- This topic has 19 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
The element of killing characters off (supposedly) and then bringing them back is really something Iāve seen no discussion on in the writing world.
Itās something Iāve seen quite a lot of actually and is one of my favorite story pieces. Iām actually using it in my current book as well.
I have plenty of examples and points to make, but I would like to get some other peoples in the discussion first.
Fair warning: This topic is probably going to be riddled with spoilers. Obviously Iām prepared to deal with that. But just making sure that anyone who joins is.
So, *ahem* the questions:
What are some techniques used in the best pulling-off of this trick youāve seen?
What makes a ādeathā work the best?
What are the best ways to throw off the reader and have them not guess it?
Examples of this? A personal favorite?Hmā¦ dare I suppose you are thinking specifically of Archie Kennedy?
I think a good way to throw off the reader and not have them guess is to strongly foreshadow that the character is going to die. Then the reader is expecting it when it happens, and is maybe not quite so shocked and devastated, but it will be a very real, heavy, and right impression, because they really knew, all along, that this was supposed to happen. This was the way it was supposed to turn out. The characterā¦ they all knew he was going to die. There was no way someone with his propensity for trouble, or a bad temper, or recklessness, or whatever, was going to come to good in the end. So it was right that he died. And thenā surprise!
I have tons of thoughts on this, but this post will do for now, because itās getting late. And when it gets lateā¦ my brain tends to frazzle up and tell my fingers to type weird things. You know how that works.Yep, you got me. š But I do have others in mind, Archie isnāt the only oneā¦ but heās still a prime example.
That way sounds really good! I donāt think Iāve read or watched any stories with that way of doing things, but it sounds like it would work really well.
The one that usually surprises me the most when they bring them back is almost the opposite, though. So, the death usually comes out of nowhere, but the aftermath seals it in the readersā minds that the character is dead. Mostly, the readers will be going āWait, he canāt be dead! They canāt go on without him!ā
But the most scary thing the author can do is show that the story can go on. That is is merely an obstacle for the other characters to overcome on their way to the story goal.
Once again: Archie. The story went on without him so seamlessly that my brother and I were fuming that theyād just forgotten about him. I was the only diehard person saying that he was still alive, though I had no possible logic to back me up. Therefore, everyone was surprised when he came back.
If the story canāt go on without the character you just killed, then everyone will know that heāll come back. Thatās usually the worst pull off of the trick. šWhat about Hercule Poirot or Sherlock Holmes? Both of them supposedly died, leaving their sidekick in the depths of despair; but both ultimately came back.
The way I am doing it is to have the character appear to die in an accident in such a way that it does not seem suspicious that his body was not found. I then completely forget about him and have the other characters go on as if he were dead. This happens near the beginning of the story and he is not mentioned again in all the middle chapters. Well actually, he is mentioned, but I have him reappear in a different character and there is no hint that it is actually him. It is only in the last chapters that I will reveal that he has actually been alive for all this time.
š¢š¢š¢š¢š¢š¢š¢š¢š¢š¢š¢š¢š¢š¢š¢š¢š¢š¢š¢š¢š¢š¢
@The Happy Bookaholic
I havenāt read either of those, but I know about Sherlock Holmes. Good example. Since the story is narrated by Dr. Watson, that makes the death more possible. Though it is sort of about Sherlockā¦ how much can the story go on without him?
@Daeus
That looks like a great plan! Good idea having him come back as another character. Donāt think Iāve seen that before. Now I want to read it. š
Iām doing something along those lines in my book. The character dies in the beginning. The other main character is devastated, but I show the next several chapters of her āgetting over itā as the plot progresses. And then I show that the other guy isnāt dead and the bad guys have him. But no one but the bad guys know heās alive. The other characters only find out heās alive near the end of the book. Through the rest, though, I use him as a subplot because he escapes and they bad guys go after him andā¦ wellā¦ itās complicated. šI donāt have many thoughts on the subject, other than that if youāre only doing it for the shock valueā¦donāt. š It always makes people feel ripped off then. Like, if the exact same thing could be accomplished with someone else that you didnāt need to bring backā¦do it that way. *Cough*BuckyBarnes*Cough*
I donāt have many thoughts on the subject, other than that if youāre only doing it for the shock valueā¦donāt. ? It always makes people feel ripped off then. Like, if the exact same thing could be accomplished with someone else that you didnāt need to bring backā¦do it that way. *Cough*BuckyBarnes*Cough*
Definitely on the shock value thing. Itās just playing with the readerās trust for no reason other than the fact that youāre the author and you can.
Actually, I disagree that Bucky was unnecessary. It was definitely played up for shock in the fan world, but the story wouldnāt have had the depth it turned out to have if the winter soldier was just some random dude. Captain America would have had no problem with whooping that guy. The bridge fight probably would have been the last weād see of him.
