Hubbry Logo
Character (arts)Character (arts)Main
Open search
Character (arts)
Community hub
Character (arts)
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Character (arts)
Character (arts)
Character (arts)
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Four commedia dell'arte characters, whose costumes and demeanor indicate the stock character roles that they portray in this genre

In fiction, a character is a person or being in a narrative (such as a novel, play, radio or television series, music, film, or video game).[1][2][3] The character may be entirely fictional or based on a real-life person, in which case the distinction of a "fictional" versus "real" character may be made.[2] Derived from the Ancient Greek word χαρακτήρ, the English word dates from the Restoration,[4] although it became widely used after its appearance in Tom Jones by Henry Fielding in 1749.[5][6] From this, the sense of "a part played by an actor" developed.[6] (Before this development, the term dramatis personae, naturalized in English from Latin and meaning "masks of the drama", encapsulated the notion of characters from the literal aspect of masks.) A character, particularly when enacted by an actor in the theater or cinema, involves "the illusion of being a human person".[7] In literature, characters guide readers through their stories, helping them to understand plots and ponder themes.[8] Since the end of the 18th century, the phrase "in character" has been used to describe an effective impersonation by an actor.[6] Since the 19th century, the art of creating characters, as practiced by actors or writers, has been called characterization.[6]

A character who stands as a representative of a particular class or group of people is known as a type.[9] Types include both stock characters and those that are more fully individualized.[9] The characters in Henrik Ibsen's Hedda Gabler (1891) and August Strindberg's Miss Julie (1888), for example, are representative of specific positions in the social relations of class and gender, such that the conflicts between the characters reveal ideological conflicts.[10]

The study of a character requires an analysis of its relations with all of the other characters in the work.[11] The individual status of a character is defined through the network of oppositions (proairetic, pragmatic, linguistic, proxemic) that it forms with the other characters.[12] The relation between characters and the action of the story shifts historically, often miming shifts in society and its ideas about human individuality, self-determination, and the social order.[13]

Creation

[edit]

In fiction writing, authors create dynamic characters using various methods. Sometimes characters are conjured up from imagination; in other instances, they are created by amplifying the character trait of a real person into a new fictional creation.[1][2]

Real people, in part or in full

[edit]

An author or creator basing a character on a real person can use a person they know, a historical figure, a current figure whom they have not met, or themselves, with the latter being either an author-surrogate or an example of self-insertion. The use of a famous person easily identifiable with certain character traits as the base for a principal character is a feature of allegorical works, such as Animal Farm by George Orwell, which portrays Soviet revolutionaries as pigs. Other authors, especially for historical fiction, make use of real people and create fictional stories revolving around their lives, as with The Paris Wife which revolves around Ernest Hemingway.

Archetypes and stock characters

[edit]
Literary scholar Patrick Grant matches characters from The Lord of the Rings with Jungian archetypes.[14]

An author can create a character using the basic character archetypes which are common to many cultural traditions: the father figure, mother figure, hero, and so on. Some writers make use of archetypes as presented by Carl Jung as the basis for character traits.[15] Generally, when an archetype from some system (such as Jung's) is used, elements of the story also follow the system's expectations in terms of storyline.

An author can also create a fictional character using generic stock characters, which are generally flat. They tend to be used for supporting or minor characters. However, some authors have used stock characters as the starting point for building richly detailed characters, such as William Shakespeare's use of the boastful soldier character as the basis for John Falstaff.

Some authors create charactonyms for their characters. A charactonym is a name that implies the psychological makeup of the person, makes an allegorical allusion, or makes reference to their appearance. For example, Shakespeare has an emotional young male character named Mercutio, John Steinbeck has a kind, sweet character named Candy in Of Mice and Men, and Mervyn Peake has a Machiavellian, manipulative, and murderous villain in Gormenghast named Steerpike. The charactonym can also indicate appearance. For example, François Rabelais gave the name Gargantua to a giant, and the huge whale in Pinocchio (1940) is named Monstro.

Types

[edit]

Round vs. flat

[edit]

In his book Aspects of the Novel, E. M. Forster defined two basic types of characters, their qualities, functions, and importance for the development of the novel: flat characters and round characters.[16] Flat characters are two-dimensional, in that they are relatively uncomplicated. By contrast, round characters are complex figures with many different characteristics, that undergo development, sometimes sufficiently to surprise the reader.[17]

In psychological terms, round or complex characters may be considered to have five personality dimensions under the Big Five model of personality.[18] The five factors are:

Stock characters are usually one-dimensional and thin. Mary Sues are characters that usually appear in fan fiction which are virtually devoid of flaws,[20] and are therefore considered flat characters.

Another type of flat character is a "walk-on", a term used by Seymour Chatman for characters that are not fully delineated and individualized; rather they are part of the background or the setting of the narrative.[21]

Dynamic vs. static

[edit]
Further information: Character arc

Dynamic characters are those that change over the course of the story, while static characters remain the same throughout. An example of a popular dynamic character in literature is Ebenezer Scrooge, the protagonist of A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens. At the start of the story, he is a bitter miser, but by the end of the tale, he transforms into a kindhearted, generous man.

Regular, recurring and guest characters

[edit]
See also: Bit part

In television, a regular, main or ongoing character is a character who appears in all or a majority of episodes, or in a significant chain of episodes of the series.[22] Regular characters may be both core and secondary ones.

A recurring character or supporting character often and frequently appears from time to time during the series' run.[23] Recurring characters often play major roles in more than one episode, sometimes being the main focus.

A guest or minor character is one who acts only in a few episodes or scenes. Unlike regular characters, the guest ones do not need to be carefully incorporated into the storyline with all its ramifications: they create a piece of drama and then disappear without consequences to the narrative structure, unlike core characters, for which any significant conflict must be traced during a considerable time, which is often seen as an unjustified waste of resources.[24]: 147  There may also be a continuing or recurring guest character.[24]: 151  Sometimes a guest or minor character may gain unanticipated popularity and turn into a regular or main one;[25] this is known as a breakout character.[26][27]

Classical analysis

[edit]
Further information: Poetics (Aristotle)

In the earliest surviving work of dramatic theory, Poetics (c. 335 BCE), the Classical Greek philosopher Aristotle states that character (ethos) is one of six qualitative parts of Athenian tragedy and one of the three objects that it represents (1450a12).[28] He understands character not to denote a fictional person, but the quality of the person acting in the story and reacting to its situations (1450a5).[29] He defines character as "that which reveals decision, of whatever sort" (1450b8).[29] It is possible, therefore, to have stories that do not contain "characters" in Aristotle's sense of the word, since character necessarily involves making the ethical dispositions of those performing the action clear.[30] If, in speeches, the speaker "decides or avoids nothing at all", then those speeches "do not have character" (1450b9—11).[31] Aristotle argues for the primacy of plot (mythos) over character (ethos).[32] He writes:

But the most important of these is the structure of the incidents. For (i) tragedy is a representation not of human beings but of action and life. Happiness and unhappiness lie in action, and the end [of life] is a sort of action, not a quality; people are of a certain sort according to their characters, but happy or the opposite according to their actions. So [the actors] do not act in order to represent the characters, but they include the characters for the sake of their actions" (1450a15–23).[33]

