Wish-Fulfilment Characters

Strong female leads or female characters with a lot of skills are often called a ‘Mary Sue,’ but this post is not about the Mary Sue. It’s about wish-fulfilment characters in general. The Mary Sue is one type, actually named for a parody of the over-candied characters fan-fiction writers were putting in their stories as their own representations. Wish-fulfilment isn’t limited to fan-fiction, though.

To a certain degree, an author puts some of themselves into every character they create - at least into every main character. Heroes, villains, foils, damsels, they all hold a little bit of the author who has created them. Not much in some cases, sometimes only an idea or a half-forgotten memory about another character of that kind the author has seen in a TV show when they were a little kid, but a bit.

So, wish-fulfilment for the author. But not only for the author, because the reader also has wishes to fulfil. It’s not a coincidence that heroic fantasy booms in times where people’s lives are boring. Men are looking to the fantasy heroes who bring down whole kingdoms and can have every woman they want. That’s escapism - and escapism is perfectly okay. One big problem is, however, that male heroes get away with that larger-than-life existence, but female heroes don’t. They get called ‘Mary Sue’ instead - but that is another story entirely.

We all have different interests and tastes, so different kinds of heroes are wish-fulfilment for us. The physically weak office worker looks at a muscled barbarian who easily defeats a whole army with his mystical sword in his large hands, swinging it with all the might of his bulky, strongly-muscled arms. The poor factory worker looks at a suave millionaire who simply can’t do wrong in business and leads a life of parties, women, and trips to exotic locations. The long-married wife looks at the good-looking, shirtless pirate the heroine of the newest erotic novel swoons against and will definitely end up in bed (or other comfortable places) with over the course of the book. The teenage girl with the overly-long limbs and the body which doesn’t really fit together looks at the similar girl in the romantic comedy who is transformed into a perfect princess who will end up with the best-looking guy in the whole book. It’s always a good dose of wish-fulfilment. And the author who writes about the muscled barbarian, the suave millionaire playboy, the immensely satisfied erotica heroine, or the little teenage duckling who is a princess swan also sometimes wishes to be those people, if only for a few hours. So, yes, a lot of literature is wish-fulfilment on both sides. And that’s perfectly okay - stories are for reading and enjoying, so whatever tickles your fancy when it comes to stories, it’s okay to read it and enjoy yourself.

A wish-fulfilment character who is too perfect and often doesn’t even allow for any tension or conflict in the story (because they can easily solve all problems) is definitely bad writing, though - not so much in fan-fiction, but if you really want to sell what you write.

Conflict is always an important point. A story needs conflict (which doesn’t necessarily mean violence, but something which needs to be resolved), because otherwise it’s boring. With a badass character who can do everything, that conflict is difficult (which is why it’s much harder to write an interesting Superman story than to write an interesting Batman story - Superman has too many powers and too few weaknesses).

It’s also, if you want to write several stories about that character, a question of stakes. You need stakes which are high enough to make things interesting (and the more competent the hero, the higher the stakes). For every new story in the series, you need new stakes. If the first story is about your character easily saving the world, what will your second story be about? The character saving the planet system? Number three will be about saving the galaxy, then, I imagine. After number four, where they save the universe, it’s over, because you’ve run out of more stakes.

Give your hero weaknesses, let them fail at some stuff. I know that’s probably not wish-fulfilment - because we all want to win. But failing at something doesn’t mean the end - it means that your hero will raise the stakes, will work on getting better and not failing again. That makes the win in the end earned and much better. We all want for our favourite character to win in the end, but to make the story interesting and to keep us invested, it can’t all be smooth travelling. There need to be bumps in the road. Even Conan the Barbarian gets defeated every now and again - just not for very long and it never ends well for his enemies.

When you’re writing a hero, there are a few questions you should ask yourself.

First of all, how does the hero fit with my story? Depending on how the story should run, a specific hero might not work with it. If you want for a story to be all about how intrigues and politics are played, a warrior will not make for a good main character, because politics and intrigues are not what they’re used to and can work with. They’ll be totally out of their element and it’s highly unlikely for them to master them to a satisfying degree. On the other hand, a long-term politician who is completely used to the whole situation won’t be a good main character, either, because they’re too good at it and have no more space for improvement.

