Naming names

Until someone mentioned the name Amaryllis in a review this weekend, I had almost forgotten about the trauma of choosing names for characters (thanks for reminding me, Chris G!).

In some cases, a first name arrives with the character and it’s impossible after a few pages to imagine using a different one. Several of the Pitkirtly crowd fall into this category: Christopher, Amaryllis, Jock, Dave. I don’t think Jemima Stevenson had a first name when she appeared, but it wasn’t too long until she invented one for herself. I had a bit of trouble with Maisie Sue, although most of the early attempts involved combinations of similar elements: Ellie Mae, Susie Mae, Mary-Ann, Susie-Ann and so on. Once I had thought of Pearson MacPherson I couldn’t not use it, no matter how silly it was!

I usually use the name I initially think of for a character, but if that doesn’t work then it often takes several attempts to choose something that seems right; I have been known to consult baby naming websites, particularly if I need something unusual or a name from another culture. On occasion the name is too right, in the sense that the character turns into someone I know who has the same name. This happened with a character in ‘Reunited in Death’, but I’d better not say which one. In any case, I changed it as soon as I noticed the increasing similarities.

In this vein, I once wrote a short novel (novella length) that actually had real people as characters, with their real names. This was great fun to write and would be impossible ever to release into the wild. Even when I let one of my sons read it, he took exception to the way I had portrayed him, and in other cases I think the people involved, particularly the one designated as murderer, would probably sue! As well as making me laugh a lot, it completely defused the fury I had been feeling about something one of the characters had done, and allowed me to move on from there.

But this kind of thing is writing as therapy and not writing for publication! I find it easier to remember the difference after consciously setting out to do it on that one occasion.

Characters in a landscape

I don’t know why it’s taken me so long to understand this, but I now realise that when I go wrong in my writing it is usually because I start from the setting for a novel and not from the characters.  The setting, no matter how lovely or sordid or exotic or homely, has to be subordinate to what the characters do there. I have somewhere on one of my computers a whole comic novel about a museum curator, which I abandoned because the museum setting had completely swamped the story.  Similarly, if there’s a theme or ‘moral’ (to use an extremely old-fashioned word) in a novel, which I think there should be, it has to be appropriate to the set of characters, otherwise it won’t make sense and will stand out like a knit row where there should be purl, or wool of a different dye number in a batch used to knit a jumper!

Needless to say I am often tempted to break my own rule – what else are rules for, after all? – when a particular setting appeals to me, so I suppose my New Year resolution for 2012 has to be to learn from previous mistakes and not to give into that temptation. Even as recently as the end of November, in the wake of NaNoWriMo, I had an idea for a whole series of thriller novels set in interesting places across Europe.  But during the mulling over phase that precedes planning in my case, the idea seems to be gradually morphing into something quite different. I am still strangely drawn to the idea of writing something set in Berlin, but I know that’s mainly because it’s a place where huge world-changing events have taken place and there would be lots of scope to put characters in danger.

Meanwhile ‘Death at the Happiness Club’ is taking shape. In the case of my Pitkirtly mystery series, the characters have well and truly taken over the asylum. Although they have been formed to some extent by the small town they inhabit, I like to think of them as having wills of their own. I just shape their stories, imposing a kind of order on their messy lives.

[yes, I know some of them would definitely object to their lives being described as messy!]

Developing characters – how far to go?

I’m in the middle of editing my fourth novel in the Pitkirtly mystery series, and I just wonder how far I can go in developing the characters. I don’t want them to change beyond recognition (and see also ‘A Reformed Character’ which rehearses some of my own views on this before coming down firmly on both sides of the fence!), but it’s good to be able at least to illustrate different sides of people in different situations.

In ‘Death at the Happiness Club’ I have slightly surprised myself by choosing to highlight aspects of Maisie Sue MacPherson and Inspector Smith, both of whom, I think it’s fair to say, started life as rather stereotypical characters. I’ve become more interested in them in the course of writing the series, and although I will never tire of chronicling the ups and downs of the rather strange relationship between Christopher and Amaryllis, it’s good to be able to explore facets of people who are different from either of them.

Just as in real life I am particularly guilty of instinctively disliking someone about whom I know very little, I do take a dislike to some of my fictional characters too. And as in real life, I often find this initial reaction to be unfair. So Maisie Sue, whom I’ve been rather unkind to, has a turn in the spotlight this time, and Inspector Smith is seen to be almost human for a while.

A New Year message

Happy New Year!
I had some idea of doing a review of 2011, but I’ve left it a bit too late for that and I really prefer to look forward, so here are some predictions for 2012 in Pitkirtly.
Maisie Sue McPherson is due to have a more exciting life than she ever planned.
Christopher will be reunited with a family member who caused him a lot of trouble in the past.
Amaryllis’s activities will lead her into danger again, and not just because she finds out Inspector Smith’s first name.
Jock McLean’s pipe will cause a catastrophe, and Jemima’s and Dave’s relationship will enter a new phase.

And as for me, I will continue to plan other people’s lives for them, which is very much easier to do in fiction than in real life!