex parents may provide different dynamics, but shouldn’t just be there to superficially subvert, rather to portray a different form of family. This doesn’t mean stretching credibility to the extent that you’re generating characters who feel inauthentic just to avoid someone more predictable, but still finding truthfulness, even if it is unique and unusual. If sticking to conventional setups, we could instinctively go with such archetypes as the caring mother and the stern father, and it’s not wrong to do that, those kinds of families exist. But if all the mother does is make dinner and worry about her kids, that’s a very limited, flat character. If that’s intentional, I mean, ok, maybe the mum doesn’t matter that much in the grand scheme of things, in which case it’s always worth asking if you even need her. But really it’s about finding the details that shows the personality and individuality of characters. Great writing can make someone who only has mere moments in a script still pop out. We’ll get to how to present that kind of thing in a future episode, but really it comes from exploring the psychology and makeup of the character so there is ultimately something to present. If you can find whatever excites or interests you about whoever you’re writing, that’s basically the soul of the character, and a bit of soul is always a good thing, just ask James Brown.

Personality and purpose

Of course a great place to take inspiration from when it comes to character work and building personality is people we have known in real life. Think of all the personalities you’ve encountered across the years - folks who are bloody minded, cynical, oblivious, delusional, utter misery guts or rays of sunshine. Those were mostly negative qualities weren’t they? I must have mostly met terrible people. Being a writer is about having observational skills and then transferring and communicating those onto the page, so people you’ve crossed paths with and witnessed in life have hopefully shaped your understanding of them and their behaviours. And the beauty is there’s no need to be restricted by the banal reality of these individuals, they can be but templates or jumping off points before you employ your artistic licence (Remember to renew your artistic licence to avoid penalty fees or court summons) 

So if you think “That friend of mine wouldn’t go on whacky adventures, they’re risk adverse and get motion sickness.” Well what if they were the whacky adventure type? Or what if events left them with no choice, or spurred them on to do something they wouldn’t ordinarily do? As long as their behaviours don’t become unbelievable, you can fabricate a different form from a strong initial inspiration. If you don’t know any interesting people in real life, you could take inspiration from famous or historical figures, or even fictional characters, whilst changing and developing them enough to avoid any claims of defamation or plagiarism. And naturally we can take from ourselves too, as that is potentially the person we know best, unless you’re incredibly lacking in self awareness. The experiences we’ve lived, our feelings and understandings, the characteristics we recognise in ourselves can all be utilised and reformed to tell stories. And even if characters do not spring from you, there’s still room to put yourself in their shoes to gain an understanding of how they might behave. The main things to be conscious of here is maintaining a level of objectivity and that all of your characters aren’t dominated by you, as this can simply make them too similar to one another, which tends to be particularly relevant when it comes to their voices, another topic for the near future!

Now it is obviously tempting to think of those quirky personalities, that guy who’d always say the weirdest things or that lady with such a strange way of talking. And absolutely that’s a great starting point if you feel you can capture how they speak and behaved, but it may be necessary to be wary if all they are is a quirk or a trait. That can be a fine flavourful thing in a side character, but if they’re an integral part of the story they’ll likely need more substance and purpose. And as much as I spoke about characters just facilitating the plot, it is often helpful to think about the role characters play in the story. Are they supportive or antagonistic, do they instigate or interrupt events, what perspectives and attitudes do they have, and how do these impact upon events. If a character has no evident purpose they may simply be lingering around or worse, taking up time and space without due cause. So your ray of sunshine introduces elements of positivity and hope, while your belligerent character may be disruptive and require responses from other characters to be dealt with, challenging elements of their personalities. In that sense they’re contributing something worthwhile, and that can either be determined by the character or the necessities of the script, as long as they are then fleshed out.

For example, a purely practical concern could be something like, my lead character’s a bit of a loner which means they don’t have any one to talk to. Now that could result in creative solutions of how the audience get an insight into what the lead is thinking, feeling or planning, but the other response could be to give them someone to talk to. Then the fun begins of thinking, right, who would that be? Is it someone they’re close to, a friend or relative, or someone less known, a burden that’s been put upon them? What’s the nature of their relationship? How do they challenge or support one another? What kind of events would disrupt or alter their relationship? How do they compliment or conflict with one another? What is keeping them together? If they care for one another, or not, why is that? And ultimately what does this new character want, what is their objective, and how does it fit in with the other events of the story? 

