http://en.wikipedia.

org/wiki/Characterization

Characterization
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search For other uses, see Characterization (disambiguation).

Characterization or characterisation is the art of creating characters for a narrative,[1] including the process of conveying information about them. It may be employed in dramatic works of art or everyday conversation. Characters may be presented by means of description, through their actions, speech, or thoughts.

Contents
[hide]

1 2 3 4 5

History Direct vs. indirect Character development In drama Character features o 5.1 Weaknesses 6 See also 7 Notes 8 References 9 External links

[edit] History
The term characterization was introduced in mid 19th century.[1] Aristotle promoted the primacy of plot over characters, that is a plot-driven narrative, arguing in his Poetics that tragedy "is a rapresentation, not of men, but of action and life."[2] This view was reversed in the 19th century, when the primacy of the character, that is a character-driven narrative, was affirmed first with the petty bourgeois realist novel, and increasingly later with the influential development of psychology.[2]

[edit] Direct vs. indirect

There are two ways an author can convey information about a character:
Direct or explicit characterization

The author literally tells the audience what a character is like. This may be done via the narrator, another character or by the character him- or herself. Indirect or implicit characterization The audience must induce for themselves what the character is like through the characters thoughts, actions, speech (choice of words, way of talking), looks and interaction with other characters, including other characters reactions to that particular person.

[edit] Character development

This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (August 2010)

A well-developed character is one that has been thoroughly characterised, with many traits shown in the narrative. A well-developed character acts according to past instances provided by its visible traits unless more information about the character is provided. The better the audience knows the character, the better the character development. Thorough characterization makes characters well-rounded and complex. This allows for a sense of realism. As an example, according to F.R. Leavis, Leo Tolstoy was the creator of some of the most complex and psychologically believable characters in fiction.[citation needed] In contrast, an underdeveloped character is considered flat or stereotypical. Character development is also very important in character-driven literature, where stories focus not on events, but on individual personalities. Classic examples include War and Peace or David Copperfield. In a tragedy, the central character generally remains fixed with whatever character flaw (hamartia) seals his fate; in a comedy the central characters typically undergo some kind of epiphany (sudden realisation) whereupon they adjust their prior beliefs and practices and avert a tragic fate. Historically, stories and plays focusing on characters became common as part of the 19th-century Romantic movement, and character-driven literature rapidly supplanted more plot-driven literature that typically utilises easily identifiable archetypes rather than proper character development.

[edit] In drama
This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (August 2010)

In performance an actor has less time to characterise and so can risk the character coming across as underdeveloped. The great realists of dramaturgy have relied heavily on implicit characterization which occupy the main body of their character driven plays. Examples of these playwrights are Henrik Ibsen, August Strindberg and Anton Chekhov. Such psychological epics as The Seagull indirectly characterise the protagonists so that the

audience is drawn into their inner turmoils as they are slowly revealed over the three hours of time spent with the characters. The actors taking on these roles must also characterise over a long period of time, to the point that there seems to be no direct statement of who the character is at any point, this realism in acting requires the actor to characterise from their own persona as a starting point. The audience therefore does not recognise a realistic characterization immediately. However the playwright and actor also have the choice of indirect characterization in a similar vein to the writer in literature. The presentation of a character for a sociological discussion only has to be as real as the discussion requires. In this way a character can be used as an iconic reference by a playwright to suggest location, an epoch in history, or even draw in a political debate. The inclusion of a stock character, or in literary terms an archetypal character, by a playwright can risk drawing overly simplistic pictures of people and smack of stereotyping. However, the degree of success in direct characterization in order to swiftly get to the action varies from play to play, and often according to the use the character is put to. In explicitly characterising a certain character the actor makes a similar gamble. The choice of what aspects of a character are demonstrated by the actor to directly characterise is a political choice and makes a statement as to the ethics and agenda of the actor and mime especially, and in epic theatre.

