Character traits are a difficult subject. When we talk about traits, we usually mean the character's personality, how they act around people, how they talk, how they react to situations, how they feel, how they think etc. A better way of implementing this is describing it as "HOW". Writing how a character does things is what allows you to show their personality/traits. But writing how a character does (or doesn't) do something is only the first step, because how a character does things goes hand-in-hand with "why" a character does something, and "what" the character does.
To give you a really basic example:
She sat on the sofa, watching the movie. She was tired, still frustrated about the argument from earlier, and occasionally voicing said frustrations out-loud to herself.
WHAT: She's watching TV, thinking about an argument (We would assume at home)
WHY: She's tired and frustrated (Perhaps looking for a distraction?)
HOW: She's frustrated and thinking (Show she's distracted from the TV, can't stop thinking about arguments, still frustrated so clearly can't let go easily, and she's vocally talking to herself)
Does this make a little sense? Let's take the first few sentences from your short story, and examine them:
Mary Thompson's alarm went off. The outside was as dark as black coffee. It was around 4:45 am. She looked at her husband who was fast asleep.
You explain things that happen, things that she's doing, but not how they happen or why they happen. Because of that, it sounds like we're jumping from thing to thing. This makes her and what's happening sound separate.
Mary Thompson's alarm went off.
So, we introduce the character, there is an alarm going off, and we know the alarm belongs to her. The sentence is fine but it sounds flat … unnatural. We could reword this simply by saying "Mary's alarm went off", as people very rarely refer to themselves using both their fore and surnames. However, a rule I like to apply to myself when writing is called "Event Order" - Introduce everything in the order it would happen. Even flashbacks. This includes names of people and places, events and actions that a character does.
You introduce your character's name immediately, but later in the story you have dialogue between Mary and another character. Who would introduce her name? You, the author? Or one of the characters in the story? Allowing your characters to introduce themselves, and each other, is more like real life. Also, a very quick way of making something interesting is to give little information, and slowly provide more. I'm not saying it's bad to start with her name, but if you've got something happening in the story that naturally introduces her, why not use that instead?
The outside was as dark as black coffee.
What's dark? Just the outside, or the sky? What about the trees or buildings? What's outside? Can she see anything? If she's looking outside, does that mean the bed is right next to the window? The curtains are open? Did she get out of bed?
You describe outside being as "dark as black coffee". Black coffee is dark, sure. But it's also liquid, oily, like tar. Thick. Steaming. If you're going to compare the sky with something to describe it's colour, you should use something that has similar properties - "Dark like a shadow". Also, my personal opinion … when it comes to describing something, I feel like you should do one of two things: 1) Describe something in a way that makes logical sense, or 2) Don't describe something if you don't need to. Everyone knows what the night looks like.
It was around 4:45 am.
Is she looking at a clock? Or are you, as the writer, just explaining the time to us readers because you're trying to explain why it's dark? If she's looking at a clock it would say the exact time, so it's not "around 4:45 am." it IS 4:45 am. Be sure. Be certain. Describe things as they are.
She looked at her husband who was fast asleep.
This sentence is good. She's doing something. It shows she has a husband, and that they're in bed together.
Now, let's reword the whole sentence. We will remove unnecessary stuff and be very straight to the point:
Her alarm went off. It was 4:45am. It was still dark outside. Her husband was still asleep.
Ok, that sounds more confident, and describes things exactly as they are. But it's a little too simple, and the sentences are still very disconnected. Let's add just a little more:
Her alarm went off. It was 4:45am. She rose from her bed and opened the curtains to look outside. It was still dark. When she turned, she looked at her husband who was still asleep.
That's good. It leads us from her being in bed and waking up, to her getting out of bed and seeing the sky, then her husband. We are saying exactly what's happening but we're not involving her very much. Let's give her more to do (I will bold the lines that describe "what" she's doing):
The alarm went off, rousing her from sleep. When she reached for her phone to switch it off, the glowing light said "4:45am". As she rose from her bed she rubbed her eyes and opened the curtains. It was still dark outside. She turned to leave the room but glanced at her husband, he was still fast asleep.
We mention the same things but we've described how she wakes up, what she does to find out the time, and what the clock looks like (it glows), what she does when she gets out of bed, and why she knows it's dark outside. Things don't just happen, she's the one that's doing things. However, we're not explaining how she feels, or why she's doing these things. Let's add a little more (I will bold the lines that describe how she's doing things and how she feels):
The alarm was loud, causing her to wake with an uncomfortable jolt and grab her phone from the bedside table. When she flicked the button there was silence again, but the glowing light said "4:45am". She huffed. She had work. She wasn't used to the routine yet. As she rose from her bed she glanced over her shoulder at her partner; he shifted slightly after being disturbed but he was thankfully still asleep. She sighed, rubbed her eyes and rose from bed to check the sky outside. It was still dark. Great.
Now, the reason why I'm saying all this is to make a point. Writing a character isn't a separate thing. It's part of everything. Part of writing a scene, part of writing a plot. Everything. Read through your own story. Split it into scenes. Go through each scene and plan what you want to happen (Don't write the story, just plan it, bullet points, notes). Then look through your notes and decide how you want them to connect, and in what order. Decide what she's doing, how she's feeling, what she's thinking, what she's seeing. If you can take what I've talked about and apply this same idea to the rest of your story, it should at least help. This isn't an instant thing, some of what I say will probably make no sense, but the more you write and test yourself the faster and sooner you'll develop how you write.
Sorry for this being rather long, but the topic of character development, traits, and how to write characters is very vast and varied. There's so much to discuss. Hope this helps.
7ballcraze, 19 Dec 2018 12:51