Hopefully this brain storming can mean that a essentially mechanical need of the script results in an interesting, layered character who adds new dimensions and dynamics to the story, rather than being someone who just asks a lot of questions or listens to the lead splurging out their every inner thought. If characters have very similar roles with little to no distinction between them then the challenge is to find those distinctions to justify their place, or consider chucking them out. I’m always encouraging culling characters, I’ve clearly got a terrible blood lust. But sometimes merging two characters who essentially do the same thing can allow you to have one really strong character rather than two less defined ones. This can also done just to pare down the character roster - it’s something very common in historical stories, where in reality lots of different figures were involved in the actual events but they are condensed down so you don’t need to have five different lords, barons and earls who it’s bloody hard to keep track of who’s who when they’ve all basically got the same powdered wig and pompous white dude persona going on. So while we may be excited about all the characters we might create, keeping necessity, purpose and practicality in mind can make sure the characters we do include have earned their place.

Character Details

Now it’s possible that one might confuse a role with a personality. So you might think, “They’re the stupid character” and while stupid people do exist, as life will so regularly prove, if they’re just there to be stupid and get a laugh for saying stupid things, again, they’re not going to be the most three dimensional and gripping character. We might revert to that argument about the mechanics of the script and say well we need a bit of levity, so their role is to be funny. And while that is a valid position in theory, once more you might want to question their prominence, or simply if the character could be a bit more interesting and necessary.

Let’s think of Baldrick in Blackadder for example. Clearly he’s not the sharpest pencil in the box and there are laughs to be had when he is confused by events, but he plays a few roles in the script. One practical benefit is that his oblivious nature means he does often need to have things explained to him, which allows information to be offered to the audience in a natural way. He’s also Blackadder’s dogsbody, as Blackadder is the kind of character who would avoid getting his hands dirty. It makes sense that he’d have Baldrick to do this because he’s an underling, but also Blackadder’s a bit of a bastard, so anyone shrewd would most likely notice that. As Blackadder is also arrogant it would be logical he wouldn’t want competition, as we witness how he tends to clash with equals and superiors. This in turn is useful for the comedy of the script - because Baldrick is incompetent, things go wrong. If he was thoroughly capable all of the cunning plans would go off without a hitch, which limits the humour of constant catastrophes. But there’s more, Baldrick also offers a bit of morality, questioning the ethics of some of the things Blackadder does, though he doesn’t have the power to change his mind. If he was a keen accomplice, the whole show would naturally have a darker edge, and indeed the first series was a bit like this, which goes some way to explain the personality shift in the second series. And Baldrick also offers fondness and loyalty to Blackadder, which helps the audience to enjoy this dastardly character a bit more than if everyone rightly deemed him to be a bit of a git. And if you want to question why Baldrick would feel that way, well in some respects it’s related to class, looking up to his superior but also because Blackadder does give him a bit of purpose, because he needs him. And just to top it all off, Baldrick has aspirations, even if they’re as simple as owning a turnip, which puts Blackadder’s grander desires into perspective. So we see Baldrick’s not just a fool, he offers uses and qualities which add to the overall composition of the script as a whole.

When it comes to figuring out these details I’d say there is no harm in knowing loads and loads of stuff about your characters, as it’ll influence how you write them. Such details will make them more interesting, help to justify the choices you make. There’s something very satisfying when you realise “They’d do that!” and it fits in perfectly with what you wish to do, or potentially draws you in new unexpected directions. Creative exercises can involve imagining what certain characters would do in certain situations, like a house fire or a family feud, and then utilising that. Putting them in those kind of predicaments which might allow them to shine or struggle and create ensuing victories or chaos. Personally I really enjoy figuring out the psychology of characters, it’s interesting to think how individuals are shaped by their past presents, and even their futures. 

For example, let’s think about money, frequently a concern for people because, you know, capitalism. Oliver Twist grew up without money, which gives him an appreciation for simple pleasures in life, but also makes him aspire towards a better life, as you would. Meanwhile the Rose family in Schitts Creek lost their money, which forces them into a new lifestyle, teaches them some humility and to recognise what matters most in life (Not that they ever seem to be struggling to get by that much) And Walter White’s worry about leaving his family without any money in the future pushes him to be willing to sell meth, so his concerns about what may come drives his behaviour now, which brings us back to motivation. And I talk quite extensively about the motives in Breaking Bad in the series one episode on Motivation, just to give that another plug.

