Reader Question: What to do with two characters who serve the same purpose?
Open forum question via email from Eric Daley:
I’ve got a few questions, that I was hoping you could answer on your blog.
1. I’ve got two supporting characters that serve the same purpose: Moral support/best friend to Male Lead and Female Lead. What’s the best way to make the supporting characters ‘real’ and different? I find it hard to make them unique. By them serving the same purpose, they really could be one character. But, I feel each lead should have that ‘best friend.’
My first comment, Eric, is that your instincts are leading you in a fruitful direction in this respect: You are looking at your characters in terms of their narrative function. A screenplay is a unique narrative form in that it is a blueprint for producing a movie and as a result, every character must serve a function tied directly to the story.
In my view, most stories have are five narrative functions represented by these character archetypes: Protagonist, Nemesis, Attractor, Mentor, and Trickster.
Typically best friends are Attractor, Mentor, or Trickster characters.
The Attractor is a character who is connected to the emotional development of the Protagonist. Symbolically we can think of them as heart.
The Mentor is a character who is connected to the intellectual development of the Protagonist. Symbolically we can think of them as head.
The Trickster, who switches back and forth from ally to enemy, tests the Protagonist, helping to prepare them for ‘battle’ against the Nemesis. Symbolically we can think of them as the Id.
In the movie Up, the Protagonist is the Carl Fredericksen (Edward Asner), a 78 year-old widower. During his journey into the ‘world of adventure’ in Paradise Falls, Carl develops three friendships:
* Russell (Jordan Nagai): A young boy who stows away in Carl’s house when it goes airborne toward South America. Russell, whose parents are divorced, has a void in his life because of his father’s absence. This parallels Carl’s experience because he has a void as well, due to the death of his beloved wife Elie. Eventually Carl becomes a surrogate father to Russell and Russell becomes the ‘child’ Carl and Elie could not have, each filling a significant emotional need for the other. That’s why I assert that Russell’s character is the story’s Attractor.
* Dug (Bob Peterson): A talking dog who befriends Carl and Russell along the way, Dug provides key information about his master, the story’s Nemesis Charles Muntz (Christopher Plummer), Muntz’s quest for a nearly mythical bird, and the ins-and-outs of Muntz’s dirigible. Equally if not more important, Dug ‘teaches’ Carl about the value of companionship, friendship, and love, a reflection of his canine nature. In this way, Dug serves as the story’s Mentor.
* Kevin: The bird Muntz is obsessively tracking turns out to be Kevin, so named by Russell who the bird befriends early on in the trek toward Paradise Falls. At first, Carl wants nothing to do with Kevin as the bird plays a series of tricks on the old man and refuses to leave the pair of humans alone. Indeed, because of Kevin and Muntz’s quest for the bird, Carl and Russell’s lives are imperiled. However Carl sets aside his goal of bringing his house to Paradise Falls — fulfilling a promise to Elie — in order to save Kevin from Muntz and reunite Kevin with her three baby birds. Ally, enemy, enemy, ally and test after test — Kevin must be the story’s Trickster.
Each of these three characters is a distinct individual, not only due to their personalities, but also their respective narrative functions.
So all of that is a lead-in to this question, Eric: Is it possible for your two best friends to play different character archetypes? For example, can the Male Lead’s Best Friend be an Attractor, Mentor, or Trickster, and the Female Lead’s Best Friend provide a different narrative function?
Obviously you can shape each character’s persona so that they are different, but since your instincts have led you into the area of narrative function, it’s worthwhile playing around with the two in terms of potentially distinct archetypes: Attractor, Mentor, or Trickster.
By the way, once you have a sense that this character is a Mentor and that one is a Trickster (or whatever), a great way to explore their personalities is to use this: A gallery of archetypes put together by Caroline Myss. A Mentor who is a a caregiver is different than an addict who is different than a revolutionary. Likewise a Trickster who is a judge is different than a thief who is different than a gambler.
What this means is that you can use the five primary character archetypes to identify the core narrative function of each character, then use these sub-archetypes per Myss’ list to zero in on the core of each character’s unique personality.
I’ll take on your second question tomorrow.