A Case Study in Character Development

[tealin]

I'm still nibbling away at my more in-depth review of Up, but in the meantime I was reminded of something I read back when I was in high school that made a lot of sense and has stayed with me ever since. Italics are the author's, bold text is mine.

Basil's character has many strengths in itself, but it has in addition an extra one which originates in the relationship between him and his audience. This is that, adult or child, we identify with him. If we are not Basil, we would like to be, and for an hour and a quarter we believe that we are.

[...] Many [Disney features] have a central character whose personality is two-dimensional. It is this character with whom we are intended to identify, and the two-dimensionality is deliberately created so that we can graft onto the character sufficient of our own attributes for the identification to be successful. In The Rescuers, Penny is 'everygirl;' in The Sword in the Stone, Wart is 'everyboy.' In The Great Mouse Detective, however, the character who might might have been expected to take on this role, Olivia, is far from two-dimensional, and it is Basil with whom we are intended to – and do – identify.

Basil is more than just a collection of behaviour patterns. One leaves the cinema feeling that one knows him as a personality – every characteristic rings true. When, for example, Ratigan escapes the palace in his bat-powered dirigible, we may be surprised at the nature of the Heath Robinsonish vehicle which Basil devises for the purposes of giving chase, but we are not surprised that Basil would have been capable of inventing it.

– John Grant, The Encyclopedia of Disney Animated Characters

I wish Mr Grant would have written succinctly enough that I could print this out onto a poster that I could pin on the outside of my cube where people might actually read it, but that's what blogs are for!

Comments

[dejablue7.livejournal.com]

I loved Basil. He was so interesting and strange and socially awkward :) And talk about an amazing character entrance.

[stevie-roch.livejournal.com]

Yes! One of my favorite Disney movies is the highly underappreciated Great Mouse Detective, probably for this very reason. Basil is one of my favorite characters, solely because he isn't cookie-cutter.

[twirlynoodle.livejournal.com]

And not at all because he's so devilishly handsome and charismatic? Aww, look how sad he is. ;) Actually I suspect Basil wouldn't care either way...

[stevie-roch.livejournal.com]

I'm not gonna lie, if I was a mouse, I'd be all over that.

[infiniteviking]

That's a fantastic blurb. If I had to condense it, it would go "We are all the Great Mouse Detective," but really, there's so much to Basil I'm not sure the reason why he works so well could really be condensed into a meagre little epigram.

*goes all 8D about your icon*

[pandoras-closet.livejournal.com]

Why not copy and paste it into Word, print it, trim off the excess paper and put it up?

I know I'd stop and read it.

[twirlynoodle.livejournal.com]

Because it's an awfully long chunk of text; I suspect people would ignore it. (We are a visual tribe at Disney...) Anyway, most of my beef in this regard is with Pixar at the moment. My message to Disney would fit on a poster, or a banner, and is nice and short and catchy: "The gift of the true artist is the knowledge of when to stop." Take that, elders and betters! I paraphrase quotes at you!

[putri-nih.livejournal.com]

AHA! Do you have that Craftsman quote in your cube? :D

Mine is pasted at my tablet.

[twirlynoodle.livejournal.com]

No, posting that here and now would be profoundly ungrateful. We're all craftsmen here, and even if we don't agree with the decisions of the higher-ups at least they are craftsmen first and businessmen second, unlike the old crew... That quote needs to be clearly printed on nice paper and sent to every animation studio and school in Canada. :)

[putri-nih.livejournal.com]

I see...I put mine mostly just for myself.

[twirlynoodle.livejournal.com]

Ah, see, if I put up a reminder for myself it would have to be "LIGHTEN UP." :)

[conga-chili.livejournal.com]

I'll bet you could just print and post along that entire line of cubes.

In any case, so true! Thank you for the words of wisdom! (and the passing along thereof)

[fairy-gany.livejournal.com]

That's a cool analysis !
The movie actually contains the coolest scene ever : when Basil figures out how to escape from the trap with Dawson, activating all the different weapons and saving Olivia.
CRAAAAZZYYYY
I need to read this Encyclopedia now !
Oh, Tealinette, I realised I hadn't friend you before ! (when I'm lucky enough to know you for real) Now you can go and read some french on my journal ;)

[darkphaedra.livejournal.com]

I have always had a hard time with identifying two dimensional characters with identifying characteristics and characters with actual personality. If they have enough quirks, it seems like a personality to me, but then I read reviews and critics say that they are, in fact, 2 dimensional and dull. How does one go about testing this?