[edit] Character features

[edit] Weaknesses
Weaknesses in a character, like vices, imperfections or flaws, make him or her appear more human causing the audience to identify with her/him.[3]

http://www.fictionfactor.com/guests/characterization.html

Direct vs. Indirect Characterization

by Terry W. Ervin II

Characterization is an important element in almost every work of fiction, whether it is a short story, a novel, or anywhere in between. When it comes to characterization, a writer has two options: 1. DIRECT CHARACTERIZATION - the writer makes direct statements about a character's personality and tells what the character is like. 2. INDIRECT CHARACTERIZATION - the writer reveals information about a character and his personality through that character's thoughts, words, and actions, along with how other characters respond to that character, including what they think and say about him. An alert writer might recognize that the two methods of characterization fall under the decision to show or to tell. Indirect characterization shows the reader. Direct characterization tells the reader. As with most show versus tell decisions, showing is more interesting and engaging to the reader, and should be used in preference to telling. Does that relegate direct characterization to the prose trash heap? No. There are times when direct characterization is useful. Whereas indirect characterization is more likely to engage a readers imagination and paint more vivid images, direct characterization excels in brevity, lower word count, and moving the story forward. For example, a writer may want to reveal a minor facet of a characters personality without distracting from the action in a scene. It is up to the writer to decide when each characterization method is appropriate. To observe the difference between direct and indirect characterization, read the paired paragraphs below. Each is written to convey the same basic information. One of each pair demonstrates direct characterization while the other demonstrates indirect characterization. See if you can identify which method is being used. Paragraph Pair 1: A. Ed Johnson scratched his head in confusion as the sales rep explained Dralcos newest engine performance diagnostic computer. The old mechanic hated modern electronics, preferring the old days when all he needed was a stack of manuals and a good set of tools. B. That Ed Johnson, said Anderson, watching the old mechanic scratch his head in confusion as the sales rep explained Dralcos newest engine performance diagnostic computer. He hasnt got a clue about modern electronics. Give him a good set of tools and a stack of yellowing manuals with a carburetor needing repair, and hed be happy as a hungry frog in a fly-field. Paragraph Pair 2: A. Julie owned a multitude of outfits and accessories, and it always took her forever to decide which combination might impress Trent. As usual, she called her sister several times for advice. After doing so, Julie decided to give the navy blue skirt with the white sweater a try. B. Julie held up six different outfits in front of the mirror and pondered which would go best with her navy blue shoes, pastel eye shadow and the diamond earrings shed already procured from her overflowing vanity. After ninety minutes of mixing and matching, and cell-phoning her sister three times for advice, Julie finally made up her mind. Shed give the navy blue skirt and white sweater a try, hoping Trent would love it. In both instances, Paragraph A illustrates an example of direct characterization (telling) while Paragraph B provides an example of indirect characterization (showing). While one might quibble with

the quality of each paragraph (or Julies fashion sense), the direct characterization examples are shorter, leaving less imagination to the reader, while still getting the same basic information across. Which is most appropriate depends on the needs and concerns of the writer. Copyright Terry W. Ervin II. All rights reserved.

Terry W. Ervin II is an English teacher who enjoys writing Science Fiction and Fantasy. He is a frequent contributor to Fiction Factor and his fiction has appeared a number of places, including The Sword Review, Futures Mystery Anthology Magazine and MindFlights. When Terry isnt writing or enjoying time with his family, he can be found in his basement raising turtles. To contact Terry or to learn more about his writing endeavors and recommended markets (among other things), visit his website at: http://www.ervin-author.com

http://www.oppapers.com/essays/Theory-Of-Character-AndCharacterization/194678

Theory Of Character And Characterization

Home Page Social Science Psychology Research Papers

Theory Of Character And Characterization

1. Theory of Character According to Abrams the meaning of character are the persons presented in a dramatic or narrative work, who are interpreted by the reader as being edowed with moral and dispositional qualities that are expressed in what they say - the dialogue - and what they do - the action (198 1:2) Therefore characters are important element in the story. The stories always introduce their characters to give a description to the readers. Character is commonly used in two ways (Stanton. 1965:17). The first is that character designates the individuals who appear in the story. The second is that character refers to the mixture of interests, desires, emotions, and moral principles that makes up each of these individuals. Character gives a certain situation or circlumstance in the story because he or she shows his or her emotions in it. According to Hugh Holman and William Harmon. character is a complicated term that includes tile idea of the moral constitution of the human personality,