If a character is only one thing, particularly if that one thing relates to facilitating the plot, they may seem a little flat or uninteresting. Finding quirks, interests and secondary motivations can help to give extra dimensions. In saying that, it’s important to think about how those are implemented. So if your super spy character has to quash a dangerous terrorist cell and in the process avenge his murdered mentor whilst trying to impress his new boss so he can get a promotion because he’s behind on his child support payments to the irritation of his estranged wife who he wants to get back together with and he’s also trying to win a regional water colour painting competition, it’s like woah woah woah. Conflicting needs and wants can be interesting, but if they’re jostling for time and attention in the script that can be very challenging and even erratic, and the audience may end up thinking well this terrorist cell can’t be that big of a concern if we’ve got to watch a scene of this spy dude painting a bowl of fruit.

And as ever this formulation of character psychology and definition isn’t something that has to be done entirely before you begin. It is a process. It might sound like I’m suggesting you just sit down and think right, my character is like this, this, this and this, sorted, let’s get going. But I’m not saying that - these things can shift, develop or completely change as you ponder them and decide what would work best in the bigger picture of the story. And as ever, I definitely would deter any thinking where you can’t get into the actual writing of the script because you don’t know which GCSE options a secondary character chose at school. The foundations of a character can be enough, and more details can be added with time. There are things which may well come to you as you write, a gap in their history or constitution which makes you think what did happen to them then, why are they like that? And maybe it’ll matter and you’ll want to explore it in the script, maybe you’ll figure out some reasoning and that’ll be enough and not actually come into play. This can spring from necessity too - you might have a character who logically would go to the police when a crime occurs, for example, but doing so would derail or complicate the story, so you might think, well why wouldn’t they do that? Have they had bad experiences with the police? Why would that be? Thus you begin to shape a new history for that character as a miscreant youth which did spring from necessity but has the potential to become an inherent part of them, because they are your creation after all.

Who’s Story Is This?

I’ve alluded to lead characters a fair bit, and again, if you want the full appraisal on that front then check out Thinking About Protagonists. But I’d be remiss to point out at this time that as you get into the character creation and plotting melange, it’s often useful to ask yourself who’s story this is. You may well think, well all of my characters have their stories, but identifying a focal point can be wise because the audience often naturally seek one out. And the risk is that in juggling many stories at once, none of them may fully cut through. Frankly if you’re starting out, ensuring at least one story strand is fully realised is a wise place to start. There may still be other plots, of course, but getting that core through line right is really beneficial. 

Let’s take Succession as an example - two references in two episodes, I think we’ve found this season’s Fleabag folks. If you’ve not watched the show I heartily recommend it. So yes, Succession certainly positions itself as an ensemble show focused on the Roy family and those around them from it’s marketing which often features the six central characters. And it certainly is about this raft of characters, but within that we can recognise that Kendall Roy is the narrative anchor of the whole thing. The show begins with him and, without spoilers, he gets the last moment too, which is very significant. Many of the major events stem from him and have the greatest emotional weight. And while we could recognise his father’s medical incident as the instigating incident for the battle to succeed him, importantly prior to this Kendall has been deposed as the heir apparent. This opens up opportunities for his siblings to reconsider their positions and fight for the biggest slice of the pie. Without that event, they all may have accepted the status quo with Kendall taking control. The fact that he has had his assumed destiny taken away from him shapes the direction of the story. That doesn’t mean he’s the most important, sympathetic or popular character of the show, you might like Roman or Shiv more, or consider them all monsters. But Kendall’s plight gives some sharp focus to the plot, and without that it could be harder to navigate, if the separate strands didn’t have that central through line to weave around. Again it comes back to your premise, how would you encapsulate the heart of the story without over complicating, and phrasing it through the perspective of one character can help that. Basically, focus on getting one strong story, and everything else can sit more comfortably around it.

That being said all characters have their own stories of course, and while we’re talking about prioritising figuring out one story to start off with that shouldn’t lead to the ultimate neglect of other characters. Really it is about adopting the same principles, who are the secondary characters, what do they want, where are they going to, what will the cause to happen and what will befall them as the consequences of their own actions and the actions of others? Then how can these kind of ideas fit in with the primary plot without detracting from it but also not feeling like an afterthought or half-baked. And we’ll tackle the prospect of multiple story lines next episode.