Aristotle suggests that works were distinguished in the first instance according to the nature of the person who created them: "the grander people represented fine actions, i.e. those of fine persons" by producing "hymns and praise-poems", while "ordinary people represented those of inferior ones" by "composing invectives" (1448b20–1449a5).[34] On this basis, a distinction between the individuals represented in tragedy and in comedy arose: tragedy, along with epic poetry, is "a representation of serious people" (1449b9–10), while comedy is "a representation of people who are rather inferior" (1449a32—33).[35]

In the Tractatus coislinianus (which may or may not be by Aristotle), Ancient Greek comedy is defined as involving three types of characters: the buffoon (bômolochus), the ironist (eirōn), and the imposter or boaster (alazṓn).[36] All three are central to Aristophanes' Old Comedy.[37]

By the time the Roman comic playwright Plautus wrote his plays two centuries later, the use of characters to define dramatic genres was well established.[38] His Amphitryon begins with a prologue in which Mercury claims that since the play contains kings and gods, it cannot be a comedy and must be a tragicomedy.[39]

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Character (arts)

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
In the arts, a character is a fictional or represented entity, typically human or human-like, within narrative works such as literature, theatre, film, and other media, embodying traits, motivations, and agency that advance the plot and illuminate themes. Characters function as the core agents of storytelling, interacting within the storyworld to generate conflict, resolution, and emotional resonance for audiences. The concept derives from the Greek kharaktēr, meaning an engraved stamp or distinctive mark, underscoring how such figures imprint enduring qualities and behaviors onto the narrative fabric. Characters are classified by narrative roles, including protagonists who drive the central action, antagonists who oppose them, and supporting types that provide context or contrast, with archetypes recurring across cultures from ancient epics to modern cinema. They vary in depth: flat characters maintain static traits for functional purposes, while round characters exhibit psychological complexity, growth, and contradictions mirroring empirical observations of . Characterization occurs through direct exposition of attributes or indirect revelation via actions, , and interactions, enabling creators to explore causal chains of and consequence. Historically, stock characters in traditions like exemplified reusable templates, evolving into individualized portrayals that prioritize causal realism in motivations over mere symbolic abstraction.

Overview

Definition and Scope

In the arts, a character refers to a fictional or semi-fictional , typically or human-like, that inhabits a storyworld constructed through media such as , theater, , or interactive formats like video games. This functions as an agent capable of intentional actions, motivations, and decisions that propel the forward or illustrate thematic concerns, distinguishing it from non-narrative elements or abstract constructs. Unlike real individuals, characters exist solely within the representational framework of the artwork, even when semi-fictional portrayals draw from historical figures, as their behaviors and traits are shaped by the creator's interpretive design rather than empirical . The scope of characters extends to anthropomorphized animals, mythical beings, or personified objects that exhibit agency akin to human cognition, but excludes non-agentic symbols or forces—such as undifferentiated "fate" or allegorical motifs—unless endowed with personality and volition to interact causally in the plot. In classical terms, as outlined in Aristotle's Poetics (c. 335 BCE), character (ethos) manifests through the moral qualities and choices of these agents, which reveal their disposition as either virtuous or flawed, thereby supporting the work's ethical and emotional impact without supplanting the primacy of action. This agentive role underscores characters' contribution to narrative causality, where their decisions generate consequences that structure events, rather than serving passively as plot conduits. Narratological frameworks reinforce this by positioning characters as text- or media-based participants whose attributes enable storyworld coherence and audience engagement across artistic domains.

Role in Narrative Structure

In narratives, characters function as primary causal agents, initiating actions through decisions and interactions that generate conflict, propel events, and lead to resolution via interconnected chains of cause and effect. This agency distinguishes character-mediated structures from purely plot-driven models, where progression relies on external contingencies rather than intentional behaviors. In pre-modern epics such as Homer's , character actions often serve reactive roles subordinate to divine machinations or fate, limiting individual causality compared to modern narratives emphasizing psychological motivations as plot engines. Causal realism in storytelling demands agents capable of volition to forge logical sequences; characters supply this by embodying desires, flaws, and rationales that trigger consequences, ensuring coherence over arbitrary happenings. Empirical analyses of processing reveal that reader-assessed plausibility of character-driven causal links—drawing on real-world action knowledge—bolsters comprehension, retention, and during engagement. Without such mediation, stories devolve into disjointed episodes, as causality hinges on traceable human-like agency rather than impersonal forces. Unlike settings, which furnish contextual backdrops, or themes, which distill emergent patterns from events, characters uniquely instantiate motivations testable by their indispensable : excising them unravels plot , as no alternative element can replicate decision-based progression. Audience immersion studies corroborate this, demonstrating that perceived character agency and relatability—via similarity in traits or experiences—heighten identification, emotional investment, and overall engagement, with meta-analyses confirming stronger effects from aligned recipient-character dynamics. This functional primacy underscores characters' empirical utility in sustaining drive beyond symbolic or atmospheric contributions.

Historical Evolution

Ancient and Classical Origins

In , the conceptualization of character emerged prominently in , exemplified by Homer's , composed around 750 BCE. Figures like Achilles embodied heroic archetypes, displaying traits such as unyielding wrath (menis), pursuit of (kleos), and internal conflict over mortality, marking early instances of individualized agency beyond mere mythic roles. These portrayals prioritized warriors' moral choices in battle and personal vendettas, laying groundwork for characters as agents of causal sequences rather than passive divine puppets. Greek tragedy further advanced this by centering human protagonists whose actions drove narratives, diverging from the heavy divine interventions in epics. Playwrights like , in works such as (472 BCE), depicted historical figures grappling with and retribution, emphasizing personal flaws over godly whims. This evolution highlighted —a critical error or defect in judgment—as pivotal to downfall, underscoring human responsibility in tragic outcomes and prefiguring causal analyses of behavior rooted in inherent limitations. Aristotle's , written circa 335 BCE, systematized these elements, defining character () as ethical dispositions manifested through choices, subordinate to plot (mythos) yet vital for effective imitation () of . He argued that characters should be consistent and appropriate to their type, revealing via decisions that evoke and , thus prioritizing representational realism over spectacle. Parallel developments appear in non-Western traditions, such as the Indian epic , with its core narrative compiled around 400 BCE amid layered oral accretions extending to 400 CE. Warriors like exhibit multifaceted traits—duty-bound prowess, doubt, and relational loyalties—driving vast conflicts through personal dilemmas, akin to Greek heroic complexities but embedded in (cosmic order). These depictions, drawn from Vedic-era motifs, illustrate early cross-cultural emphases on characters as loci of ethical causation in expansive narratives.

