What better time than Halloween week to discuss fear- an important part of my Character Map eBook.  Below is a short excerpt.

The Character’s Fear

There are nine specific types of fears which can drive characters’ actions.

At the deepest root of all these fears is: How the character believes he or she is or might become unloved or unlovable.

The character asks: “What must I hide or deny so that others will love and/or accept me? If others knew who I really am they would surely turn surely away from me.” This is the secret doubt or dread the character must face in order to live in his or her true self (instead of the false self of the mask). The character’s fear is that deep anxiety, worry, self-doubt of inner shame that prevents the character from making a Leap of Faith toward the true self. Indeed, it is only possible to be truly loved by taking the chance to be one’s self.

Indeed, it is only possible to be truly loved by taking the chance to be one’s self. It is only through honesty, openness, and vulnerability that intimacy can be built. Without such intimacy, there can be no real love.

Fear and Shame

A character’s fear is the greatest burden he or she carries. It is the yoke the character cannot escape. It defines the secret shame that character never wants to face or acknowledge. It is the unspoken reason the character truly believes he or she is (or could be) a disappointment or disgrace to others (and therefore could be or become unloved or un-loveable).

It is the unspoken reason the character truly believes he or she is (or could be) a disappointment or disgrace to others (and therefore could be or become unloved or un-loveable).

What secret fault or failing does your character hide? Does he or she ask— Am I unworthy of love? Will I ever deserve love? What must I do to win or work for love? What do I have to do to prove I am loveable? Will I always do or say the wrong thing? Am I such a failure or disappointment that I will never be loved?

Choose one of these questions and force your character to confront this issue in all his or her dealings with others— and especially with the antagonist. Force your character to risk everything in facing the fear behind the question. Unless your character faces his or her fear or secret shame, your character will never be free. Your character will constantly be forced to cling the mask and seek its “protection.” A character that hides a secret shame will never be able to live a truly authentic life. As long as that fear and shame exist.

Fear Drives All Conflict

Whenever you are having trouble with a scene, a sequence or an act, ask yourself— How is the character’s fear manifesting itself in this situation? How is the character denying, avoiding, camouflaging or hiding the fear? How is the character trying to cope with or manage the fear? How is the fear tempting the character to get into trouble? How is the character facing the fear? Or, how is the character surrendering to or personally manifesting the fear?

You can purchase The Character Map at the ETB store for more insights in creating a three-dimensional, engaging character that will help you craft the best character you can.

SaveSave

SaveSave

SaveSave

SaveSave

SaveSave

…What is the purpose of the pre-battle speech in film? Does it have a purpose other than exposition or is it just a standard prerequisite of any war story?

BRAVEHEART – In Braveheart, William Wallace gives a pre-battle speech that became a defining moment in the film. What differs it from the same narcoleptic moments in Alexander? Wallace’s speech tells us as much about his character as it does the justification for the battle. It gives us another piece of Wallace’s motive for being there instead of serving solely as exposition.

“Yes. Fight and you may die. Run and you will live, at least awhile. And dying in your bed many years from now, would you be willing to trade all the days from this day to that, for one chance to come back here as young men, and tell our enemies that they may take our lives, but the will never take our freedom?”

GLADIATOR – Maximus gives his troops a similar speech in Gladiator — similar because it, too, is a look inside the motives of the leader. But because it tells us what the men believe about life and death, Maximus’ speech also serves as exposition.

“Three weeks from now, I will be harvesting my crops. Imagine where you will be and it will be so. Along the line, stay with me. If you find yourself alone, riding in green fields with the sun on your face, do not be troubled for you are in Allysium and you are already dead. What we do in life echoes in eternity.”

TROY – This film has two pre-battle speeches — Achilles’ speech to his Myrmidons and Hector’s speech to battalions of Troy. Achilles’ speech is about his character. He wants his name to live forever.

“Myrmidons, my brothers of the sword. I’d rather fight alongside you than any army of thousands. Let no man forget how menacing we are. We are lions. You know what’s there waiting beyond that beach? Immortality! Take it. It’s yours!”

