Writing Within Restrictions Part 2: Character

If you haven't read part 1, then click here

As for Part 2:

Aphrodite in Greek literature has always appeared beautiful and elegant. These qualities most likely come from her heritage as a Goddess. Perhaps if she was born a mortal with the same qualities, she would not hold that elegance granted to her. She might be dirty and unappealing. Obviously aged, cheap attempts to enhance appearances, and very obviously having slept around.

Speech/mannerism Style:  Constantly under the façade of an elegant and well-spoken accent. It should be superficial and half obvious to the audience. As with all the God projections, she will be erratic, and whenever she is suddenly affected by some genuine emotion (a sudden lust for a character, for example Theseus who is new and young) she will break down into an unstructured mess of words, slang and constant inflections.  Her accent will break down to an unrefined state, and she her posture break down. When the character is acting, she holds a high head, forward thrust breasts and other model-like poses. When she breaks down her posture will change to a slanted and slightly crooked state, where she desperate for some sort of sexual gratification. Casually gazing eyes will in an instant turn wide-eyed and callow. 

Ares Projection

Unlike Athene, Ares does not so much inhabit the plotting and tactical parts of war as much he does the sadist pleasure in bloodlust. He seems swept up by the tumult bombast of it all, and this is because he can fight well. Unfortunately, this makes him seem somewhat arrogant, and also immature. He is a powerful warrior because he is a God, and as God acts oblivious to him quick temper or lack of thoughtfulness.  As a God, this is okay, as Gods believe themselves to be perfect, and dwell in the superficial. Ares thus can have a rambunctious affair with Aphrodite, and can justify himself as the ‘warrior’. However in real life he isn’t simply declared a top class fighter by his father, instead he has to practice and gain strength like anyone else. And being a good fighter may not be enough to hold his own in the real world. While Ares might not stupid, I would like to play on his temerarious and thoughtless nature, revealing a tender fraternity to his smart and more cultured brother (Apollo) that leads to an insecurity in which he seems to elevate himself as the leader, in his almost megalomaniacal complex of control and power.  His inability to socialize or understand his brothers/sister will be what distances him, and makes him think he is clear-headed and thus should take control.

Speech/Mannerisms:  He will walk with an authoritative swagger, and try to speak in way that demands respect and attention, He will overbearing, but despite his childish efforts, his team mostly refuses to take him seriously, often ignoring or shooing him. He then acts like a child who is not getting enough attention, spluttering vocally, turning red and stamping his feet. Aphrodite consistently seduces him for her own gratification; however he believes he is striving forward in his gruff masculinity.

 From the DCAU^

Artemis projection

Artemis is portrayed as woman who abstains from intercourse, keeping independent and proud. However she seems disdainful of men to the point of snobbery, and I wish to accustom to this aspect. Her misandry and cold, blasé sophistication is something I will turn into insecurity. The scorn she holds for men (and flirtatious women) will be due to trauma and/or her sheer chilling fear she has of social interaction, being manipulated and her inability to relate to another human being. Despite being the smartest in the group next to Apollo, she cannot lead the party. She tries to cover up her sorrow with her animals, and when she is alone with them, she begins to act naturally, as will be depicted.

Mannerisms/speech style: She will walk around with large, but precise steps to show intellectual worth, and also show her pride. She will have her head tilted upwards, looking down in conversation. Efficient in her words, but take a long time to speak them, as if her voice is worth listening to for as long as possible. However when alone with her animals, she will take more modest stances, and while still not a proverbial girly female, she will appear relaxed and at peace.

A problem that could be encountered with this character could be that; in spending so much type with animals, she could be detached from her siblings, and thus also lack humanity, believing animals to be better company.

Apollo projection

Apollo is significantly harder to flaw. He always seems far too relaxed in mythology. So for this reason, the point of this character will be more based around the idea that he is far too flippant and laid back to be a leader. He’s the most mature; however he will also be in a blasé state of elevating himself due to being cultured and artistic. Not snobbish or pretentious, just very self-indulgent. Since Theseus is an outside who breaks what the God projections expect from human behavior, he will face conflict when he finds out that Theseus is not intimidated by condescending artistic babble. 

That said, his flaw can inhabit a smaller part of the script than his partners, and can serve as somewhat of an anchor. After all, Theseus needs to initially see them as adventurers/travelers worth joining in the first place.

A problem in which he can encounter could involve his flippancy, and how when the rest of his team is left in ramshackle despair, he is not able to tie them together, as he is far too removed from them and their problems, never taking enough interest. 