Development in Modern Literary Theory

In the nineteenth century, advanced character development by emphasizing motivations rooted in social and environmental , drawing on empirical observations of amid industrialization and . Honoré de Balzac's (1829–1848), comprising over 90 works, depicted characters as products of economic pressures and societal hierarchies, illustrating how inheritance, ambition, and deterministically shape personal trajectories. similarly portrayed characters' drives as emergent from material conditions, as in Hard Times (1854), where utilitarian education and factory exploitation causally distort psychological growth, prioritizing verifiable social mechanics over idealized heroism. This shift marked a departure from earlier romantic emphases on innate , favoring causal explanations grounded in observable societal . Sigmund Freud's (1900) introduced subconscious drives into character theory, arguing that behaviors arise from repressed instincts and unconscious conflicts rather than transparent rationality, influencing post-1900 literary analysis to probe hidden psychic layers. Psychoanalytic criticism, emerging in the early twentieth century, applied this framework to reveal how characters' apparent actions mask id-driven impulses clashing with superego constraints, as evidenced in modernist works dissecting internal fragmentation. This approach complemented realism's external causality with internal empiricism, validating depth through clinical case studies of neuroses and dreams, though it risked overgeneralizing universal archetypes at the expense of individual variability. E. M. Forster's Aspects of the Novel () codified the round-flat distinction, classifying round characters as dynamically complex—capable of convincing surprises via evolving traits and contradictions—while flat ones remain summarily predictable, based on forensic reading of novels like those by Tolstoy and Dostoevsky. Forster derived this binary from textual evidence of psychological nuance, arguing round figures sustain vitality through unanticipated responses to , as opposed to flat types reduced to single epithets. Mid-twentieth-century , exemplified by Vladimir Propp's Morphology of the Folktale (1928), reconceptualized characters as functional spheres of action—such as donor or —detached from personal , with 31 invariant plot functions dictating roles across 100 Russian folktales analyzed empirically. Propp's method prioritized structural constancy over subjective depth, treating as interchangeable vehicles for progression, which structuralists later extended to broader genres but which overlooks characters' autonomous causal agency rooted in empirical individuality.

Methods of Characterization

Direct and Indirect Techniques

Direct entails the explicit statement of a character's traits by the narrator, another character, or the character themselves, providing unambiguous details such as physical attributes, , or motivations. For instance, a narrator might declare, "The old man was wise and patient," directly conveying these qualities without requiring reader . This technique suits concise narratives or archetypal depictions where rapid trait establishment is prioritized, as seen in traditional fables or moral tales. However, overuse risks reducing immersion by favoring declarative summary over evidential demonstration, potentially limiting the causal depth readers derive from observed behaviors. Indirect characterization, by contrast, discloses traits through demonstrable evidence: a character's voluntary actions, spoken words, internal thoughts, external appearance, or the observable effects on surrounding figures. Readers infer qualities—like from a figure's actions or deceit from inconsistent speech—via causal linkages, akin to empirical assessment in everyday observation. This method aligns with realist conventions, where authors withhold overt judgments to enable audience-driven conclusions, fostering a of discovery grounded in rather than authorial fiat. Examples include portraying avarice not by stating it but by depicting a protagonist's refusal to aid kin despite ample means, allowing traits to emerge organically from plot dynamics. The preference for indirect over direct approaches gained prominence in late 19th-century fiction, particularly through Henry James's emphasis on dramatized scenes and consciousness to evoke , critiquing mere telling as insufficient for psychological realism. James argued that rendering "processes" via showing—through , , and —superiorly conveys character interiors, influencing craft . This pivot formalized in Percy Lubbock's The Craft of Fiction (1921), which contrasts summary (direct telling) with scenic enactment (indirect showing), lauding James for prioritizing reader to heighten . Such techniques underscore a shift toward evidential , where character conveyance relies on verifiable narrative actions over interpretive assertion.

Incorporation of Real Individuals

In literary and dramatic works, characters based on real individuals lend historical authenticity while allowing artists to explore psychological depths or causal motivations through selective dramatization. William Shakespeare's Richard III (performed circa 1593) centers on the historical King Richard III of England (1452–1485), portraying him as a Machiavellian schemer whose physical deformities symbolize moral corruption. The play draws from Raphael Holinshed's Chronicles of England, Scotland, and Ireland (1587 edition), which synthesized earlier accounts including Sir Thomas More's History of King Richard III (written circa 1513–1518 but unpublished until 1557), both tainted by Tudor-era propaganda that vilified Richard to legitimize Henry VII's usurpation. Shakespeare heightened these traits—exaggerating Richard's scoliosis into a pronounced hunchback and inventing soliloquies revealing premeditated villainy—for stage impact, diverging from archaeological evidence of mild spinal curvature in Richard's 2012-exhumed remains and contemporary records indicating competent rule during his brief reign (1483–1485). Such alterations prioritize narrative propulsion over verbatim fidelity, compressing events like the Princes in the Tower disappearance to underscore causal themes of ambition and retribution. Nineteenth-century fiction similarly adapted real figures to probe ethical tensions. Victor Hugo's (1862) features Inspector , modeled on Eugène François (1775–1857), a French ex-convict who reformed to establish the world's first detective bureau, the Sûreté Nationale, in 1812. Vidocq's trajectory from criminal to relentless lawman—detailed in his 1828 memoirs Mémoires—inspired Javert's rigid legalism and internal conflict, though Hugo amplified Javert's suicidal rigidity to contrast with redemption arcs, fabricating psychological absolutism absent in Vidocq's pragmatic career. This license serves causal realism by heightening ideological clashes, verifiable against Vidocq's documented innovations in versus the novel's invented pursuits, without distorting core biographical facts like his 19 arrests and eventual pardons. Modern adaptations, particularly biopics, navigate defamation risks amid such liberties. David Fincher's The Social Network (2010) fictionalizes (born 1984) as Facebook's socially awkward architect, drawing from events in Ben Mezrich's (2009) but inventing dialogues, romantic subplots, and motives like spiteful inception during a breakup. Zuckerberg deemed the depiction "not accurate" in a 2010 interview, yet pursued no suit, as U.S. defamation standards for public figures demand proof of "actual malice"—knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard—per New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964), rendering claims untenable absent verifiable fabrications. Timeline compressions and composite scenes maintain dramatic causality, but ethical boundaries emerge in potential harm to living subjects, prompting disclosures of fictionalization to mitigate liability while preserving artistic compression for coherence.

Use of Archetypes and Stock Figures

Archetypes represent recurring universal patterns in , symbolism, and roles that facilitate the efficient depiction of character traits and motivations across diverse cultural contexts, minimizing the need for redundant exposition. These patterns emerge from shared psychological structures, allowing creators to evoke immediate recognition and emotional depth. Empirical analyses of global , such as those examining mythological motifs, reveal consistent archetypes like the —embodying courage and transformation—and , representing repressed or antagonistic aspects of the psyche—appearing in stories from ancient Sumerian epics to Indigenous oral traditions. Carl Jung formalized archetypes in his psychological framework starting around 1919, positing them as innate prototypes within the that influence character formation in arts and literature, with the archetype involving a journey of and embodying conflict or moral duality. built on this in (1949), identifying a monomyth where the archetype recurs across cultures, from Polynesian legends to European fairy tales, supported by comparative analysis of over 300 myths demonstrating structural similarities in character functions and trials. This cross-cultural recurrence underscores archetypes' utility in streamlining narrative conveyance, as evidenced by showing their presence in 70-80% of analyzed tales regardless of geographic origin. Stock figures, distinct yet complementary to archetypes, consist of simplified, flat character types embodying exaggerated societal roles, such as the fool for or the for unambiguous opposition, which promote economy by relying on pre-established familiarity. In theater, these enable rapid setup of conflicts and ; for instance, Molière's (premiered 1664) employs the titular character as a stock hypocrite—a pious pretender exposing religious fraudulence—to critique 17th-century French hypocrisy with minimal backstory, allowing focus on thematic critique. Such figures excel in recognition, reducing for audiences and enabling efficient plotting in ensemble formats like , where masked roles like the boastful captain facilitated improvised performances across from the onward. While effective for universality and brevity, overuse of archetypes and stock figures risks predictability, as rigid adherence to patterns can undermine narrative surprise and , a concern raised in literary analyses noting formulaic journeys in commercial . However, response counters this by demonstrating sustained resonance: a study of media characters found that archetypal figures elicit stronger emotional identification tied to viewers' traits, with archetypes correlating to higher scores in surveys of over 500 participants exposed to prototypes. This empirical affinity explains their persistence, as archetypes align with innate cognitive processing preferences for familiar causal structures in .