Naming Characters

Alongside all of this in depth character discovery, there is the slightly less important but still relevant issue of naming your characters. This is the first of what may be a recurring element across this series - Fun but slightly trivial elements of writing. Character naming can follow a similar trend to basically stealing from your own life by naming them after people you know who they bear similarities to, as long as they’re not likely to be deeply offended by that. Often times it’s probably just a matter of thinking in the same way as parents naming their child “They feel like a Montgomery”. Clearly some folks like to rifle through a baby names book and give their righteous character the Sanskrit meaning for noble figure as their title, and that’s entirely reasonable if you’re into nominative determinism. On the flip of that, it’s quite funny when a character’s called Hope and they’re a miserable sad sack. I always advise that it’s wise to avoid similar, generic names, especially if the characters are similar and generic too, so if you’ve got a Matt, Mark and Mike you might want to reconsider just to make it easier for readers and eventual audiences to remember who’s who, unless they’re supposed to be almost interchangeable. It’s tempting to say that character names are never going to be the cause of whether a script is successful or not, unless they’re painfully bad, a la that Family Guy joke where Brian complains about a lead character called John Everyman. 

Of course there are some considerations of whether a name fits someone’s culture or class, surnames particularly, and it could be interesting to interpret what a name giver intended when choosing a moniker, or how a character becomes known through nicknames, or chooses their own name. Whether someone’s name matches their personality feels like a bit more of a matter of interpretation. Saying that, I did once get a note where I was told a character didn’t seem like a Ryan, which was weird as he was based on someone I knew, called Ryan. Maybe I’m just a terrible writer. It should be one of those things where, if it feels right for you then that’s good enough. But again, sometimes a name doesn’t feel right, and then changing names can be a painful experience in itself. This also allows a cautionary tale where I once decided to change a character’s name from Mo to Raj for reasons I can’t really recall anymore, did a quick find and replace without properly checking, only to later find that every time the script said “Moments later” which we’ll probably talk about when we get onto scene headings, it had been changed to Rajments later, which was not ideal. A similar thing can happen when you find and replace a name in block capitals, which then changes it in the dialogue so it seems like every time someone speaks to that character they’re yelling SUSAN! There’ll be more fun technical considerations like this in episode four, the anatomy of a script, coming soon. But ultimately, what is in a name? As pondered great poet Williams Shake-a-spear. Maybe something, maybe nothing, it’s up to you really. And that’s why this section was essentially trivial.

Putting This in Practice

So we’ve got a second section which we should apply to popular launderette based drama series, Handwash Only, still working on that title. In the previous episode we immediately identified the woman working in the backroom as an intriguing figure, so it seems logical to take her as the potential focal point at this early stage. The first question that comes to mind is why does she work at the launderette. Not to besmirch the job, but it’s a fairly low skill and low paying roll. It’s not quite an “I always dreamed of working in a launderette” scenario. So did she leave school early? Is she just desperate for work, so took any position going? Or is it perhaps a family business? Oh no, I’ve been influenced by Succession, haven’t I? But that opens up a few interesting avenues for he story and the general context of events. For one thing, if the story we’re aiming for is that she’s trying to save the launderette from closing down, if she just worked there and had no invested interest in the place other than keeping her job, why would she care? Equally how much influence would she actually have? There is a possible story that she just has a certain naivety and loyalty to her employer and imagines she can make a difference, which is intriguing but could create some challenging logical empathy for the audience. If it is her theoretical inheritance though she has a stronger motivation to make it work and more sway over the route that could be taken. 

From that we can begin to ask further questions, did she actually want to work there or has it been forced upon her? In which case does she have other dreams, or is she able to see different routes for the business because she doesn’t give a monkeys about the laundry business itself? As she’s in a lowly position in the business, has she been overlooked? Is she trying to prove herself and earn more respect? Does she have a deeper internal understanding of the place than the rest of her family? We might then begin to decide who the rest of her family are so as to help us understand her more, based on their relationships. Presumably someone in the family would actually be running the business, and it can be very different if that’s a grandparent, a parent or a sibling, for example. Which is the optimum dynamic which assists her story? Proving oneself to a parent is different to competing with a sibling for authority, but also those two relationships can run in tandem. Is it a more distant relative, which raises questions about the absence of the closer family, and is potentially a less heated relationship - so maybe not that, unless the drama is more about how our protagonist’s drive for success compromises what would be an otherwise good relationship. But who brings out the best and worst in her? What is their history which dictates how they are together now? What footprints have they left on one another? How involved are they with each other’s lives? Is their relationship intimate or business like?