However, the explanation if Buckyās survival was a little far fetched, Iāll admit that.- Rank: Charismatic Rebel
- Total Posts: 40
I donāt like surprises. When I think that somebody is dead, I would like them to stay dead and not appear fifteen chapters later. Perhaps thatās just my odd way of thinking, but hey, forums are for odd people and their odd ways of thinking.
Amen to that last part, Natalee!
But I have a thought on this. How many of you here have read the Lord of the Rings? Itās my all time favorite book, so Iāll probably be referencing it so much you guys are going to start screaming āenough with the Lord of the Rings stuff already!ā so Iām going to take advantage of it before it gets too old.
Gandalf. He breaks Roseyās rule. I mean, you know the fellowship cannot get along without him. The story is going to play out p-r-etty bad if he isnāt there to take care of everybody and confront Sauron. Youāre like, there is no way this is for serious. He canāt die! Heās too important! Butā¦ he did die. And you are forced to realizeā¦ heās not coming back. As important as he was, heās gone for good. Who could live after having confronted that Balrog both mentally and physically, and being pulled down into an endless chasm amidst the foundations of stone? Who, even a wizard? Even Gandalf?
And even if you do hang on to hope stubbornly, the scene outside Moria where they all break down weeping seals it in your mind. Heās gone. And it is only doubly confirmed as the different members of the fellowship battle with their grief and overcome it, learning to survive without himā learning to let him go. And it is confirmed what you already knew: the fellowship is a mess without Gandalf. But they learn not to be. And thatās why Gandalf doesnāt have to come back. You as the reader think, āhey, they might actually be able to pull this off without a wizard. They might actually do it.ā And then, of courseā¦ surprise! And they couldnāt get on without him after all.
I love it.@Natalee
Totally understand that. š I usually like it when that happens, though because I sort of plot out where I think the story is going to go from the point Iām at, and someone coming back usually throws off my predictions, which I, strangely, enjoy very much. So, Iāll echo your last part. š@Kate
Hmm, that sounds interesting! Never read the LotR stuff, but I actually donāt think thatās breaking my rule in the way I thought. The most cheesy way to make your character ādieā would be to kill them, even though itās obvious the story canāt go on without them. Then when everyone needs him the most, heā¦ surprise surpriseā¦ comes back to life! Wooowā¦. didnāt expect that. š
The way youāre saying that was pulled off, was that he didnāt come back when youād expect him to. When they need him the most, in other words. So, theyāre kind of skimming the cliche there, but taking it in a totally different direction.@Rosey. Yeah, youāre right, actually. It sort of gave a twist to the rule, maybe playing with breaking it, but in the end it worked out amazingly. Youāve never read the Lord of the Rings?!!!? Oh, you should! You donāt know what youāre missing.
Yeah, so this is all personal opinion. I think that there needs to be foreshadowing that they will die. I mean you could make it surprising, but based on the mass opinion on currently famous tv series (you know what ones Iām talking about) thereās a fifty/fifty chance that people will either be shocked and then hate or just hate while forgetting to be shocked. Gets?
The biggie that I believe though is that (as @Kate infered) the person has to be important. You gotta believe that the person isnāt just gonna be brought back. The audience has to be sad. Yeah, so thatās basically the biggie. The more important the person than the sadder the audience will be.
Another biggie is that it has to be relevant to the story. Mindlessly killing characters is stupid. Hereās a really good infograph that everyoneshould look at. āHow to Kill a Characterā Er every author that is.
On Bucky Barnes and brining him back. I believe that a shock factor for bringing someone back has to exist. Therefore, we must see the characters be shocked of the return. We must see the characters slowly get used to that person being gone. We must see the characterās grief. And I believe that there must be a significant period of time between death and revival. That being said. Bringing Bucky Barnes back was a shock value in the comics. An awesome twist in the movie becauseeveryone (or everyone who watched the trailers) knew Bucky was coming back. So the audience was in on it knowing something Steve didnāt. But the trick was on the audience when Buckyās return wasnāt the big reveal. The Hyrda infiltration of SHIELD was. Pretty awesomely played, right?
I blog on story and spiritual things at mkami.weebly.com
@Kate
Exactly. š
XD Well, youāre never read the Peleg Chronicles, so weāre even. š@Mark
Great points. The foreshadowing thing definitely makes it seem more real once the character does die because they were sort of expecting it because they were warned. They just need to be shown that the story can work without the character. But they also have to serve a purpose when you bring them back, usually a sort of hidden one.@Rosey. *sigh* I suppose youāre right. Sniff. Sniffle. Sniffsniffsniffsniffle. *sigh* Who wrote the Peleg Chronicles? What genre are they? They sound like fantasy, but titles can be deceiving. š I suppose I might just have to look them up if I ever get the time. And thatās a big ifā¦ maybe when Iām eighty three.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