Character Classifications

Round and Flat Distinctions

The distinction between round and flat characters originates in E.M. Forster's analysis in Aspects of the Novel, where flat characters are defined as those constructed around a single dominant idea or quality, expressible in a concise phrase, rendering their actions predictable and consistent without deviation. Such characters serve functions like providing clarity in ensemble stories or delivering through exaggerated traits, as seen in Charles Dickens's (serialized 1849–1850), where Mrs. Micawber embodies unwavering loyalty summarized as "I will never desert Mr. Micawber," facilitating efficient plot progression without demanding interpretive depth from readers. In contrast, round characters exhibit multifaceted traits that allow for internal contradictions and behavioral surprises while maintaining overall consistency, assessed through textual evidence of complexity rather than unsubstantiated claims of psychological depth. Jane Austen's in (1813) exemplifies this, as her initial prejudices yield to self-reflective growth amid romantic tensions, revealing layered motivations that align with causal sequences of misjudgment and correction grounded in observable interactions. This dimensionality supports causal realism in narratives by permitting characters to navigate contradictions—such as pride clashing with evidence—without implausibility, thereby enhancing through predictable yet nuanced responses to events. Forster proposed an empirical test for roundness: the capacity to surprise convincingly within the story's logic, distinguishing it from mere unpredictability or flat rigidity. Narratologists have critiqued this binary for oversimplifying character function, arguing it privileges mimetic realism over functional roles in diverse genres and potentially misreads subtle textual nuances as flatness, as in reevaluations of Dickensian figures where apparent masks contextual adaptations. Despite such limitations, the framework remains a practical tool for evaluating complexity via textual predictability versus emergent consistency.

Dynamic and Static Traits

Static characters exhibit unchanging core traits across a , providing stability that reinforces thematic consistency or highlights contrasts with evolving elements. Their immutability allows them to function as ideals, foils, or anchors, emphasizing enduring values or predictable behaviors amid plot flux. For instance, , introduced by in (1887), retains his unparalleled deductive logic, emotional detachment, and eccentric habits throughout the canon, unaltered by cases or personal trials. This consistency amplifies his role in illuminating human folly through unchanging rationality. In contrast, dynamic characters undergo profound internal shifts in beliefs, motivations, or behaviors, propelled by causal events that plausibly alter their psychological makeup. Such transformations demand credible catalysts rooted in realistic responses to experiences, aligning with principles of psychological realism where external pressures reshape inner drives without contrivance. in ' A Christmas Carol, serialized in December 1843, exemplifies this: initially defined by avarice and isolation, he evolves into benevolence after confrontations with spectral visitations that force reckoning with past regrets, present solitude, and future consequences, yielding a causally linked redemption. Analyses of such arcs underscore that effective dynamism hinges on sequential psychological progression, where initial flaws meet escalating pressures to forge authentic change. Distinctions in mutability influence efficacy: static figures sustain focal tensions by resisting , while dynamic ones resolve conflicts through evident growth, often heightening closure via demonstrated over mere revelation. In plot dissections, dynamic evolutions correlate with intensified reader engagement in resolution phases, as transformations validate causal chains from to outcome.

Narrative Roles (Protagonist, Antagonist, etc.)

In narrative theory, roles such as and denote functional positions within a story's , where characters' actions generate conflict and progression rather than predefined moral alignments. These roles emphasize relational dynamics: the initiates or responds to forces that propel the plot, while antagonists provide opposition essential for tension, and supporting figures facilitate escalation without dominating agency. This framework aligns with dramatic models like Freytag's pyramid, which maps rising action through character-driven confrontations toward climax, underscoring over ethical categorization. The serves as the central agent whose decisions and pursuits drive the narrative's primary causal chain, often bearing the consequences that resolve the central conflict. Unlike traditional heroic figures, protagonists need not embody virtue; anti-heroes like Walter White in (2008–2013) exemplify this by escalating from a chemistry to a methamphetamine empire builder through self-interested choices that propel the plot, yet retain focal agency. The , conversely, embodies the primary oppositional force—be it a character, , or abstract barrier—that thwarts the protagonist's objectives, thereby heightening stakes and necessitating adaptive responses. This role often mirrors the protagonist's traits to amplify conflict's relational depth, as seen in systemic antagonists like economic pressures or rival entities, which sustain momentum via persistent causal friction rather than villainous intent alone. Supporting roles, such as the mentor or love interest, function to reinforce the protagonist's trajectory by providing resources, insights, or emotional incentives that intensify causal linkages without usurping primacy. Mentors impart knowledge or tools critical for overcoming obstacles, as in advisory figures who enable plot advancement during rising action; love interests, meanwhile, introduce interpersonal conflicts that tie personal motivations to broader stakes, ensuring relational causality extends beyond isolated agency. These positions integrate into structural analyses like Freytag's 1863 model, where they catalyze exposition-to-climax progression through enabling interactions.

Theoretical Frameworks

Aristotelian and Classical Analysis

In Plato's Republic, composed circa 375 BCE, the dialogue's interlocutors express concern that poetic mimesis—imitation—of immoral or base characters risks corrupting the moral formation of the young, especially the guardians of the ideal city, by habituating them to vice through empathetic enactment. Socrates specifies that guardians should avoid imitating lamentation, drunkenness, or madness, as such representations foster emotional instability and ethical laxity rather than the steadfast virtue required for rulership; instead, poetry must model only noble actions to reinforce psychic harmony. This caution underscores characters' potential as ethical vectors, where mimetic replication of flawed personas could erode rational control over appetites and spirit, prioritizing societal stability over artistic liberty. Aristotle, in his Poetics circa 335 BCE, subordinates character to plot in tragedy but deems it essential for evoking pity and fear, the cathartic emotions central to the genre's effect. Characters must exhibit superiority in virtue—goodness aligned with moral excellence—yet possess a flaw or error () that ensures realism and plausibility, preventing mere virtue signaling while enabling , the reversal of fortune that heightens tragic impact through unexpected yet probable shifts. For instance, the should neither be wholly wicked, lest revulsion replace , nor flawless, as this diminishes of shared vulnerability; thus, figures like exemplify middling virtue, where ethical stature amplifies the mimetic imitation of human contingency and consequence. Roman critics extended these principles, with Horace's Ars Poetica circa 19 BCE advocating (aptum), wherein characters' traits, speech, and actions must align with their age, status, and role to maintain and ethical propriety. A youth's impetuousness or an elder's deliberation should reflect natural probabilities, avoiding incongruities like gods in trivial pursuits, to preserve the instructive moral function of alongside delight; inconsistency undermines the work's unity and risks modeling implausible behaviors that confuse rather than elevate the audience's understanding of . This emphasis on fitting representation reinforces classical as a disciplined , balancing realism with normative ideals to guide ethical discernment without descending into .