Does my hero have appropriate weaknesses for the story? Let’s run with that political intrigue again here. Your hero is a member of a ruling family, so used to politics, but still very young. What weaknesses do they have? They’ll be inexperienced, because learning something in theory isn’t the same as practicing it. They won’t have a large network of favours they’re owed, so there’s not much string-pulling behind the scenes. Perhaps they’re a little too outspoken as well and find it hard to fit in perfectly. They’re not exactly a square peg in a round hole, but they’re a little egg-shaped and don’t fit the hole too well.

How can my hero improve? Again with that intrigue story. The hero will gain experience as they attend political meetings. They’ll meet people and start to network. Perhaps an old friend of the family will take them under their wings and teach them a little about the practical side and introduce them to a few key figures. They’ll learn to think before they speak eventually, after having destroyed a few useful alliances which need to be rebuilt.

Only if your hero fits with the story, has weaknesses which will show in the story (no ‘they can’t swim’ in a story without large bodies of water or suchlike), and can improve on those weaknesses, you have a character who will be interesting to read about. Sure, we all want for our characters to be the best of the best and do everything perfectly (because we know we can’t), but they will be more interesting, even during the writing process, if they’re not. Showing a badass character can scratch some itches, but showing a character become a badass is one of the best kinds of stories out there.

When you get the feeling that things are going too smoothly for your character, you should look at them closely and ask yourself whether you’ve written an idealized wish-fulfilment version of yourself or whether you’re missing a few bumps in the road for a character who can be bothered by them. Remember: wish-fulfilment characters aren’t evil incarnated, but they need careful guidance not to become boring.

Defying The Standards

Over time, at least in western media, certain standards have been developed. If you merely write about a ‘hero,’ people will have a similar picture in mind, no matter their own ethnicity, gender, or sexual interest. They’ll all see your hero as a straight, white man. And it sucks in so many ways. There’s the obvious reasons, such as ignoring minorities. There’s also less obvious ones, though. Using heroes with other backgrounds leads to more interesting, less ‘same old’ stories, among other things.

It’s not hard to see how the Straight White Dude, as I like to call him, became the standard hero figure. For a long while, the West criminalized homosexuality, so having a hero who wasn’t straight would have been an affront to the morals of people (and to the laws, even though an imaginary person can’t be incarcerated). Throughout the long history of Europe colonizing other areas of our planet, white people were dominating wherever they went. They made a horrid mess of countries in Africa by paying no heed to the ethnicities living there and creating borders wherever it suited them. They ruled with a strong hand, taking slaves, taking resources the areas really needed. Other areas of the world, be they in Asia, the Americas, or even Australia and other areas in the Pacific, were treated no better. The white man came, saw, and conquered with a horrid regularity. Women were not taken for equal for a long time, either, so the hero has to be a man, right? Well, that’s what this post is about.

And even though the colonies are gone by now, the problems remain. White is beautiful, so people not white by nature try their best to look white - Africans and African-Americans straighten their hair, because straight hair is white and that looks better. Asian people dye their hair blond (which usually turns out orange) and do surgery to make their eyes more ‘European.’ People bleach their skin, because ‘white’ skin is better than dark skin. It’s the whites who do it the other way around, curl their hair or tan their skin - because they can afford to try and look less white. Homosexuality is frowned upon and still criminalized in parts of our planet. Even where it’s legal, people still have a lot of prejudices which make it harder the moment you’re not clearly heterosexual. Having more positive characters in media who are not heterosexual, not white, and not identifying as male (whether they are identifying as female or as something else) would be great and would help a lot with that problem. Normally, everyone should assume the hero of a story, if not described otherwise, looks like them.

What do you get out of defying the standards and not using the Straight White Dude? First of all, you get a more memorable main character, because it’s easy to mix up all those Straight White Dudes. If your character is not standard, chances are readers will remember them for a bit longer. Of course, some will be annoyed that they are not getting their regular hero (especially straight, white men, perhaps, but some of them might approve of something a bit different, too). There’s no pleasing everyone, so you shouldn’t base your decision for a main character on that, though.