KINGDOM OF HEAVEN – This pre-battle speach is not a speech. As Balian prepares Jerusalem to defend itself, he gives no pep talk. But he believes that no man is a servant to another and makes each man a knight by administering the same oath to them that he took at his father’s deathbed. This serves no expository purpose that I can see but solely demonstrates the character of the leader.

“Be without fear in the face of your enemies. Be brave and upright that God may love thee. Speak the truth even if it leads to your death. Safeguard the helpless. This is your oath (he slaps a young teen as his father slapped him) and that is so you remember it. Rise, a knight!”

I think all of these examples work, but why do they work? The one thing I see in each one is that the battle speech, like other dialogue in the film, also serves to reveal character.

ALEXANDER – So why does the speech in Alexander not work for me? Aside from being entirely too long and boring, it has several long pauses of silence as we watch an eagle or inaudible shots while the opposing army looks at each other. Even if we wanted to care at the beginning of the speech, by the time it’s over we’re too exhausted to give a rip how the battle turns out.

“You’ve all honored your country and your ancestors and now we come to this most distant place in Asia where across from us Darius has at last gathered an army– (cut from speech to no audible dialogue and follow long descent of an eagle and then go back to Alexander mid sentence) — but look again at this war and ask yourselves, who is this great king who pays assasins in gold coins to murder my father, our king in a most despicable and cowardly manner? Who is this great king Darius who enslaves his own men to fight? Who is this king but a king of air? These men do not fight for their homes. They fight because this king tells them they must. When they fight, they will melt away like the air. We are not here today as slaves. We are here as Macedonian free men! Some of you, perhaps myself, will not live to see the sun set over these mountains today but I say to you what every warrior has known since the beginning of time, conquer your fear and I promise you, you will conquer death! When they ask you where you fought so bravely, you will answer, I was here this day at Gaugamela for the freedom and glory of Greece! Zeus be with us!”

Conclusion? Well, first of all, I think pre-battle speeches have to serve some purpose other than pure exposition but what I don’t know is if it’s critical that the speech also reveal character.

Laurie’s Notes: I believe it is critical that a battle speech reveal character.  Each kind of leader sees the world differently and fights for different reasons.  Each kind of leader inspires followers differently.

All of the examples in MaryAn’s post above are Power of Idealism leaders.  Power of Idealism leaders believe that life and war should involve a grand passion or great ideal. They see the world in terms of sweeping epic poetry or as a struggle for individuality and freedom of operatic proportions against impossible odds.

Power of Idealism leaders inspire and challenge their followers to give their all to a glorious cause. They create a sense of special destiny and often link their mission to a grand heroic tradition (knighthood) or the glory of the immortality (Elysian Fields).  What they are after is valor, honor and the kind of immortality to inspire others in story, song or legend.

Another example of this kind of leadership is demonstrated in King Leonidas’ battle speech to his Spartans at the Pass of Thermopylae in the film 300.

KING LEONIDAS  “This is where we hold them! This is where we fight! This is where they die! Remember this day, men, for it will be yours for all time… Spartans, prepare for glory!”

In contrast, a Power of Will character fights for more territory, revenge or total domination and uses any means (fair or foul) he deems necessary.  This kind of leader and his followers are characterized by the burning desire for MORE!  Gordon Gekko, a Power of Will leader in Wall Street, gives a kind of battle speech to inspire the stockholders to throw out the old management of a company he is trying to take over.

GORDON GEKKO  “I am not a destroyer of companies. I am a liberator of them! The point is, ladies and gentleman, that greed — for lack of a better word — is good. Greed is right. Greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed, in all of its forms — greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge — has marked the upward surge of mankind. And greed — you mark my words — will not only save Teldar Paper, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the USA.“

Competing values are neutral.  They are a simple (often one word) expression of a fundamental truth or an ideal a person holds dear.  No value is inherently better or worse than another.  For example:  Freedom and Security are two fundamental American values.

America sees itself as “the home of the brave and the land of the free.”  Lady Liberty is an iconic symbol of the nation.  But to survive, every nation (or person) must be secure in its person, property and borders.  Security is also a fundamental American value, especially in these potentially very dangerous times.