Psychological and Realist Approaches

Psychological realism emerged in 19th-century literature as a method to model characters' behaviors through internal causal mechanisms, emphasizing thoughts and emotions over external events. Gustave Flaubert's (1857) pioneered this approach via indirect interior , delving into Emma Bovary's unvoiced dissatisfactions and romantic delusions to explain her adulterous actions and eventual as products of psychological discord rather than mere social circumstance. This technique treated the psyche as a deterministic engine, where unresolved internal conflicts propel narrative outcomes, verifiable through the novel's detailed rendering of cognitive processes absent overt authorial judgment. In the early , empirical psychology from integrated into , framing literary figures via id-ego-superego dynamics to depict unconscious instincts clashing with rational . James Joyce's Ulysses (1922) exemplifies this, employing stream-of-consciousness to trace protagonists' mental streams—such as Leopold Bloom's repressed desires—mirroring Freudian case studies where biographical traumas predict behavioral patterns. extended such models with archetypes from the , interpreting characters as symbolic expressions of innate psychic structures, as in analyses linking fictional heroes to universal or anima figures, often cross-verified against authors' documented personal histories. These frameworks positioned characters as testable hypotheses of human , prioritizing intrapsychic forces empirically observed in clinical data over deterministic external plots. Critiques of these approaches highlight their tendency to over-psychologize, attributing behaviors primarily to individual unconscious processes while underweighting for cultural and environmental determinants. For instance, social observation in realist works like Flaubert's reveals behaviors shaped by class norms and economic pressures, which psychological reductions may eclipse, as noted in examinations of pervasive psychologisation in Western interpretive traditions that sideline influences. thus demands balancing psychic models with verifiable social data to avoid reductive individualism unsupported by broader behavioral studies.

Structuralist and Postmodern Perspectives

Structuralist approaches to literary characters, emerging prominently in the mid-20th century, reconceptualized them not as psychologically coherent individuals but as functional actants within narrative structures. , in his 1966 essay "Introduction to the Structural Analysis of Narrative," drew on A.J. Greimas's to argue that characters serve as placeholders in binary oppositions—such as subject/object or sender/receiver—prioritizing their roles in propositional functions over any inherent personality or depth. This framework built on Vladimir Propp's earlier empirical analysis of 196 Russian folktales in Morphology of the Folktale (1928, translated 1958), where Propp identified 31 invariant functions and seven character types defined by spheres of action, demonstrating recurring structural patterns across tales regardless of specific . Propp's morphology provided a data-driven foundation, revealing how characters operate as interchangeable elements in causal sequences rather than autonomous agents. Postmodern perspectives further destabilized character coherence, viewing them as illusions or multiplicities susceptible to interpretive flux. Umberto Eco's Opera aperta (1962, translated as The Open Work) posited that modern artworks, including narratives, invite multiple reader constructions, rendering character identities provisional and context-dependent rather than fixed traits. This manifests in metafictional works like Vladimir Nabokov's Pale Fire (1962), where the narrator Charles Kinbote's unreliable commentary on John Shade's poem blurs boundaries between identities, authorship, and reality, exemplifying how postmodern texts undermine stable psychological attribution through layered unreliability and intertextual games. Such approaches challenge essentialist views, emphasizing characters as semiotic constructs open to deconstruction. Empirical , however, tempers these reductions by evidencing audiences' persistent of consistent agency and traits in fictional figures. Studies demonstrate that readers automatically simulate characters' emotional states and intentions during comprehension, integrating them into trait-based situation models that assume causal continuity akin to real persons. For instance, identification with characters correlates with neural overlap between self and fictional others, fostering attributions of stable even in ambiguous narratives. engagement experiments further reveal causal attributions and judgments applied to characters as intentional agents, resisting full dissolution into structural signs and underscoring innate cognitive mechanisms for anthropomorphic . This suggests structuralist and postmodern emphases on instability overlook experiential data of reader , where deconstructive potentials coexist with robust pattern-seeking.

Adaptations Across Media

In Literature and Theater

In literature, characters achieve internal depth through narrative prose, which allows authors to delve into thoughts, memories, and motivations via techniques like stream-of-consciousness and descriptive exposition. Marcel Proust's (original French: À la recherche du temps perdu), serialized across seven volumes from 1913 to 1927, illustrates this by immersing readers in the narrator's and psychological , rendering character complexity reliant on textual inference rather than direct . This medium's static nature imposes causal constraints, as reader engagement demands active reconstruction of traits from authorial cues, fostering varied interpretations unbound by performance variables. In theater, characters manifest externally through actors' embodiment, constrained by live , gestures, and spatial dynamics that prioritize observable actions over unspoken interiority. Konstantin Stanislavski's "system," detailed in (published 1936), emphasizes actors' use of emotional memory and "given circumstances" to internalize roles, enabling realistic portrayal despite the medium's and audience proximity. Performative demands limit depth to what can be conveyed in real-time, often amplifying archetypal traits via physicality and vocal inflection, as opposed to literature's expansive narration. Empirical distinctions arise from cognitive processing: literary inference engages readers in bridging gaps between described events and implied , promoting delayed, reflective comprehension, while theater's visual-auditory immediacy delivers traits through direct sensory input, heightening but risking without scripted support. Historically, Elizabethan theater mitigated this via soliloquies—monologues revealing inner turmoil to the —as in Shakespeare's (c. 1600), which evolved from medieval conventions to convey causal motivations amid action-driven plots, bridging textual and stage constraints.

In Film and Television

In film, techniques such as montage and non-linear flashbacks enable efficient revelation of character traits and causal motivations within constrained runtimes, typically 90 to 180 minutes. Orson Welles's (1941) exemplifies this through fragmented flashbacks narrated from multiple perspectives, constructing the Charles Foster Kane's complex psychology via visual and auditory montage that juxtaposes key life events to imply deeper motivations without exhaustive exposition. These methods compress temporal arcs, favoring hybrid characters that exhibit selective roundness—multifaceted traits in pivotal moments—while maintaining flat predictability elsewhere to sustain plot momentum amid runtime limits. Television's serialized format, spanning multiple seasons, permits fuller dynamic character evolution, unfeasible in standalone films, by unfolding causal relationships over extended episodes. David Chase's (1999–2007), comprising 86 episodes, traces Tony Soprano's psychological growth through therapy sessions and moral dilemmas, leveraging serialization for incremental trait shifts driven by recurring stressors like and . This structure reveals causal realism in character behavior, where actions accrue consequences across arcs, contrasting film's condensed causality. Binge-viewing, facilitated by streaming platforms since the mid-2010s, bolsters immediate comprehension and retention of these arcs—viewers report higher perceived understanding post-marathon sessions—but empirical tests show memories of narrative details, including character developments, decay faster than with spaced viewing, potentially diluting long-term causal insight. Adaptations from to or television often encounter fidelity challenges in character portrayal, as visual media prioritize external actions and over internal , leading to streamlined traits. Studies of responses indicate that condensations alter perceived character depth, with viewers deriving less nuanced interpretations of motivations compared to readers, due to excised subplots and monologues essential for round development. Such transformations reflect medium-specific constraints, where runtime and visual demands hybridize source material's fuller arcs into more efficient, yet causally abbreviated, depictions.

