Orson Scott Card argues that having themes in mind, before creating a character, creates characters as cardboard cutouts, rather than believable characters.
He argues that if the audience were to recognize a theme in some piece, it takes them out of the story, it takes breaks the reader's stream of consciousness.
He argues that themes will naturally form out of interesting character conflict, and setting conflicts, and should be left this way, rather than adapting characters to certain endings or beginings, to fulfill a theme.
Allow the audience to form their own theme interpretations, rather than be forced into the author's.
I agree with Orson on this. What do you think?
it's a fairly reasonable stance to take.
>>8229023
>believable characters
>>8229023
>it takes them out of the story, it takes breaks the reader's stream of consciousness.
He's right about characters tending to turn into ideograms rather than people if authors focus too much on the themes. However, being "taken out of the story" isn't really a problem for me. Books aren't video games. Recognizing themes is an important part of the reading process.
>>8229023
>He argues that themes will naturally form out of interesting character conflict, and setting conflicts, and should be left this way, rather than adapting characters to certain endings or beginings, to fulfill a theme.
It's a good idea, but I don't think most writers can wing it like that and make it work. I need a fairly sturdy outline in mind personally.
>>8229023
I agree
>>8229075
This, his characters are as ridiculous as Ayn Rand's.
>>8229023
according to him a lot of great works are failures then, which is cool but plenty of them with themes obviously in mind work out quite well.
Some even had characters more believable because of it.