[twirlynoodle.livejournal.com]

I do not claim to be an expert – a big part of my fixation on story and character stuff is an attempt to learn how to do it – but my own rule of thumb is basically this: If you were given an assignment to write a story with that character, would you be able to channel them well enough that they could dictate what their reactions and decisions would be? Or could you take a personality test as that character and get a reasonably accurate result? (Of course it's hard to tell if the result is accurate if you don't know the character that well in the first place...) The tricky thing about two-dimensional characters, as that excerpt describes, is that people tend to fill in the blanks with aspects of their own personality, so they may not appear to be as two-dimensional as an objective test would reveal them to be. I am very bad at doing this; I much more readily sympathise with characters who have a distinct and convincing personality. How can I pretend to be someone if I don't know who they are?

[ubiquitouspitt.livejournal.com]

*scratches head*

I was always taught that 3d characters are characters who undergo a change in the course of a story.

The difference between a dull flat character and a character who comes with bells and whistles is, I think, a different matter altogether. Forster has shown us (always back to the Bloomsbury group) that completely boring British-banker S'types can undergo a fundamental character change that renders them 3-dimensional.

[twirlynoodle.livejournal.com]

Aha, BUT, you can't tell if a character has undergone a change unless you have a good idea who they are to begin with!

I have Theories regarding S vs N character development but they are mostly poorly informed and non-comprehensive. Nevertheless, for your perusal: When Ss write/read a character, they want to know facts about them; when Ns write/read a character, they want to know what they are like. By this theory Robin McKinley is an S and Terry Pratchett is an N; the fact that most writers seem to be Ns would explain why the minority of books* seem to be overly reliant on backstory and biographical tidbits. (I wonder if biographers are, statistically, more likely to be S types...) Regarding Up** it makes me wonder if Bob Peterson (writer) is an S, because Pete Docter(director)'s previous film, Monsters, Inc, is much more personality-focused than biography-focused. Mr Peterson, being the most significant variable between the two movies, may be the easiest place to pin the blame...

[putri-nih.livejournal.com]

Wasn't Bob Peterson the head of story on Monsters? Theoretically he would have had also a significant influence over it as well. (then again, I have no idea how things work over there at Pixar)

Re: Rotten Tomatoes
:P O you.

[twirlynoodle.livejournal.com]

Wasn't Bob Peterson the head of story on Monsters?

Yes, but, Head of Story, to my knowledge, is more like the Story Wrangler, herding the story artists and shepherding the plot. When you actually write the screenplay you have a lot more influence on the minutiae of the movie, what with originating it and all.

[ubiquitouspitt.livejournal.com]

God, why are you making me read this at 8am when I've only had one cup of coffee...

You can have a good idea of what a character is without there being much to them. I think we are confusing literary terms, is all. However, you should carry on expounding your theory. The vast majority of my utterances are poorly informed and non-comprehensive.

And you should stop reviewing Up because the activity jeopardizes my love for you. I'm afraid we've reached the kind of obsessive, mind-bending, infuriating unsolvable problem that breaks a person's spirit and, inevitably, changes them for the worst. Can't you see that your participation in this whole quixotic endeavour is turning you evil?

Come back to me. Come back to me. *beckoning hand*

[(Anonymous)]

I thought -dynamic- (as opposed to static) characters underwent changes, while multidimensional (as opposed to one-dimensional) characters have personality.

[ubiquitouspitt.livejournal.com]

As I suspected, the terms '3d' and 'dynamic' are generally interchangeable. This is from a k12 literary elements website:

Three-dimensional characters: They have good and bad qualities. Their goals, ambitions and values change. A round character changes as a result of what happens to him or her. A character who changes inside as a result of what happens to him is referred to in literature as a DYNAMIC character. A dynamic character grows or progresses to a higher level of understanding in the course of the story

http://www.orangeusd.k12.ca.us/yorba/literary_elements.htm

[darkphaedra.livejournal.com]

I'm sort of the opposite: I have *such* an easy time projecting myself onto a blank character, that I really don't realize I'm doing it. I read their lines with the same accents I would use, whether the author intended them that way or not and all kinds of stuff. It's definitely something I've been trying to conquer in my writing, but it's been a struggle.