In Video Games and Interactive Formats

In early video games following the , non-player characters (NPCs) often functioned as static archetypes with minimal , providing quest information or lore without evolving based on player actions, as seen in the original Final Fantasy (released December 18, 1987, for the Famicom/NES), where NPCs like villagers or royalty deliver fixed dialogues to advance linear narratives. This design preserved traditional causal structures in storytelling, prioritizing developer-controlled progression over player influence, which limited character depth to archetypal roles such as informants or quest triggers. The introduction of protagonist agency in later titles marked a shift toward choice-driven character arcs, exemplified by the trilogy (2007–2012), where players' decisions in dialogue trees and moral alignments (Paragon or Renegade) alter companion relationships, plot branches, and long-term outcomes across installments, enabling personalized narrative causality. Such mechanics allow protagonists like to exhibit dynamic traits influenced by cumulative player inputs, fostering emergent character development while maintaining overarching causal coherence through scripted consequences. Post-2020 advancements in have further enhanced NPC responsiveness, incorporating generative models and to enable context-aware dialogues and adaptive behaviors, as in experimental integrations by studios using AI for unscripted interactions that respond to player history and environmental cues. These developments extend beyond predefined branches, allowing characters to exhibit procedural , though implementation remains constrained by computational limits and design intent to avoid fully unpredictable outcomes. Empirical studies indicate that heightened player control over characters correlates with increased immersion and , as branching s in RPGs amplify perceived agency and emotional investment compared to linear formats. However, excessive risks narrative fragmentation, where divergent player paths dilute cohesive and character arcs, potentially reducing overall story satisfaction despite gains in . This tension underscores interactivity's causal trade-offs in interactive formats, balancing empowerment with structural integrity.

Controversies in Representation

Stereotypes and Their Empirical Effects

Stereotypes in artistic characters refer to simplified, often exaggerated traits ascribed to individuals based on group affiliations, such as , , or occupation, enabling rapid comprehension of roles. In pre-1960s Hollywood cinema, racial tropes frequently depicted Black characters as subservient domestics or buffoons, while Asian characters embodied exotic or villainous archetypes, reflecting prevailing societal categorizations rather than nuanced individuality. Such portrayals correlate with perceptual biases among viewers, as empirical analyses indicate that repeated exposure to stereotypical media representations reinforces preexisting implicit prejudices, particularly toward minority groups. Short-term exposure to stereotypical characters activates cognitive priming effects, where viewers temporarily adopt attitudes congruent with the depicted traits, as demonstrated in experiments showing stereotype-consistent behaviors following viewing. Meta-analyses of media effects reveal that these activations contribute to heightened in susceptible audiences, with portrayals amplifying associations like danger with certain racial groups. However, longitudinal data suggest mixed long-term outcomes, including potential desensitization through , where habitual consumption normalizes traits without further bias escalation, akin to reduced reactivity observed in repeated encounters. Despite risks of reinforcement, stereotypes serve narrative utility by facilitating efficient world-building and character economy, allowing creators to convey essential motivations and conflicts with minimal exposition, as media production leverages them to streamline costs. Their cross-cultural persistence—from stock figures to modern archetypes—points to evolutionary underpinnings in human , where cognitive heuristics for quick social categorization aided ancestral survival by predicting group behaviors efficiently. This adaptive foundation balances against empirical downsides, as functional shortcuts in fiction mirror real perceptual efficiencies but can entrench inaccuracies when unexamined.

Debates on Diversity and Forced Inclusion

Advocates for expanded representation in artistic characters argue that diverse portrayals enhance relatability and foster positive attitudinal shifts toward underrepresented groups. A 2023 study analyzing successful minority characters on television concluded that such representations contribute to improved diversity attitudes among viewers, building on prior experimental demonstrating reduced through relatable narratives. Similarly, a 2019 Movio analysis of global data found that films featuring onscreen diversity in lead roles outperformed less diverse counterparts by attracting broader demographics, with diverse comprising a of opening-weekend ticket buyers for several top-grossing titles in subsequent years. These findings, drawn from metrics and content experiments, posit that authentic inclusion expands market appeal without necessitating quotas. Critics of quota-driven inclusion contend that it frequently manifests as , prioritizing demographic checkboxes over narrative depth and resulting in underdeveloped characters that undermine storytelling integrity. Empirical examinations of highlight its association with negative long-term outcomes, including diminished individual agency and superficial integration, as tokenized figures often serve symbolic roles rather than fully realized arcs. In post-2010s media, particularly following industry-wide diversity mandates, analyses of franchise adaptations like the (MCU) reveal patterns where rapid inclusion pushes coincided with shallower supporting roles, per content reviews and creator commentaries, potentially alienating core audiences who prioritize merit-based character . A 2021 assessment linked such practices to token characters existing primarily to signal inclusivity, correlating with critiques of eroded plot coherence in affected productions. Verifiable trends underscore tensions between these positions: while early MCU phases (circa 2010-2019) achieved peaks exceeding $20 billion cumulatively amid initial diversity integrations, subsequent entries post-2020 experienced slumps, with domestic grosses dropping amid reports of "superhero fatigue" and selective audience disengagement. Surveys and data from 2023-2024 indicate viewer preferences leaning toward story-driven merit over enforced representation, with backlash evident in declining theater for quota-emphasized films despite persistent for organic diversity. These outcomes suggest causal links where forced metrics may dilute character authenticity, as evidenced by franchise metrics showing inverse correlations between inclusion intensity and sustained reception, though academic sources advocating quotas often emanate from institutions with documented ideological skews toward progressive framing.

