So Long, Harry
Alas, poor Harry.
In my last version of what is now a thriller, my main female character had a best friend. I called him Harry. His purpose was to show my main character's world, and because he was her best friend, he could tell the reader, through dialogue, things only a best friend would know. In real life, my best friend knows, for example, that I like pineapple upside-down cake, would run off with David Sedaris, and never met a disco song I won't dance to. She has also been there for me in sickness and health. When I had surgery a couple of years ago, she subbed in for me at my kids' school and went to watch them sing so they would have someone in the audience. So Harry had a purpose. Or so I thought. At first, Harry was gay, since most of my close guy friends are gay, and I understand that dynamic. But then my writers' group suggested making him straight and married and explore a different dynamic. So I did. I gave Harry a wife, a child, an entire existence. My main character was godmother to his child. Harry's wife was a painter. Harry graduated from Harvard. He spoke three languages. He was REALLY smart.
Harry became a darling.
Because in the end, the only REAL purpose Harry served, other then to reveal some things about the main character . . . was to get killed. Murdered. So you felt bad when he was killed because maybe, as a reader, you grew to like him.
And then that murder propelled my main character further into crisis. (But the book wasn't about solving his murder, but about getting to the heart of a conspiracy.)
Except that, now I realize Harry just needs to be gone, period. Out of the book. Not even murdered just GONE. He's not a main character. He's not even a subplot. Harry is a victim. And as such . . . he doesn't need so much development.
So in this version, Harry is no longer there. He has been replaced by a day nurse. She has a couple of identifying points--Jewish, Puerto Rican, good cook, kind but not afraid to speak up. She serves the purpose better. And she may be nice, but she's not a darling. And she's a cahpter away from getting killed.
Losing Harry accomplishes something else. It puts the focus square on going DEEPER with the main characters--which now number three, instead of one. There is no meandering. It's just digging deeper and deeper into the complexities.
We all know to kill our darlings, but sometimes, I think, we wonder what that means. For me, it means looking at every single secondary character and asking, "What's your purpose, dude?" And Harry's purpose was to be murdered. And not much more. So he doesn't need such a well-developed world.
Harry's gone.
And the book is clipping along.
Thoughts? How do you know when it's time to get rid of one of your darlings?
27 comments:
I don't know if I agree with you on this. It really depends on the book. I've read some thrillers and mysteries where a lot of attention is spent on a character and then they're killed and it really shocks the reader.
But then again... EVERYTHING depends, doesn't it?
But then again... EVERYTHING depends, doesn't it?
Yes, it depends on the story. I've never gotten rid of a character. I probably should have, but I'm keen on having millions of secondaries.
So, you've given me something to think about.
Can I have Harry, since you don't want him anymore?
I can always use an extra victim. :)
Hi Mark:
I agree. That's why I was sort of like . . . in this case, Harry doesn't need that much development. I think I can have readers LIKE a character and see the treachery they're up against, without meandering through Harry's life.
I think, mainly, is constantly being aware of a character's purpose and when it's crossing a line to darling status without serving STORY. (Which in this case, it did not.)
E
Melissa:
I think the highest purpose of a book is STORY. And what the story demands. In this case, Harry's purpose didn't serve story well at all. It distracted from the story.
E
Jude:
LOL! Have at 'em.
E
There's a cleaning lady that one reader suggested I cut, but she's so FUNNY! We'll see... if another reader suggests to axe her, I might.
Can you use Harry in another book? If you don't want to give him to Jude, that is?
I'm making pineapple upside-down cake for Easter, Erica. Come on over!
I don't know if I've gotten rid of a character. I might have in previous books and don't remember. I get rid of chapters and it always feels good. Like cleaning junk I haven't used in three years out of closets. There's a chance I might be sorry some day, but it still feels good.
Melanie:
I don't know if Harry is right for another book. But I do know I was right to get rid of him in this one.
As for your funny character--for me, I think, "Am I using this character to show how funny I AM, or do they serve the purpose of story." A lot of time it's just to show I am clever. Which for me means they have to go.
E
Edie:
With Harry's departure, whole chapters are gone, too!
E
So far I haven't really had to off any characters...yet.
