Overused Types of Characters

[1eyedjack]

Intrinsically better for a reader, no, of course not.

Intrinsically better for a writer... I do actually believe so.  I think that if you're serious about writing as well as you can, you keep trying new challenges and not settling for easy options.  In the same way that one can't really train up to being an Olympic runner by setting the target of one's training at outrunning half a dozen random passers-by.

Eh, I've never seen a comparison of art to sports that I've ever liked.  Sure you both try hard, but whereas an Olympic runner has a solid goal in mind a writer really doesn't.  You have far more options than that runner for getting from point A to point B and touting any one above others is mostly subjective.  Really all you gotta do is write.  Once you are doing that, you're most of the way there. 

Not to say that it isn't hard work, but how you get to that point is subjective.  For some people it is easy and for some it isn't.  It is like Buddhism and enlightenment.  It happens every day but so does lightning.  Doesn't mean everyone is always struck by it.  You can hold up a lightning rod but that's not a guarantee.  You could be doing everything to avoid it and still get hit.  That's why this is art and not sports. 

Sure, Tchaikovsky wrote the Nutcracker suite and he hated it because he was so limited in what he did and it ended up being a big hit.  Then you have Mozart and if you know nothing other than the movie Amadeus you'll still know what I'm talking about. 

Listen to Yo-Yo-Ma's rendition of Bach's Cello Suite.  He doesn't keep a perfectly timed tempo, he rolls around in speed and it works beautifully.  His bow dances across the strings and he lays into the deeper notes making them strike harder.  He uses variations. 

So with that in mind, I think making things harder isn't the goal.  I think just looking at things differently, easy or not, and mixing things up is a better goal to have in mind.  Things don't always have to be complicated and sometimes simple just works. 

TL:DR Don't go for difficulty, just have a dynamic point of view.

[Snowleopard]

Er, minor correction there 1EJ - serious writers usually have a serious, solid goal in mind.
Noodling maybe not but if you've got to turn out an article or term paper or some such thing yes.

[the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh]

Some time ago we were talking of Jack Chalker's work and you used the term YKIOK.   At the time I understood you to mean 'kink' in the sense of story twist. 

Not recalling the conversation, but in context it seems most likely I meant Chalker's fondness for imposing fairly gratuitous somatic sex-changes upon his characters.   Seemingly a thing he felt was an interesting story element.

Did you instead mean 'kink' as in perceptual kink, the kink in our, the readers', personal context as the artist proceeds to expand said context?    The same kink Proust tries to explain when he talks of Renoir?

I would love to be able to claim that, but every now and again you give me more credit than I deserve, and this is, alas, one of these times.

[1eyedjack]

Er, minor correction there 1EJ - serious writers usually have a serious, solid goal in mind.
Noodling maybe not but if you've got to turn out an article or term paper or some such thing yes.

Sure there's the goal of churning something out but what that is and how you do it are things you can control.  I wasn't entirely clear on that point, you are correct.  In my mind it is the difference between Olympic racing and parkour.  You can be good at it but there are a lot of right ways to do it.

As for journalism and papers and the like I honestly hadn't been considering those.  I completely concede to that point, just making that clear.

[Bearracuda]

It's not possible to write a bestseller by setting out to write a by-the-numbers bestseller. That much is solid.

You stand much more chance of taking off if you write the stories that work for you than defining the stories you tell solely by what's marketable.

I didn't say try to write a bestseller by trying to write a bestseller. >.>  And your second sentence just made my point for me, so, thanks for that.

[Snowleopard]

Sure there's the goal of churning something out but what that is and how you do it are things you can control.  I wasn't entirely clear on that point, you are correct.  In my mind it is the difference between Olympic racing and parkour.  You can be good at it but there are a lot of right ways to do it.

As for journalism and papers and the like I honestly hadn't been considering those.  I completely concede to that point, just making that clear.

Okay, your comment makes sense from that point of view.  I was just considering all writing.