Concept vs. Character Death Match

Yes, the kidlets have been watching a lot of Homestarruner lately and I've been inundated with Strongbad, hence the DEATH MATCH. *cue cheesy dun dun dun..* What started this was a review I saw the other day of Incarceron, by Catherine Fisher.

 

I just finished this book a couple weeks ago, and it is sort of a sci-fi, dystopian, fantasy, quasi-historical.It has two POV characters, and the story alternates between the two. It took me a little time to get into the groove of the book, but once I did I enjoyed it. The person's review that got me thinking was that she didn't like it because she couldn't become really invested in the characters. 

As I thought about it, I realized that sure enough, I was pretty ho-hum about the characters too. But I still enjoyed the book because the concept was intriguing.  And since I'm a writer-type, and like to mull about this sort of thing rather than pay attention to the football game I'm watching with my hubby on TV (shh, don't tell him), I started pondering about what is more important to me as a reader, concept or character? I thought back to some books that stand out in my mind.

I enjoyed the Twilight series (until book 4, which I threw across the room) because of the concept. Some of the characters I liked, others I wanted to slap silly. *cough* *Bella* *cough* So in that case it was concept over character. 

Concept = 2 (including Incarceron), Character = 0

In Hunger Games, by Suzanne Collins, I'm going to say the concept won me at first, and kept me long enough to get into the characters. So it was concept hook, then character reeled me in. And in a death match, I have to choose one over the other, so...

Concept = 3, Character = 0

In Scones and Sensibility, by Lindsay Eland, it was all character. The concept wasn't super-different, but boy, I loved the characters.

Concept = 3, Character = 1

In Paranormalcy by Kiersten White, it was another case of character trumping concept, although the concept was pretty good.

Concept = 3, Character =2

Then comes Soulless by Gail Carriger, which was a super fun read (the whole series), and all about the concept for me. 

Concept = 4, Character = 2

The Artemis Fowl series is another of my top favorites, and this one has the knockout combination of a fantastic concept AND great characters. 

Concept = 5, Character = 3

Scott Westerfeld's Uglies, Pretties, and Specials stand out among books I've read, and that was for the awesome concept.

Concept = 6, Character = 3

Almost every Jodi Picoult book has a foundation of great characters, and my favorite, My Sister's Keeper, is no exception. Jodi always adds a nice concept twist, but the characters carry the book.

Concept = 6, Character = 4

Another favorite, I Capture the Castle by Dodie Smith, is very much a character book too.

Concept = 6, Character = 5

So, the result of our Death Match is . . . concept wins by one! (Not exactly a death match, but still.)

**Revision: For those who visited earlier and my math was off (pathetic when you're only counting to 6, right?), I have learned not to write a blog post while helping kidlets with homework. Doesn't work so well.

But what I learned from it is much more exciting. I think a story needs to have either a killer concept OR killer characters. Of course, as a writer, it is best if you can knock both out of the park, but either your characters or your concept need to really shine, and then the other has to be pretty good, or at the least not turn people off. (I'm thinking in particular about a book I read with a really intriguing concept but I couldn't stand the main character, so I couldn't finish the trilogy. I even gave the story a chance in Book 2. Nope, still couldn't stand the MC.) 

How about you? Do you prefer concept over character, or vice versa? Perhaps our Death Match can be revived...

Awesome Quote

Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm.

 Winston Churchill

Everyday Courage

I've been thinking about courage lately. What we often consider "courage" is really the sum total of a series of little steps that someone takes, even if sometimes they don't want to.

Today I read this in Holly Lisle's "Mugging the Muse" e-book, which eloquently explains the nebulous musings wandering around in my brain:

My definition of courage is nothing more than taking one step more than you think you can. It has nothing to do with feeling or not feeling fear, with doing great deeds (though sometimes courage accomplishes great deeds), or with conquering life-and-death situations (though in such situations it is certainly helpful.)

Courage is a form of tenaciousness, a refusal to quit when you want to quit because you're tired or humiliated or broken, and it is as necessary in everyday life as it is in moments of great upheaval. In fact, I could easily say that everyday courage is more important than the "great deeds" sort because every one of us will be in everyday situations, while not all of us will be called upon in our lifetimes to perform great deeds.

Courage is as essential to the writer as oxygen, no more and no less. The writer who lacks courage will never succeed.

Courage is working on your goals, step by dogged step, even if you don't feel like it.  Courage is venturing out of that "safe" zone, where you put a little bit of your soul on the page. Courage is pushing through the "my writing is total crap" stage. Courage is handing your writing over to a critique partner. Courage is clicking "Send" on that query letter email. Courage is looking at a hill ahead, cringing, and running up it anyway, because sometimes the harder you work for something, the more it's worth it.

(Aside: I love Holly Lisle's workshops, and even though she has an affiliate program, I do not participate in it. I simply share the good stuff I find.)

So, now that we've looked a little closer at courage, I have a question for you. Where do you find your courage?