You will also get a character who might approach things from a different angle, perhaps not being quite as strong as the Straight White Dude or not quite as influential or not trained as a fighter. That will lead to different stories with different things happening, which is also something a lot of your audience will like.

Personally, I love casting against expectations and not using the regular standards, because it leads me on different paths (as a discovery writer, I never know quite where the story will end and, with an unusual main character, there are even more paths open to me). It means I can’t just write the same story others have written before, because the usual solutions might not be open to my main character, but then, who just wants to rehash other people’s stories? People who just copy a bestseller in order to cash in on its success, I guess, but that’s not me. And, just for the books, that ‘copy the formula and get rich’ plan usually doesn’t work. Bestsellers more often than not are made by the moment they’re released - it’s not so much a formula than being in the right place at the right time. That, too, is no reason to play it safe.

There is, of course, also a reason to use the standard model - if it fits best with the story you have in mind. I’m not saying that you should never use the Straight White Dude again, since he does have his uses. What you shouldn’t do, is think that he’s the only possible hero type around. Or the only hero type safe to use. That’s a weakness of Hollywood at the moment - they rather remake old movies than risk doing something new and unique. And then they’re surprised that people aren’t really hot on the movies, because they’ve seen the originals and like them more - nostalgia is a powerful force, but can work in unexpected ways.

When you start a new story, ask yourself whether you need Mr. Straight White Dude or whether another hero, not straight, not white, not male, perhaps even neither, will serve you as well or even better. Think about what having that other hero in your story might change about it, which new solutions to problems, which new conflicts you can find this way. Just don’t try to make it all about the ‘otherness’ of the hero - or to tell people who really are part of that part of the population what their lives are like. Chances are they know that better than you do. If you want to make the problems a specific minority faces a major plot point of your story without being part of the minority, you should definitely interview people beforehand and you should have some sensivity readers who will check the finished text and tell you if and where you were wrong. If they’re not a major plot point, you can simply use a character who is not Mr. Straight White Dude and ignore those specific problems.

Defying the standards can be fun and also very satisfying. It means not always being able to follow a regular formula, but it definitely helps with writing something more unique, to stand out from the regular crowd. It also may make your process of writing much more interesting, because you will have to explore different aspects of the character and figure out how they would handle a certain situation. So why don’t you try it out and see if you like it? You can always return to Mr. Straight White Dude, if you don’t.

Manage Your Wants And Needs

Wants and needs in the context of the story mean what your character wants to achieve and what your character needs to realize. Quite often, your main character will have a clear goal in mind, such as fame, love, or acceptance. Yet, their way of achieving that goal tends to be flawed - or blocked, in some way, by the antagonist. However, as in real life, what your character wants often is not what they need. They might not even want to be heroes, but just stay where they are and lead a regular life! Unbelievable, I know, but it can happen.

This is where the needs come in. Your character might just want to be famous for fame’s sake, but they will have to learn that fame isn’t everything. They need to learn that, as a matter of fact, to put into perspective what they want. Or they will need to learn that love can’t be forced and that only be accepting their love interest they way they are, they have a chance to win love. Or that you can’t be accepted by pretending to be someone else, but need to be accepted as the person you are, because there’s a lot of aspects you can’t change about yourself. Needs can also be different, though. An arrogant main character might have to learn humility or a meek character might need to develop some confidence (Alex is such a case).

Identifying your character’s want and need is an important part while you’re working on the story, no matter whether you start writing immediately or whether you are a plotter and planner. Both need to figure into your story and they need to be connected. Whenever you wonder why the climax of a story didn’t really work for you, chances are someone didn’t connect the wants and needs and made the black moment (where the character is at their lowest and has to face the need) unconnected to the actual climax for the character.

An example.

