"Writing is the painting of the voice!" -Voltaire
Since this forthcoming weekend is going to be jam-packed, I am posting today. Enjoy!
Recently, I read two YA novels: The Bunker Diary by Kevin Brooks and Ship Breaker by Paulo Bacigalupi. While I recommend both of these novels, one is, in my opinion better, because of one simple fact: their main characters.
As the title states, I will be discussing the problem with passive main characters. Never heard this term before? Well, I think it's a real problem in a portion of today's literature. An active main character, well we probably can all think of examples, since they are so common. But an active main character is one who takes action when something happens. They don't just react, they act. They are the main driver of the plot and the story, because they are the main character. For example, my characters have to react to the circumstances around them, but most of the time, this also causes them to act. To do something. And we all want to see our main character do something, whether they are male or female, young or old, a dog or an alien, we all want to see them be brave and take action and be involved. Why else would we read it if we didn't like the main character, and didn't want them to succeed. Linus from The Bunker Diary is a good example of this. Him and six other people have been kidnapped and are now trapped in this completely white bunker. They are then being manipulated with their freedom and basic needs by an unnamed man called Him. And, of course, they spend the story trying to survive and get out of this bunker. Linus willingly forms relationships with these people, reaches out to help them despite themselves. He always takes action. Especially when he first arrives, he is the only captive, but is always active in the way that he handles himself. Instead of spending his time sulking and letting things happen, he seeks out answers, sometimes ending up with unfortunate results. But even though he fails over and over again, it is still entertaining and inspiring to the readers. While he had his emotional moments, those didn't distract from moving the plot along with the secondary characters, and him working with everyone else to get them out. Even though they were stuck in a plain bunker with nothing to do, Linus is always thoughtful and active, a basic need of every good character.
On the other hand, a passive main character is one who, essentially, does nothing. This doesn't mean this character is a doormat, or reluctant or unenthusiastic. These are character traits. Passive, however, refers to a characters actions. Or, lack thereof. Passive characters normally react, instead of act. An example of this would be when Terra first sees her deceased father. What she does in this instance would be a reaction. However, when Wyatt extends his hand to her, she decides to take it. Even though both of these are small actions, they both show that it is just as important for a character to act as it is for them to react. However, you cannot have one without the other.
Also, passive characters as main characters in stories take backseats, almost as if they are watching the plot unfold, and they are just bystanders. A good example of a passive character that I have read of late is Nailer from Ship Breaker.
First, I liked the book Ship Breaker - there are some things it does very well. The writing is exquisite and stylish, the setting is descriptive, enthralling, and immersive, however, Nailer, the main character, leans to be very passive. Despite his mostly timid, reluctant, and quiet personality, he is still very passive in the things that he does in and for the story. This is shown in many scenes, where his friend Pima makes most of the decisions, and he is only there to help. His primary involvement is just because his father hates him, and abuses him. The problem is, is that Nailer doesn't seem to have much of a mind of his own. He's very smart and calculated, and is an expert at playing the game of life, except he never takes action based on this. We never see him personally succeed or fail, because he is not the driver of the story. He mostly reacts and is forced by the plot to do things. Like I said, there needs to be a balance of a character acting and reacting, and in this novel, there isn't a whole lot of that, unfortunately. And since timidity and reluctance are negative personality traits, one of the points of the story is to get him to overcome these parts of him, which he never does.
And now to what I'm really getting at: The Problem With Passive Main Characters. The problem with passive main characters is that their inaction shows us that they don't care. That they are utterly apathetic, and that they'd rather be gouging their eyes out with spoons instead of being there. And, at times, this is understandable, but there needs to come a point where this passive main character realizes their situation, and decides to take action because there is no other option but for them to do so. The main problem is that these passive characters don't care. They don't care much about anything or anyone or even themselves. And this is all we want to see them do, is to care about something. We want to see them give a shit, because when someone does, they do something about it once said thing is in peril, ultimately setting a good, hearty plot in motion.
Over all, The Bunker Diary was a great novel with an odd ending (I won't spoil it for you. You need to go read it yourself because it's amazing), and Ship Breaker was a good book with some annoying imperfections.
Happy reading,
~The WordShaker