The question is:  What happens when a character (or country) is forced to make starker and starker choices in favor of one value over (or to the exclusion of) another?

How much freedom are you willing to sacrifice or surrender in order to be secure?  As citizens are pushed to give up more personal autonomy, liberty or privacy, when do they cease to be free? Alternatively, how much security are you willing to sacrifice or surrender in order to be free?  If safety measures are too often thwarted by civil libertarians can a nation be adequately secure?

As the risk rises and a nation (or person) is pushed to the brink, it is forced to chose one value over the other.  These choices build up over time.  A final definitive choice should negate or eliminate one value in favor of another.   The payoff to a feature film well and satisfyingly written is to show this kind of final climactic choice at the end of the story.

For example:  In Schindler’s List, Oskar Schindler discovers war is the road to riches.  His Jewish accountant pads the factory payroll to save people from the camps.  At first, Schindler resists then, as he gets to know the factory workers, he gives away his watch, then his ring and then his cigarette case in making deals to shield them.  Schindler makes his final value choice when he gives his last trunk of money to protect those workers who are now finally and fully “his” responsibility. Schindler finishes the film penniless and dressed in the rags.  In a Power of Conscience film, like Schindler’s List, the values at stake are Personal Well-Being vs. Moral Responsibility.

In series television, this choice is paid off more slowly and over multiple episodes or seasons.  A television series shows how this choice is made through incremental action, over time, leading to a climactic series finale.

For example:  In NYPD Blue, Andy Sipowicz choses to face his demons one by one.  He battles his temper and his rage. First he reigns himself in and gets sober, then he gets married, has a baby, reconciles with his eldest son, loses that son, loses his wife and cares for his remaining child. Over 17 years the drunken, racist, misanthrope we met in the pilot becomes, in a final leap of faith, a temperate respected leader of the men in his precinct. In a Power of Will series, like NYPD Blue, each choice involves the competing values of Impulse vs Restraint.

Getting back to our earlier example: How is freedom finally sacrificed? What is the tipping point?  Alternatively, what well-meaning policies deal security a fatal blow?   The audience wants to see how this final value choice is driven by faith or by fear.   They want to see how the character is pushed to extremes that provoke action that conclusively defines his or her character.

Values + Action = Character

The obstacles in a film or television series should create the kind of risk, peril or danger that pushes the character to take actions that define what is most fundamentally important or true in a character’s life. This is the case even in comedy.  There is no greater risk or peril than the vulnerability that makes a character funny.

The character should be forced to make a stark, definitive and active choice. As one value is ultimately chosen, the character finally negates or surrenders the other contrasting value.  What price is paid for the character’s choice?  What are the consequences for the character?  The more expensive the price, the more dire the consequences are for your character, the more compelling and urgent your story will be for your audience.

One man was rich and powerful.  The other man was poor but intelligent and savvy.  Both men needed the other to succeed and they owed substantial debts of honor and respect to each other.

The woman was the rich and powerful man’s servant.  My first question about this romantic triangle was– what would drive the powerful and important man the most crazy?

Would this influential pillar of the community be driven to extremes if the intelligent and savvy man stole his servant or his WIFE?  The answer is, of course, is his wife.

That much more intimate betrayal would produce a nuclear reaction of outrage, shame and revenge.  No servant girl, however, beautiful and desirable, matches the humiliation of being cuckolded by one’s wife and best friend.

In another consulting job, two best friends decide to embark on a road trip.  The night before they leave they hook up with some local girls.  The girls are generally supportive of the two guys’ dream of heading out on the open road.

What would cause more conflict?  Telling your FIANCE that you are leaving town indefinitely or some easy-going girls you might never see again.  The answer is clear.  Telling your fiance involves intense angst, incredible turmoil and probably a torrent of tears.  (Along with a lot of guilt over a loved one’s sense of abandonment)

Always ask yourself– What would make the situation more impossible?  What would torture your character more intensely.  Then make the strongest choice.  Ramp up the conflict.  Make it more personal.  Make it more intimate and emotional.  The higher the stakes for the character the more the audience cares about what happens next.