Example: It was a bit dim in the church; much of the light that filtered in took on the colors of stained class, sending patterns of light across the wooden floors. The walls were stone but the rows of pews were wood, and they led to a simple altar at the front of the large room. A Western man in black mopped the floor in front of the altar. He hummed to himself while swaying rhythmically. His light-colored hair was flattened against his head by a pair of giant headphones wired to a music player on his hip.

I’ve written on dialogue in manga before, and a lot of those rules still apply. But the two biggest points to remember are: 1.) not everyone speaks in exactly the same way but also 2.) most people don’t speak all that differently, either. Unless you’re talking about people on the extreme edges of the social spectrum, like a street punk vs a king, the differences in dialogue between people is usually subtle. People who are supposed to be speaking formally USE CONTRACTIONS. Not as often as people who are speaking slang, but they still use them. Look, even a really polite person isn’t going to say “I do not want to do that.” They say “I don’t want to do that.” They DON’T say “I don’t wanna do that.” That would be your slangy character. Do you see the difference? It’s subtle. Slurred but common expressions (like “wanna” and “gonna”), cursing, and vocabulary are the easiest ways to vary up dialogue between characters with different speech patterns. Once you get a little more experienced, differences in grammar and word choice can also differentiate characters from one another. But really, don’t try too hard to make your character speech patterns distinctive unless you know what you’re doing, because formal people NOT USING CONTRACTIONS EVER and slangy people having really elaborate (and sometimes inconsistent) accents are obvious marks of an amateur. And yes, I did it when I was younger, too.

Distinctive characters:

I think the best method for creating a cast of distinctive characters boils down to one thing: moral codes. Each character should have a list of “wills,” “won’ts” and “mights.” Extreme ends of the spectrum include a character who will do everything for everyone and is all things to all people vs a character who’s pure evil and only does thing for self-gain and the pain of others. In general, don’t use those archetypes unless you're writing a morality play or a comedy. But every character should have a moral code somewhere between the extremes that drives most of her conduct. Is this person nice, but only when it’s easy? What about someone who's really rude, but only because she believes in honesty above all things? What about a “lawful evil” person, who’s driven entirely but self-gain but will only go as far as she can manipulate the system? There’s a reason D&D makes you pick an alignment during character creation: it’s the core of a character. It’s okay to have grey area, aka the “mights,” because that means the character will eventually have to deliberate and make a choice about something--which is usually a good place for character and/or plot development. Just don’t leave the grey area too big AND make sure the moral codes differ, because otherwise you get crappy soap opera stuff. I tried watching The Tudors a few years ago, and after it became clear that every character was driven by the desire for money, sex, and power, I stopped watching. Why bother? Every character acts the exact same way as she strives for the most money, sex, and power.

Other than the moral code, two other big areas of character creation are “general personality type” and “how she reacts under stress.” I’ll use Tokyo Demons as an example, since the cast is humongous and we had to get pretty distinctive:

Sachi: friendly and talkative; gets quiet and/or scared, but never cries

Kiyoshi: nice, simplistic, not much of a talker; cries

Kadoyuki: soft-spoken and evasive; panic attacks (crying, shaking, vomiting)

Then, after that, try and think of the one trait that best describes the summation of everything you’ve put together (a sort of "shortcut description"). Then you can do the more superficial stuff: what a character looks like, likes and dislikes, etc. If you're lucky enough to be working with a good artist, your characters get more dynamic through further interpretation. Of course, most people don't only create Japanese schoolboys who look very similar.

	Name: Sachi Ishida Age: 16 Likes: Urban teenage hang-outs: arcades, karaoke, etc. Dislikes: Insects, having to wear his glasses Description: Sachi is a chatterbox, but he’s also kind and honest, which becomes invaluable when the chips are down. He’s always been drawn to shy classmates and actively pursues them; their negative reactions to him makes him reconsider his tactic of "talking makes everything better," since he learns (the hard way) that introverts need a lot of space. Empathetic but naive. "Shortcut" defining trait: Kindness
	Name: Kiyoshi Honda Age: 16 Likes: Sports, TV variety programs, and junk food Dislikes: Needles and haircuts Description: Kiyoshi is a slightly dim teenager who’s been in love with a very normal girl named Mai since junior high. Despite his athletic nature, he eats complete crap, but it fortunately doesn't slow him down. He gave up archery (against everyone’s wishes) once he entered high school in order to purse soccer. He has an uncanny knowledge of television dramas, since his late mother used to force him to be her "watching buddy" because of her exaggerated emotional response to them. "Shortcut" defining trait: Innocence
	Name: Kadoyuki Yoshimoto Age: 15 Likes: Mystery novels, sweets Dislikes: Gym class Description: Kadoyuki has a long and troubled past with his abusive family; if he’s found a coping mechanism, it doesn’t seem to be helping. Intelligent but nervous, Kadoyuki is used to fending for himself, but his terrible circumstances force him into adulthood and self-reliance well before his time. "Shortcut" defining trait: Growth

Don't be lazy when creating characters; if you only go through the easier steps, such as describing the character in one simplified trait, you run the risk of ending up with a cliché. “Kindness” isn’t enough to define a character--but someone who's kind and follows the moral code of “treat others as you want to be treated” even if that means hurting her own self-interest? That's kindness with a little depth. If you switch that moral code to “kind because she has an ego and wants other people to love her, but she’ll stop the minute it gets in the way of her popularity”? That’s kindness with a catch.

Good luck. I may update this post over time.

© Lianne Sentar, July 2011