Your Window to Inspiration: Seamlessly Browse Tumblr!
hot take thatll probably get me bullied off this platform but those drawing where people draw their favorite fictional charcters with signs that say “free palastine 🍉” are just “hello kitty says acab” rebranded
AUGGH THERES SOMETHING ABOUT THE PARALLELS BETWEEN THE OKDER TWINS AND THE YOUNGER TWINS
Like how the younger twins have parallels between each of the older twins, but are still not them and super different just as much as they are similar!!
Like,
Stanford & Dipper (Dippers birthmark parallels Fords six fingers, they’re both nerdy and were bullied, etc.)
This one’s obvious, along with Stanley & Mabel (being the twin that feels ‘lesser’ or ‘dumber’ than the other, fear of being abandoned, etc.)
But people don’t notice and/or talk about the parallels between Stanley & Dipper and Ford & Mabel!!
Stanley & Dipper (Being weak and kinda wimpy as children, Stan related to him with that, both of them being stubborn and reckless, etc.)
Stanford & Mabel (They both can get way too absorbed in their own things that they forget about other peoples feelings, etc. I love Ford and Mabel so much and this isn’t meant to be mean.)
But then we see that the younger twins are still very much themselves, and not direct copies of the older twins, and I love that so much!!
feeling frustrated while being in the closet and living with other people who dont know im trans, having to hide my art so they dont suspect a thing is really exhausting. it prevents me from doing bigger and more explicit paintings :c
(btw my commisions are open so I can save up to start hrt)
A character doesn’t need a flaw to be compelling.
In writing discourse, I often see the advice to give your protagonist and such a weakness of some kind, a personal ‘flaw’, otherwise they’ll be boring. Which, I’m gonna do the controversial thing and just…disagree. Straight up.
That’s not to say the advice can’t be useful. It is, for a lot of new writers. But it’s not the ONLY way to write good characters. In fact, I think overly relying on it is a detrimental to a writer’s work. It limits a writer’s options, subconsciously. If a character can only be interesting with flaws, then flaws are what makes a character interesting…and then everything else gets underdeveloped.
When I say ‘everything else’, I mean things that are easily overlooked. Things like philosophy and worldview. Things like how their traumatic backstory changes how they see, experience, think and feel. Not just in terms of trauma. In terms of mindset. Stuff that is harder to develop, takes a bit more than than just making lists of strengths and weaknesses.
Because the way one thinks is so, so different to personality, and if you don’t consider it? All the characters will simply share your beliefs. That’s bad. That’s very bad. Characters need diversity. They need to have different values. Things like whether or not it’s worth to go to war over a trivial village. Things like how they view authority, those beneath them, those on their level, among other things. Beliefs won’t necessarily be political opinions.
Like, a character can become interesting without having a single personality flaw. They can lack flaws and still not be glorified.