[ SECRET POST #2791 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2791 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 058 secrets from Secret Submission Post #399.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - posted twice ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

"female character who stands there and lets everything bounce off an impenetrable will of iron"

I kind of ... like those characters? Male or female, really. I have a lot of love for the 'determinator' trope, and the phrase 'will of iron' always makes me automatically perk up and become interested. It's not always done well, of course, that's true of most things, but I like that character type.

It's not the only way to do a strong character, I agree. It is however a way to do it, if you get them right? You can have a strong character who fits this mould, so long as they're compelling enough to carry it.

There's no single way to make a good character. You can have single characters that are awesome in defiance of the story around them, and you can have truly contemptible characters that work brilliantly with their story, and a range of combinations in between. If the character is compelling enough to make the audience engage with them, then they've managed at least one measure of 'strength', whether that's the internal strength to be admirable or the narrative strength to be interesting.

Which may be part of your point, yes, that a character needs to be well-written, but a well-written character can also be an iron-willed survivor or an action heroine or anything else that happens to work. You don't have to pick just one.

SA

[(Anonymous)]

I hate html. Without the mess:

"female character who stands there and lets everything bounce off an impenetrable will of iron"

I kind of ... like those characters? Male or female, really. I have a lot of love for the 'determinator' trope, and the phrase 'will of iron' always makes me automatically perk up and become interested. It's not always done well, of course, that's true of most things, but I like that character type.

It's not the only way to do a strong character, I agree. It is however a way to do it, if you get them right? You can have a strong character who fits this mould, so long as they're compelling enough to carry it.

There's no single way to make a good character. You can have single characters that are awesome in defiance of the story around them, and you can have truly contemptible characters that work brilliantly with their story, and a range of combinations in between. If the character is compelling enough to make the audience engage with them, then they've managed at least one measure of 'strength', whether that's the internal strength to be admirable or the narrative strength to be interesting.

Which may be part of your point, yes, that a character needs to be well-written, but a well-written character can also be an iron-willed survivor or an action heroine or anything else that happens to work. You don't have to pick just one.

[dreemyweird]

I don't think either the OP or the author of the tumblr post in the screenshot deny this, though! Rather, they're annoyed by the fact that people seem to automatically assume a character is "strong" because it's written in a particular way.

(I do, however, agree with your view).