Write Better: Tips and tricks

Character X wouldn't do [action]

Your protagonist, we'll call her Susan, has to do what you (the writer) direct her to do. What you make her do drives the story forward. On top of that, you own her. She's living on the page and in your head. You know her better than anyone.

So when you get comments about Susan saying she wouldn't do what you said she did, it's easy to get a little annoyed. You created Susan. You know Susan *has* to do this or the story won't be the story. Not to mention that yes, in fact, she would do exactly that. That's why you wrote it!

When you're editing, dealing with these comments can be rather frustrating, especially if only one person mentioned it and you're using your personal knowledge/experience/research.

There are two widespread pieces of feedback:

1. Character wouldn't do X.

Ex. Susan wouldn't go near the hive if she's that allergic and terrified of bees.

2. Character would do Y.

Ex. How does Susan, a psychiatrist, not see the warning signs in Andrew, especially after Carlos pulled her aside in Chapter 3 and warned her? I'm pretty sure she would be cautious.

How do we resolve this type of conflict so our story can continue? Is the reviewer wrong or did I miss something?

Let's start with an example:

In Dark Side, Marcy's cat slips out through an open front door. Marcy manages to track her down in the woods behind the bird feeder, and remarks that she'll have to check the cat for ticks.

A reader commented: Cats don't get ticks. Only dogs do.

Now, in this instance the reader is factually incorrect. Cats can and do get ticks. Ticks don't see a warm furry body strolling past, throw out a tiny arm across their BFF, and shout, "Wait, man! It's a cat!"

But then, the common advice is to see if you can make things clearer for future readers. I even recommend this in most cases! You should check, but you don't always have to act. Sometimes readers are being stupid. Other times the one person to tell you is the one person that cares enough to help.

In this case I asked myself, "Should I include more information to make it less likely that another reader will stumble by and go: Psh, no way. Cats don't get ticks. ...?"

The answer is no.

When you might need to clarify:

1. Lots of people mention the issue. You need to pay close attention when even one person mentions an issue like this, but if you're getting boatloads of readers telling you the same thing, there's a good chance you missed your mark. They might all be wrong, but there's a better chance that something in your writing went off course.

Remember, this doesn't always mean that your story is wrong. It just means you need to do a better job of conveying what you mean!

2. There's no (or very little) evidence to back you up. This is the most common reason a writer has to go back and revise a "character won't/will" situation. There isn't quite enough credible evidence to establish your point. Usually, it's just because writers are so close to the story, they forget that the reader doesn't know what they do and they gloss over something that needed to be expanded on.

Someone says:

Susan is Catholic. She wouldn't have sex before marriage. Catholics never have sex before marriage.

You KNOW that those big, sweeping general statements are wrong. So you're safe, right?

Sort of. People and characters are individuals, but you have to look at the information you presented in the story. Is there enough in there to suggest that Susan would be okay with having sex before she's married? If you portrayed her as this pious little dove and hammer home the God references, and two chapters later she's sleeping with a random guy she met at a bar, it's possible you didn't do enough to indicate that she's cool with sex (or hint that she's not a little dove). You may need to go back and set it up a little more/better.