Say your character wants to be famous and has an ample amount of arrogance. Their need, clearly, will be to learn humility. The climax of such a story could be the main character no longer arrogantly assuming they can do everything, but instead asking for help with a task which is beyond their skills. The black moment, the need, should be the main character trying to do the task or something similar by themselves and failing, dampening their arrogance and showing them they’re not as perfect as they thought they are. Throughout the story, show the character being arrogant, more focused on their own skills than on what they’re actually doing with them. Focused on becoming a famous … whatever skills you want to give them, it doesn’t matter whether they’re warriors, singers, athletes, or something completely different. As soon as they have a marketable skill, they can become famous for it, after all. Let’s say they’re a singer, because the ‘warrior needs to learn to rely on others’ trope is used pretty often. So, you show them sail through the first few levels of a singing contest, treating other singers like dirt. They do not pay attention to the rules of the rounds much, either, but instead just do their thing. In the semi-finals, they’re giving a duet to sing, but they refuse to practice the song together with the other singer - and fail because of that. That is the black moment, because basically seconds before the ultimate goal they’re out of the running. But then they are given a last chance: the other duet didn’t perform much better and the semi-finals will be repeated. They’ve learned from their mistake and realized that their skills alone will not carry them through all tests. They have also learned to respect the other singer in their team who practiced long and hard, so this time, they work together with that other singer and make it together. They win the semi-finals and have to go up against their team-mate in the finals. Instead of looking down on the other singer, they give their best and respect that the other one is also giving their best. In the end, they win, but only by a small margin.

In this example the want (fame) and the need (humility) are connected by the character’s arrogance. Because the character is arrogant, they think they deserve fame more than everyone else and they’re prepared to do whatever it takes - not just practicing, but also putting others out of the running. When they’re humiliated, they have to rethink their strategy so far and they realize that their arrogance sabotaged them. They learn not to think they’re better than everyone else and, thus, manage to prove they’re worthy of the title, not only because of their skill, but also because of their character.

A bad example?

Your character wants to be accepted by their family, but the family is made up of proud warriors and your character is simply not good at fighting and has no real interest in it. The character still joins the military and trains hard to become the fighter they think they have to be. They become good at what they do, are respected and even adored by people. The black moment comes when someone calls them conceited and proves they’re not as good as they thought they were. In the climax, they train even harder to prove themselves stronger and better and win the day. Doesn’t really fit together? That is because the need (humility) has nothing to do with the want (acceptance). The lesson for the character to learn should be that they can be accepted they way they are, not the way they think they need to be. But both black moment and climax completely ignore the actual want and are completely focused on a need which is not in alignment with the want.

What should have happened, is that a skill or trait which the character always had, but ignored to fit in with the family, comes to their aid. They were sent out to deal with a very powerful enemy, say, and in the black moment they’re forced to realize that they can’t do anything against that enemy with their warrior skills. But they’ve been very empathic before, it was one of their ‘weaknesses,’ and so when they catch up with the enemy again, they talk to that enemy and come to an agreement. The enemy leaves, the country is saved, and they have proven that their weakness never was a weakness, that they can do something great with a trait which their family thought was bad. That gets the family to change its stance and accept them the way they are. Here, both the want (acceptance) and the need (to accept themselves and realize that they don’t have to change to suit other people) fit together.

Ask yourself what your main character wants and what they really need. Then find a way to combine the two. That might happen through a trait or skill which fits with both (as with the arrogance example). Always ask yourself if the climax of your story fits with what you have promised in the beginning (including the want) and, if not, whether not keeping the promise still works out. Generally speaking, you should try to always keep your promises, because your audience wants for things to work out as they should. The audience usually wants to see the hero succeed, which means getting what they want, but by accepting their need and growing as a character.

Writing A Series

There’s a difference between writing a stand-alone novel and writing a series. It’s mostly setting up other things which might run along as you expand the universe of your series, as new characters enter and old ones might retire. You might also want a plot arc or two which reach further than just one book, which might not be fully finished within the first novel they’re in. I usually avoid that, although the Syndicate in Knight Agency 5 and ongoing might count as one.

I admit that the first Knight Agency novel, “Secret Keeper,” wasn’t planned as the beginning of a series, but while I was writing it, I soon realized that I had enough material for more stories and that I wanted to continue writing Jane’s adventures. So I continued, drawing on running gags like Steven’s ruined suit, trying to establish some specifics (like the ‘brat/old man’ thing, the berserk, or Jane’s tendency to get up late).

When I wrote the first story about the Black Knight Agency, I already knew I wanted to go on. The first novel, “Criminal Ventures,” was meant to set everything up and establish not just the other Jane, Steven, Brock, etc, but also the Black Knight Agency at the end. I made it an origin story of sorts, which is why it starts with Jane as a ten-year-old in the foster care system and not, like “Secret Keeper,” with Jane as an established agent of twenty-five.