Critiques of Tokenism and Narrative Integrity

Critics argue that tokenism in character development prioritizes superficial demographic representation over coherent narrative causality, resulting in characters whose motivations and actions defy logical consistency within the story's established world. This approach often manifests as altering core traits or backstories to fulfill inclusion quotas, leading to implausible behaviors that undermine character realism and overall plot integrity. For instance, in Disney's 2023 live-action The Little Mermaid, the decision to recast the originally pale-skinned mermaid Ariel with a Black actress prompted backlash for straining the fairy tale's visual and cultural logic, with detractors claiming it introduced inconsistencies in underwater society dynamics without narrative justification. Similarly, the 2025 Snow White remake faced pre-release criticism for modifying the dwarves' portrayal and the protagonist's agency to align with modern diversity imperatives, critics asserting this sacrificed the original tale's archetypal motivations for checkbox compliance. Empirical indicators of harm include widened gaps between critic and scores on platforms like for films perceived as tokenistic, reflecting reduced viewer engagement due to perceived violations of causal realism. In 2023, projects like exhibited a notable divide, with scores lagging behind critics amid complaints of forced diversity disrupting character arcs and lore consistency, contributing to its underperformance at $206 million worldwide against a $270 million budget. feedback on forums and aggregates from that year highlighted disengagement, with viewers citing "checkbox characters" whose demographics drove decisions over organic story progression, leading to motivational inconsistencies such as sudden ideological shifts unrelated to prior traits. These patterns suggest that when inclusion overrides first-principles logic—where actions stem from character history and environmental pressures—viewership and commercial viability suffer, as evidenced by broader 2023-2024 Hollywood stagnation despite diversity pushes. Proponents of varied representation counter that diverse perspectives inherently enhance by mirroring real-world complexity, potentially fostering evolutionary adaptations in . However, this is subordinated by evidence from forced implementations, where token characters exhibit flattened motivations—often reduced to serving white leads without independent causal drives—yielding empirical declines in metrics and critical coherence. Mainstream academic reports, such as those from UCLA, emphasize diversity's benefits but often overlook tokenism's costs, potentially reflecting institutional biases toward ideological conformity over unvarnished . In essence, prioritizing demographics as causal endpoints rather than incidental outcomes erodes the foundational realism that sustains compelling characters.