I’m tempted to ask what quality does she encapsulate which gives her the potential to save the business. Is it optimism, cunning, does she have a business brain, heck, has she studied business but been pushed down into grunt work? Is that to do with her gender or general ranking in the family? How are her perceptions of herself, her family and the world challenged or confirmed by the events of the story? Is she heading in a direction of success or failure? Is she smart or foolish, or does she go against her intelligence and morality in pursuit of her goal to prove her worth? How would she then respond if she creates a bad situation for herself? If she is some great business brain then why doesn’t she get a better job somewhere else? What is holding her in this place? Is it simply wanting to cash in on what she believes she is owed, or is there loyalty, or insecurity? If it’s a mix of things, which has the most influence? And how might such things manifest? Might she look for work elsewhere, and what would happen in that scenario? 

All of this is essentially aimed towards ensuring it is her story, that she is driving events. There could be a version where her father who owns the business pushes it in an illegal direction and it is about how she reacts to that, but this potentially puts in her in a responsive role, unless she grabs the opportunity to prove herself and takes the situation in more extreme directions. If she found out the launderette had been operating illegally and aimed to clean it up -ehhhh? - then she has a more active intention. But does that direction actually take events away from rather than towards drama? Unless her aspirations cause more trouble.

Then extra layers can be added in as you think about her life away from the primary setting of the launderette. Does she have loved ones or dependents? What is her relationship like with them? Does she lack their appreciation, which would make her want to seek it elsewhere? Is providing for them a major concern? Does she have no one, making her job more of a priority? Again, how do the people around her shape her, or contribute to the overall composition of the situation? What about these other characters compliments or helps to explain what we see of her at work, and what offers different dimensions to her? And what are those dimensions? And as we figure out what the essence of each of these characters may be, a mother who thinks little of the lead, a brother who humiliates her, a son who feels some shame in her occupation, we can then go through the same process of fleshing them out, what are their wants and psychological foundations, are they too obvious or rigid as options. Can we make them more interesting and thus provoke knock on effects from who they are and what they provide? We then don’t see out lead in isolation but as part of a network of characters who matter and influence events.

On a practical level, we can ask how old is she? If this is someone later in life, is she realising she’s running out of opportunities to achieve something? Has she been doing this job most of her life and come to realise she has nothing else or no appreciation? Is she from a particular culture which explains how she has been treated and perceived? What else is she interested in? What brings her happiness? What state of health is she in? How does she behave in different situations? What are her habits? And what’s her name? My brain just plucked Gloria out of nowhere, and I kind of like it. Makes me think of Gloria by Laura Branigan, or Gloria Gaynor, I Will Survive, very apt. Gloria Estefan, Dr Beat, not so apt. But she’s trying to get some glory, eh? eh?

So clearly there are plenty of questions available to ask. Some of them may provide answers some may open up new chains of enquiry which allows more possibilities. It can be wise at this point to go back to the core premise you’re aiming for to help you remember how the qualities you’re giving your character play a part in the bigger picture of the idea. So in this case if the basis is a worker at a struggling launderette enters the world of crime to save the business, we’re asking why does she want to save it, practically and emotionally, what skills and traits does she have which assist in her in that, who around her will help or hinder her efforts, and how will her innate personality influence the journey of the story? I can’t wait to find out all this, and more. But it’ll have to wait until next episode because this one is pretty much finito.

Outro

So there we go, character creation is a fun-packed opportunity for exploring personas, relationships, roles and details. Hopefully the choices you make compliment and contribute to one another to create a rounded character who has a robust core adorned with some complexities. Obviously the challenge in the writing itself is to figure out how to present these ideas, and we’ll be getting to that in due course. But knowing or figuring out the fundamental qualities of your character will naturally give you more options of what to present about them. And it is an exciting process, open to opportunities where you can decipher more as you go along, building that sense of what makes the characters tick, so every bit of ticking they do feels authentic, pertinent and undeniable. Just to reiterate, it’s something you’ll come back across the writing process, not something you need to have ironclad and indisputable before you begin. Because a lot of these decisions may well be influenced and altered by the plot that you are going to build. And plotting is next week’s topic, so plot out some time in your diary to listen to that! That doesn’t really make sense.

Thanks for listening. Again, if you want to play along at home, then this week is clearly about figuring out who your characters are, and maybe where the whole thing is set. If you want to show off just how creative you are, then send a brief character breakdown via TwitterX or Instagram @writing_pod, there’s a contact form on my website, robinleetaylor.com that you can use too and even get in touch about some professional script consulation. And if you like you could become a Patron at pateron.com/ThinkingAboutWriting where for a small donation you can hear me talk about Mr and Mrs Smith on Amazon Prime, as well as other upcoming bonus content. So until next time, think about writing a script! That’s a slightly better catchphrase. Okay, take care, bye bye.