Would I change that today? No, I wouldn’t. I feel that Jane Doe needs the origin story, the background of abusive foster homes, the strange way in which a criminal mastermind raised her - well, that reality’s Steven did. Jane Browne has some background, told through memories during the first three novels - Jane at ten, eleven, twelve, and thirteen. There’s also mention of her being caught making out at fifteen. But Jane Browne is all about being a secret agent. Jane Doe needs the background to explain her knowledge and skills as the former right hand of a criminal mastermind.

The John Stanton novellas which make up the first volume of “John Stanton - Agent of the Crown” came one by one, but it was clear to me early that I wanted to write several stories about John and his adventures, so I started building the world and the background in the first one, “The Case of the Modern Bluebeard,” and continued with it afterwards. The Loki Files, on the other hand, are finished, as far as I am concerned, so Volume 1 and Volume 2, six stories overall, will be all about this version of Loki and his adventures. I had a great run with them and they showed me I could write something again (after years of not really finishing a story), but after the sixth novella, I knew the end had come. Loki had had a lot of adventures, he was married, he’d found his final place in Asgard’s society, and he’d become the foster father of a small griffin. It was time to leave him to his own devices, as fun as most of the writing was (I did have quite a bit of a fight with “Heart of Ice,” since I, too, suffered from a slight depression for a while).

On the other hand, when I wrote my current book, “Alex Dorsey,” it became clear very early on that this one was going to be a standalone novel. I have no idea what else I should write about Alex. She’ll have had her personal development by the end of the book, the problems which I laid out for her will have been solved, she will even have found love. What else should I tell about her? She deserves a bit of peace and quiet after the time she’s had.

I also want for the Magpies to be a series, so “One for Sorrow” (out now!) will not remain the only adventure of Inez and Tom, but I’m not quite sure what the next one will bring for them - although I know the title, “Two for Joy.” I do have potential titles for ten novels about them - which is more than the Knight Agency as my longest-running series currently has. “Grave Diggers” is number eight and “Ignition Rites” (working title) will be number nine.

Writing a series of stories can be a challenge. Each book, I believe, should be a standalone, even if parts of what is happening make more sense if you read the full series. I started the Syndicate theme in “Changing Times,” because I wanted another challenge for Jane - organized crime goes deeper than just the regular variety. Then I realized it would be unlikely for it all to be over in one story, so I continued it in “Death Dealer,” diving deeper into the mechanics of the organisation. I’ve been taking a break from the Syndicate with “Grave Diggers,” though, and don’t currently plan to bring them back for “Ignition Rites.” Afterwards, all is fair game.

Perhaps that is up to my kind of writing, though. I see the stories about Jane, Inez, and John as some sort of pulp - adventure yarn for reading when you’re in the mood. It helps to read them in order, because I introduce new characters which will stay over time, such as Cedric Thornton in “A Plague of Rogues” or Manju Overton in “The Case of the Goddess’ Assassin,” which will be part of the second volume of John Stanton. If you just want to jump in with a story which sounds interesting, though, there’s no reason why you shouldn’t. I tend to mention things from past stories which will be important for the current one in the story itself, so it should be possible to enjoy the story without having read the other parts of the series.

For my kind of writing, this works. Even though certain things have an impact on the series as a such, the stories themselves are not heavily based on each other. For other kinds of writing, for epic fantasy novels, for instance, it might not work. But even then you should have plots which finish within the book they’re in. Do not try to make all plots last three or four or five books - that might tire out the audience and they may just stop reading this story and go read something else instead. People want closure and that means having some plot arcs which finish within a book and not two books later. ‘It gets explained in the next book’ is not a good excuse for something which the audience can’t understand in this one. After all, the next book might be years away or never come at all.

Writing a series comes with its own challenges. You’re playing an even longer game than with a novel, but on the other hand, you can also include a lot more ideas. It all depends on which characters you base the series around, so find someone like a secret agent, a criminal, or an up-and-coming jewel thief to write about - a character who can be trusted to have interesting adventures. And try to stay away from cosy mysteries when it comes to long series - it gets unrealistic when an amateur stumbles from one case to the next.