Theory of character and characterization
Before we can appreciate how a physical trait might contribute to the formation of a character trait we would first have to have them clearly in mind as distinct from each other! The poet Platon Oyunsky draws heavily from the native mythology of his homeland, the Yakut region in Russia and the Sahka people.
That is, an author may embed the fact that a given character l-c1 is "spindly-legged" in an overall context of additional details X has loads of money, but buys his clothes at from the Salvation Army, skimps on food, etc.
Character and characterization in literature pdf
We can never automatically take a character's dirty hands as signifying that "he has dirty hands" is responsible for something evil. The difference between a character of a written script and his or her characterisation by an actor or actress is usually less of a problem with films, unless it is a film based on a narrative which existed before the film was produced, or, the character is found in an earlier film. Any of these attributes might or might not like various physical traits be an essential element of a given person's "personal identity," for himself or herself, or for others. Before we can appreciate how a physical trait might contribute to the formation of a character trait we would first have to have them clearly in mind as distinct from each other! On the basis of some data, we can usually expect certain actions or behaviour from a character. These traits, according to her, are hierarchically arranged; she also views characterization in terms of how the network of character traits, in reference to a particular character, is created. This difficulty, one suspects, is largely due to the human aspect of characterisation. Finally, 3 when there does turn out to be a symptomatic or a symbolic connection between a physical trait and a character trait, this will be available to be appreciated because the character trait in question is independently testified to by additional evidence. However, whether character or characterisation exist at all in Aristotle is a moot point, with some scholars arguing that the conception of character exist in his Poetics, but it is not as important as plot. Notions of characterisation may not even exist in certain periods in the development of literary criticism. Another major difference in drama is that it is not possible to 'go inside the character's head' in the way possible in a novel, meaning this method of character exposition is unavailable. However, in spite of differences between characters and real people, a clear dividing line between characters and real people is not possible. The speaking is how his or her essential personality leaks out for the world to see; it is not the sum total of his or her personality.
In theory, a reader should be able to identify which character is speaking simply from the way he or she talks. These twelve archetypes are often cited in fictional characters. Another major difference in drama is that it is not possible to 'go inside the character's head' in the way possible in a novel, meaning this method of character exposition is unavailable.
This is an idea that uses the kaleidoscopic model on narrating for mythology.
Instead of being either an emblem or an effect of some aspect of a person's personality, a physical trait could but need not function as a cause or condition of a psychological disposition or an ethical inclination. Note that in the one case, the stoutness functions as a symptom of the inclination to give in to one's appetites; in the other it serves as a symbol of "being hard to budge" presumably the person didn't grow stout because he refused to budge, but just so happens, fittingly, to be as potentially hard to budge physically as he is hard to persuade to change his ways, whatever these may be.
based on 84 review