References

  1. https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/literature-and-writing/character-arts
  2. https://www-archiv.fdm.uni-hamburg.de/lhn/node/41.html
  3. https://iu.pressbooks.pub/prosefiction/chapter/chapter-4-characterization/
  4. https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-character-literature-1689836
  5. https://www.masterclass.com/articles/guide-to-all-the-types-of-characters-in-literature
  6. https://www.studiobinder.com/blog/what-are-the-types-of-characters-in-a-story/
  7. https://oxfordre.com/literature/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780190201098.001.0001/acrefore-9780190201098-e-107
  8. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/355974022_Methodical_Approach_to_a_Literary_Character
  9. https://academic.oup.com/book/40065/chapter/340736609
  10. https://iep.utm.edu/aristotle-poetics/
  11. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/cambridge-companion-to-narrative-theory/character/C3BDC7D2F81E57E8BB8222BA167BEAF5
  12. https://neuroarts.org/pdf/EP_model.pdf
  13. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/cambridge-classical-journal/article/homeric-motivation-and-modern-narratology-the-case-of-penelope/CFF77EABE334691D70FDC9FACB997955
  14. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11305923/
  15. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8603941/
  16. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00936502231204834
  17. https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/literature-and-writing/homer-composes-iliad
  18. https://www.cliffsnotes.com/literature/i/the-iliad/character-analysis/achilles
  19. https://warontherocks.com/2015/12/achilles-and-patroclus-archetypal-heroes/
  20. https://www.litcharts.com/literary-devices-and-terms/hamartia
  21. https://bibisco.com/blog/what-is-hamartia-use-and-examples-in-narrative/
  22. https://pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca/thepoetics/
  23. https://www.richardchambers.net/the-elements-of-drama.html
  24. https://www.exoticindiaart.com/blog/the-mahabharata-the-worlds-longest-epic-poem/
  25. https://dharmshastra.quora.com/What-Do-We-Learn-from-the-Character-of-Arjun-in-Mahabharata-The-character-of-Arjuna-in-the-Mahabharata-is-multifaceted
  26. https://www.prekshaa.in/timeline-and-composer-mahabharata
  27. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/387939238_Honore_de_Balzac_and_the_Rise_of_Realism_in_Literature
  28. https://literaturecurry.com/blog-details/261/charles-dickens-as-a-novelist-of-social-reali
  29. https://literariness.org/2018/01/08/realism-and-naturalism-in-europe-and-america/
  30. https://iep.utm.edu/freud/
  31. https://globaljournals.org/GJHSS_Volume17/3-Psychoanalytic-Theory-used.pdf
  32. https://fiveable.me/literary-theory-criticism/unit-4/sigmund-freud/study-guide/8uaumDETd9UW61FY
  33. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/70492/70492-h/70492-h.htm
  34. https://writersalliance.org/flat-and-round-characters-in-fiction/
  35. https://web.mit.edu/allanmc/www/propp.pdf
  36. https://media-studies.com/propp/
  37. https://www.litcharts.com/literary-devices-and-terms/characterization
  38. https://www.readwritethink.org/sites/default/files/resources/lesson_images/lesson800/Characterization.pdf
  39. https://www.grammarly.com/blog/literary-devices/direct-characterization/
  40. https://www.masterclass.com/articles/guide-to-direct-characterization-and-indirect-characterization
  41. https://www.grammarly.com/blog/literary-devices/indirect-characterization/
  42. https://nownovel.com/direct-vs-indirect-characterization
  43. https://www-archiv.fdm.uni-hamburg.de/lhn/node/84.html
  44. https://personal.unizar.es/garciala/publicaciones/narrativetheory/4.Distance.htm
  45. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/18961/18961-h/18961-h.htm
  46. https://www.atlantis-press.com/article/125949592.pdf
  47. https://www.shakespeare-online.com/sources/R3sources.html
  48. https://www.bellshakespeare.com.au/richard-3-historical-background
  49. https://www.shakespeare.org.uk/explore-shakespeare/blogs/shakespeares-richard-iii-myth-or-reality/
  50. https://publicdomainreview.org/essay/eugene-francois-vidocq-and-the-birth-of-the-detective
  51. https://vidocq.org/about-us/the-life-of-monsieur-vidocq/
  52. https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/everything-social-network-law-64301/
  53. https://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/04/business/media/04portrayal.html
  54. https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/columbia-social-network-lawsuit-mark-zuckerberg-323950/
  55. https://www.jcf.org/learn/joseph-campbell-heros-journey
  56. http://mcd.woodbury.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Faber-Mayer-2009.pdf
  57. https://positivepsychology.com/jungian-archetypes/
  58. https://blog.celtx.com/defining-stock-characters-their-role-classic-examples/
  59. https://www.cozycatpress.com/posts/archetypes-in-literature-1015c
  60. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334074875_Archetypes_and_Narrative_Processes
  61. https://andrewblackman.net/2010/04/aspects-of-the-novel-by-e-m-forster/
  62. https://journals.lib.unb.ca/index.php/IFR/article/view/7655/8712
  63. https://kenyonreview.org/2018/08/in-defense-of-flat-characters/
  64. https://thejohnfox.com/2021/02/round-and-flat-characters-definitions-and-writing-guide/
  65. https://literarydevices.net/round-character/
  66. https://www.scribophile.com/academy/round-vs-flat-characters
  67. https://fictioneditorsopinions.com/2018/flat-and-round-characters/
  68. https://www.academia.edu/6559762/E_M_Forsters_Concept_of_the_Flat_Character_A_Stylistic_Critique_and_a_Critique_of_the_Orthodox_Stylistic_Position_on_the_Difference_between_Direct_and_Indirect_Speech_Forms_in_the_Novel_with_Examples_from_James_Joyce_and_Jane_Austen_
  69. https://www.mcgill.ca/english/files/english/halevi-wise_unflattening_mrs_micawber.pdf
  70. https://www.scribophile.com/academy/what-is-a-static-character
  71. https://selfpublishing.com/static-vs-dynamic-characters/
  72. https://literarydevices.net/static-character/
  73. https://www.masterclass.com/articles/dynamic-characters-vs-static-characters
  74. https://www.thoughtco.com/psychological-realism-2207838
  75. https://www.ipl.org/essay/A-Dynamic-Character-In-Ebenezer-Scrooge-In-P3F782FCED6
  76. https://papersowl.com/examples/ebenezer-scrooge-a-character-analysis/
  77. https://fictionary.co/journal/static-character/
  78. https://www.centreofexcellence.com/static-vs-dynamic-characters/
  79. https://writers.com/freytags-pyramid
  80. https://liberalarts.oregonstate.edu/wlf/what-protagonist
  81. https://www.studiobinder.com/blog/what-is-a-protagonist-definition/
  82. https://www.cbr.com/walter-white-breaking-bad-tv-greatest-anti-hero/
  83. https://www.litcharts.com/literary-devices-and-terms/antagonist
  84. https://www.grammarly.com/blog/literary-devices/antagonist/
  85. https://writers.com/antagonist-definition
  86. https://diymfa.com/writing/archetypes-for-supporting-characters/
  87. https://www.masterclass.com/articles/freytags-pyramid
  88. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/298860350_The_realism_of_%27Madame_Bovary%27Flaubert
  89. https://www.academia.edu/126710549/Re_Reading_Madame_Bovary_The_Pioneer_of_The_Psychological_Realistic_Novel
  90. https://www.studysmarter.co.uk/explanations/english/creative-writing/psychological-realism/
  91. https://jisem-journal.com/index.php/journal/article/download/6620/3087/11065
  92. https://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/thesescanada/vol2/002/MR18297.PDF?oclc_number=282444279
  93. https://www.simplypsychology.org/freud-vs-jung.html
  94. https://the-artifice.com/madame-bovary-or-the-struggles-of-individual-psychology-vs-social-oppression/
  95. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262026890_Psychologisation_and_Critique_in_Modern-day_Western_Culture
  96. https://www.jstor.org/stable/668848
  97. http://www.davidbardschwarz.com/pdf/barthes.pdf
  98. https://monoskop.org/images/f/f3/Propp_Vladimir_Morphology_of_the_Folktale_2nd_ed.pdf
  99. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4266407/
  100. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8138084/
  101. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.762011/full
  102. https://antilogicalism.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/lost-time.pdf
  103. https://www.k-state.edu/psych/vcl/publications/Magliano_et_al_2013-3.pdf
  104. https://www.amazon.com/actor-prepares-Konstantin-Stanislavsky/dp/B0008BV47O
  105. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338056545_Theatre_and_literature_an_ontological_aspect_of_their_relationship
  106. https://www.folger.edu/blogs/shakespeare-and-beyond/soliloquy-hamlet-elizabethan-mind-excerpt-helen-hackett/
  107. https://study.com/academy/lesson/citizen-kane-plot-analysis-context.html
  108. https://www.ipl.org/essay/Citizen-Kane-Montage-Scene-Analysis-FKC6VLWBUXFV
  109. https://www.studiobinder.com/blog/round-vs-flat-character/
  110. https://www.academia.edu/34328322/Long_Form_Narrative_THE_SOPRANOS
  111. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319418016_The_impact_of_binge_watching_on_memory_and_perceived_comprehension
  112. https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/7729/6532
  113. https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2957&context=clcweb
  114. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1693821/FULLTEXT01.pdf
  115. http://www.fforigins.com/ff1/char/npc.html
  116. https://ffc.rpgclassics.com/low/ff1characters.shtml
  117. https://www.academia.edu/17411310/How_You_Emerge_from_This_Game_is_up_to_You_Agency_Positioning_and_Narrativity_in_the_Mass_Effect_Trilogy
  118. https://tvobsessive.com/2020/03/16/the-mass-effect-franchise-is-about-choices-steeped-in-consequences/
  119. https://www.ap.org/news-highlights/spotlights/2024/can-ai-make-video-games-more-immersive-some-studios-turn-to-ai-fueled-npcs-for-more-interaction/
  120. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/300588610_Narrative_Control_and_Player_Experience_in_Role_Playing_Games_Decision_Points_and_Branching_Narrative_Feedback
  121. https://www.mdpi.com/2078-2489/15/6/294
  122. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220302079_Measuring_Player_Immersion_in_the_Computer_Game_Narrative
  123. https://www.cbc.ca/radio/ideas/from-servants-to-outlaws-100-years-of-black-representation-in-hollywood-films-1.5953758
  124. https://www.dw.com/en/hollywood-movies-stereotypes-prejudice-data-analysis/a-47561660
  125. https://scholars.org/contribution/how-racial-stereotypes-popular-media-affect-people-and-what-hollywood-can-do-become
  126. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/download/2691/1325
  127. https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/93881/gyang_1.pdf%3Bsequence=1
  128. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15213269.2025.2498374
  129. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/371444419_Media_stereotypes_prejudice_and_preference-based_reinforcement_toward_the_dynamic_of_self-reinforcing_effects_by_integrating_audience_selectivity
  130. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4522002/
  131. https://lifestyle.sustainability-directory.com/question/why-does-media-use-stereotypical-portrayals/
  132. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2015-24749-023
  133. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/381578412_Evolutionary_Approaches_to_Stereotyping_and_Prejudice
  134. https://meda.foundation/pattern-recognition-unveiling-the-brains-efficiency-and-biases/
  135. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00918369.2023.2191287
  136. https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/film-diversity-helps-drive-box-office-hits-study-shows-1249601/
  137. https://www.forbes.com/sites/drdarnellhuntanddranachristinaramon/2024/03/07/diverse-audiences-prop-up-a-struggling-theatrical-industry-and-demand-diversity-on-screen/
  138. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10837049/
  139. https://www.statepress.com/article/2021/11/opinion-forced-diversity-ruining-characters-entertainment
  140. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/346377223_Diversity_tokenism_and_comic_books_Crafting_better_strategies
  141. https://analythical.com/blog/marvel-movie-success
  142. https://aithor.com/essay-examples/how-marvels-box-office-slump-reflects-us-audience-fatigue
  143. https://medium.com/%40PaulJung11/the-data-behind-hollywoods-great-contraction-940c48989379
  144. https://theithacan.org/56672/life-culture/popped-culture/disneys-casting-to-redefine-fairytales-faces-cheers-and-criticism/
  145. https://scotscoop.com/disneys-live-action-remakes-fuel-a-broader-diversity-and-inclusion-discussion/
  146. https://collider.com/notable-divides-between-audience-critic-scores-on-rotten-tomatoes/
  147. https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/qtmg4j/as_more_diverse_characters_are_being_seen_in/
  148. https://digitalcontentnext.org/blog/2024/03/20/hollywoods-diversity-driven-returns-dont-align-with-investments/
  149. https://www.scholarsandstorytellers.com/blog/diversity-in-hollywood-how-to-write-black-characters-beyond-tokenism
  150. https://variety.com/2024/film/news/ucla-hollywood-diversity-report-barbie-creed-john-wick-1235933248/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.