But there are two characters that have confused me up until I had a moment the other night. For a while I had tried to work Leona and Robin into Piper's circle of friends thus making them a diverse group of five, rather than three. This worked until the other two characters became deeply intertwined in Piper's story. those two characters have become so important that they've overshadowed poor Robin and Leona. I could keep them by Piper's side, but that would be pretty useless. So where do I put them?
Now I know. they're perfect for fixing a couple of the worst scenes,and at least one of the huge plot holes. They'll probably show up else where in the series, but for now they both have a perpose, and that's what matters.
Thrilling when things straighen themselves out isn't it?
-J.T.
J.T.
VERY thrilling. I love moments like that.
E
Poor Harry! I loved your description of him too. I'm a character gal, and not sure I've ever cut one loose like that. I can see your reasons for doing so, but still do you miss Harry? lol. See, I'm worried where he's at now.
I've had a character that made the decision to exit a book, but it was through death. That really killed me, but it was his call. When I was done with the book, I could see exactly what he meant. The bigger picture was richer for it.
I've cut characters... I've even cut characters I really, really liked. I think I cut three from Raskin's Wings. One I looooved. He was my mc's first cousin and he was just so cool.. but the only purpose he really served was to show how uncool my mc felt... once the mc grows into his own skin a bit more, the cousin character was completely unnecessary, he was just an extra person to try to manuever through the action.
And after I cut him, I had to get really honest with how to show the mc, how to bring the reader to know him without little 'tricks' through dialogue or the other character's eyes. I think it's much improved for that cut. Still love the character. Maybe someday I'll revisit him for a different story.
Erica, the journey you describe sounds a lot like what I'm learning in my Fiction to Film class - adaptation. So far we've watched three films adapted from short stories, and each one has changed the characters, their names, locations, etc. So, maybe you're not "killing off the darlings" but merely making an adaptation of the first draft. ;)
I think I've said this before. I haven't killed off characters, but have killed some great stories. :)
Maybe I'm not sophisticated enough to know if my characters are necessary. Like in life (although I know fiction isn't life) some people pass through your life, but they serve a purpose. My main character flounders at times, and her best friends are like an angel and devil on each shoulder. I sometimes wonder if one friend could serve the same purpose, although then maybe I'd have to name her Sybil.
Okay, so you're letting your crit partners entice you to modify your major supporting characters, before you get to THE END?
Advice passed on by Alice: Start at the beginning, go on until the end, then stop. After that, you can go back and do surgery on the route.
LaDonna:
That's happened to me twice (characters needing to exit--their choice to be sacrifical lambs).
E
merry:
Exactly! When you cut someone like that, you lose that crutch. I am definitely writing deeper.
E
Kath:
What a fascinating way to study a story!!
E
Hi Amy:
I don't know . . . I get really honest about their purpose. It's also about whether they remain a secondary or become a scene-hogging darling.
E
Dal:
My crit group has been in existence for 14 years and has produced a lot of books . . . I have a lot of trust in them . . . but actually, this post refers to something I've been sharing for a while now on the blog. The book WAS done, but I abandoned it five years ago, sold several other projects (my May release, my June release) and am returning to it to reimagine it as a thriller. So it's different from how you are interpreting it.
Beyond that, I think everyone has their own process. I tend to write three or four chapters, go through and edit while crit comments are fresh in my mind, and then move forward. It works for me . . . and lets me turn in polished work that seems "fresh" I guess because I worked on the chapters when crit comments were "right there" in my head.
Thanks for dropping by!
E
Fast and unexpected. That's the way I'd want to go if I were them.
I killed off a secondary character who I thought would hang around for the trilogy because she had introduced my heroine to a whole new world. Nope. She's gone. Had to do it. She would've made it too easy for my heroine to navigate that world in book two and that wasn't going to work.
Erica, my funny lady is definitely not clever. She's a little Mexican cleaning lady that is only there for a page or two. It's what she catches the MC doing - or what she thinks he's doing - that's funny. We'll see.
Melanie:
Then keep her! Two pages does not a darling make. :-)
E
marcia:
Very clear-eyed . . . .
E
Erica, I appreciate your opinion. :) My wip isn't very upbeat so I need my small moments of comic relief.
Post a Comment