[ubiquitouspitt.livejournal.com]

Basiiil <3 <3 <3. How that movie warped my small developing child's brain into the small developing adult's brain I am left to deal with, now.

Give. Up. On. Up! Your life has meaning, gah, go find that meaning. Hint: It has nothing to do with reviewing Up!

[lady-twatterby.livejournal.com]

The Great Mouse Detective was the reason I started reading Conan Doyle's work. XD

[mellifluous-ink.livejournal.com]

<3

There is so little love for this film, and these characters. I think people overlook how well it was actually written and group it with the 'Disney Mice' films without really seeing it as anything but pap.

Actually, most of the mouse films are pretty good. And Sword in the Stone is just...yeah. I totally love that film. I read the book recently, and the film was such a wonderful adaptation. The book is kind of clunky.

[beckychan.livejournal.com]

Ah Basil! One of my favorite Disney heros! The depth of his flaws make him so darned likeable! The ego, the short temper, the way (or lack thereof) with children. And he can't even remeber her name. Miss... Flangerhanger.

[amyofcanada.livejournal.com]

I don't get the bit about Olivia being "far from two-dimensional". She seemed pretty two-dimensional to me.

I love Basil's huge range of emotion. Definitely one of my favourite Disney characters.

[twirlynoodle.livejournal.com]

I agree, Olivia's not exactly the most well-rounded character in the bunch ... maybe because she's not the focus of attention, her lack of development isn't as painful? She's got at least as much personality as most preceding Disney leads...

[dejablue7.livejournal.com]

Just watched Up. I thought it was absolutely awful, with the exception of a couple of elements. Like the dogs, who were wonderful.

Btw, as an animator for Disney, I wonder if you will find the following bit on character animation from a review on Pixar's UP interesting. Any thoughts?

From:http://keithlango.blogspot.com/2009/06/my-review-of-pixars-up.html

A significant item that held me back from buying into Carl's story as it unfolded was that I had a hard time buying into Carl, the old man. After the first act he stopped moving and acting like a slow, creaky, feeble 78 year old widower who needs a walking cane. He became a physically strong, high endurance, highly flexible action hero who can take a beating and keep on ticking- brushing off any ill effects from a fall or being trampled, tossed and otherwise roughly handled. I get it- his adventure revitalized him. But there's a difference between a revitalized old man and a strong young man. For all the comparisons to Miyasaki that people have for Up, this is where Miyasaki handles things way better. His frail characters live their adventures in their frailty. The girl transformed into an old woman in Howl's Moving Castle moved and acted like an old woman for the majority of the movie (until she started transforming back into her younger self, that is). The children in My Neighbor Totoro were limited children the whole film, experiencing their world as children, not action heroes. Up dispenses with human frailty in exchange for action set pieces. How many hanging one hand grabs to save oneself from falling to one's doom can a 78 year be expected to pull off? How many times can they be thrown down from heights and not break a hip? (my 76 year old mother in law broke her hip falling off a bed. And she wasn't some wilting flower of a woman, physically, either). And that's only one example. There were scores of them. I'm not the kind of person who picks nits in movies over physical impossibilities (ie: the entire Michael Bay filmography), but this is the guts of Character Animation, folks. Sure the moves exhibited a form of technical polish and solidity, but they were hollow of meaning- they weren't believable in any way because they were not true to an old man in any way. It wasn't character animation (ie: within character, expressing a unique person in every way)- it was movement to keep up with the gymnastics of adventure.

This wasn't a story about an old man on an adventure saddled with the limitations of his old-man-ish-ness. That would be an interesting and intriguing film if you ask me. Instead this was an action adventure flick with a strong athletic character in an old man costume who occasionally acted old for effect. Stanislovsky's rolling in his grave.

[sydpad.livejournal.com]

OMG, still love Great Mouse Detective so much. Starting to realize a lot of Ada is coming from Basil!