And that's just about enough of me posting old coursework. I'll try to make some new blogs posts

-Taha

Writing Within Restrictions Part 1: Plot and Meaning

A complaint I often hear from young writers about mediums like Comic Books and film is that they rarely allow for complete freedom to the artists. Like having to take into account a complex character history, or the intended audience. This leads to the term 'artistic compromise' -  a term treated with far more contempt than it deserves. I'm all for artistic freedom, where would be without it? Not somewhere nice, that's for sure. But restrictions aren't always a bad thing. They can be what keeps your work succinct, as you can no longer run away too far with your thoughts. It also means that your creativity has to be thoughtfully modeled around a core concept/character/theme etc, and isn't something random like 'THE ANT WHO SOUGHT TO TAKE OVER THE UNIVERSE' (Though I personally love the sound of that, it'd still be very easy to produce trash from it. Narrower subject matter would do better to keep a writer on track)

Over the course of a few months (Which concluded last July) I chose to write a play script for my Drama GCSE,and the restriction there were fairly rigid. I had to work in a pool of existing characters (Theseus,Athena, Aphrodite, Apollo and Ares)  and stay true/acknowledge their basic symbolism. The plot had to be sandwiched with the mythology of Theseus, taking place during his first journey to Athens. All within 12 pages (meaning I had little time to invent my own characters)

That was pretty daunting at the time, but I think I managed to do it with a reasonable level of quality. I don't put much stock in academic grading/accolades, particularly with opinionated subjects like the Arts. But for what it's worth, I got an A* in the script and accompanying coursework. I don't actually like the script too much, but I think I got my ideas across, and those ideas I believe in.

This isn't a guide on how your supposed to write characters within restrictions, because such a thing doesn't exist. There'll never be any 'right' way. It's just my own basic character profiles, their personalities, and relevance in the story.  It's merely how I did it with my GCSE, and what I think stands as an example of a way it can be done.




1) The Stimulus Material (A pre-existing script with ideas and characters my own writing had to relate to)

The original stimulus (by Neil Duffield)  involves a few overseeing Gods, controlling the lives of genuine humans as if they were chess pieces. The writer attempts to delve into deep emotion with drama that shakes two separated brothers to the core. Theseus is completely haunted by the discovery of his long lost father's kingship, and seeks a sense of belonging he seems to think his father has taken away. This links to the very universal theme of identity, something Theseus lacks, and something people usually require to fit in with life, move on, and grow.   

Story outline

Theseus meets a group of travelers in the wilderness with whom he joins with (strength in numbers)  

The group are mortals; however, their personalities are derived from the four gods in the stimulus material. Revenge and jealousy exist within this group, and it will be depicting the way the Greek Gods are very human, puerile and not fit to control or influence someone as intelligent as Theseus. The group behaves in an almost silly melodramatic style, while Theseus remains melancholic and natural. This will set up a contrast, the non-naturalism seeming even sillier due to being put beside a normal, intelligent, and charismatic lead.

The group’s dispute shall be numerous and petty, all diminutive echoes of the Mt. Olympus Gods.  Theseus will eventually learn that he is better on his own, making his way alone to Athens, where his own people lie. He will find relief from the almost scary thought of being ruled by clueless fools. The development will lead to a point where the message should seem to be this: Gods/Leaders often exist in their own little world, largely ignorant of the world they control and affect, and are not fit to rule people like Theseus.

The camp in which Theseus is staying with the mini Gods has two distinct sections; Theseus' area of normalcy, and the mini Gods area of surreal, and overemphasized social issues, all/most of which could be easily solved by intelligent people who were sufficiently in tune with the word and its nature. (I.e. not Gods) It reduces the God’s problems to that of an inane and self-indulgent soap opera, with incredibly transparent emotions.

Objectives/Intentions

The implication is that to truly know how to deal with humans,  to strive and long to be in a world with imperfect beings, one must understand the imperfect humans, and thus must be one of them. The idea of a creator is too abstract, and too vague for us to truly find everlasting belief in. To truly be free, we must be independent from a so-called ‘higher’ level of thinking.

The closest a God could ever be to human, is exactly the over-emphasized caricatures my travellers inhabit, as they don’t have the experience, memory and thinking that a normal human would have.  Attempting to fake or imitate something as complex as human nature can be met with very little success.

 Theseus sees the equivalence of Gods, isolated individuals who control and influence that which they do not understand, he leaves and goes gives the kingdom of humans (Athens) a leader, giving it back to the chaos of war and human’s art and greed. They are free. The anti-God message could easily be further applied to anti-authority, or at least authority that invests a lot of power in a few individuals. 

I want to use the dialogue and stage directions to be able to show how the two sides of naturalism and non-naturalism seem to coexist in this world. In writing it like this I want to be able to allow actors the opportunity to explore the themes raised earlier and showcase them to the audience.

You see? I'm not stating that's all super profound, but it did manage to take a largely meaningless script (Duffield's story was largely a loud clamor of different caricatures) and give it my own meanings, through subverting it. I do that even more with the characters, which will be the subject of Part 2.

Stay Tuned Folks!

- Taha