HOME | DD

oomizuao In reply to Captain-Kiryu [2017-04-14 01:31:02 +0000 UTC]

I was thinking about something like conservation-restoration, but that's called "restaurering" where I'm from so yeah, I meant restoration  I couldn't think of a better word to describe something that is both restored to it's original state of which it once was AND updating and improving it to a newer form/version at the same time Like an overhaul I guess? Maybe that would've been a more appropriate term; that I gave my story a good overhaul *googles the definition*  Yeah. "Overhaul", that's definitely the word I was looking for

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Captain-Kiryu In reply to oomizuao [2017-04-14 02:42:32 +0000 UTC]

Ah! I suppose it may be called "revising" as well

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

oomizuao In reply to mutat [2016-09-28 12:23:22 +0000 UTC]

Thank you so much for your comment. It really made me think (in a good way!).
I didn't want to or intend for Charles to be a "sexy villain" type of guy, but I can see how I made it appear as if that was my intention with this "new version" of him. I think it'll all make more sense in the novel, especially with how there's a lot of things I couldn't reveal in the artist's comment section - it was actually really tricky to give just a brief description like that without adding too much detail but still having it make sort of sense..?
I feel the character is still the same, the essence of him anyways - the way I see it. And that 'essence' is not based on his actions, but who he is beneath all that. Charles is one of the first characters from this character cast to have a full backstory - many other characters of mine had their story portray itself slowly but surely as time passed and I got to know them better. Lillith is a good example of a 'late bloomer' in regards of backstory, as she's been hard as heck to figure out but then she handed me a pile of missing pieces to her puzzle in one go last month. Charles' backstory pieces were already there from - ok, not the start, but veeery early on - and his backstory hasn't changed much at all. The tricky part with Charles was getting into his head; figuring out how he thinks. I've figured it out more now, but it's taken a lot of time and work, and as risky as it feels to say; the way he is here and the way you describe him to appear in your comment, is very much a 'disguise', or for the lack of a better word: an armor.
I personally want to avoid people sympathizing with Charles or pitying him, but I've come to realize that I can't really write him or any other character the way I want people to see them. Instead I have to just write the characters as they are from now on, and leave it to the readers to make up their own opinion.
I think Charles is someone who you could sympathize with and even feel sorry for if you got to know him and know all about him - from the start, from how his life was and what he's learned from his own experiences and problems.  I think that if you hypothetically put twenty characters through the same type of challenge/problem, you'd still end up with twenty different outcomes. Despite having been faced with the exact same challenge, they would all have dealt with it in their own, unique way. Some of them might look like they coped somewhat similarily, like there was a pattern, but there would still be individual variations. This is, I think, because there are so many factors that come into play, so many things that matter in that big equation, and to predict or try figure out the outcome before it happens, you'd have to know all those little details. To me this is another thing that makes it so challenging to write my characters in a way that is uniquely theirs and not influenced by what I want, what I feel or how I think they should act or speak. I've already interfered like that far too much and still do to some degree - but I am working on removing myself from that equation, metaphorically speaking.
I didn't alter Charles appearance like this because it felt cool or 'hot' or anything (although I can see why it may appear that I did), these changes happened partly because I interfered a little due to not seeing any logic in parts of how things were in the story, but mostly because it felt like it was supposed to be like that. Like it was one of those idea-paths that resisted the least. I'm still not 100% settled on the details surrounding his career, I do feel there is some resistance there, so I might tone some of it down until it feels like the pieces of the puzzle fits nicely again instead of feeling like I tried forcing the wrong piece into place with a hammer
I've focused the most on getting to know the characters themselves over the past two-ish years (after my hiatus I felt like re-starting the story, going back to the 'roots' and starting from scratch), and one of the little thought-experiments I did was to present them with a problem and see how they solve it; canon or non-canon, simply just to get to know them. The characters all feel much more like individuals now, and I've gotten to know them so well now that I can even remind myself before they do that "no way, they wouldn't say/do that..!" and then scrap that idea/piece instead of forcing the character to fit a situation just because I want things to go the way I want them to, you know? Like I see that the piece doesn't fit before I've layed it down, and then try it somewhere else instead of hammering it down (I do like metaphors, sorry..)

With Charles I had so many unanswered questions from the first 16 chapters that I posted here on DeviantART, and so most of his recent developement began with me deciding to work on finding the answers to those questions instead of just pretending I knew or that it wasn't important and stuff.. I knew my story was full of holes, and I've been working on fixing those and making sure every detail is as it should be. Some of the questions with Charles wasn't about him as a character as much as they were about his surroundings and trivial stuff - because the character was pretty much in place already, I just had to take the time to get to know him better. But his surroundings messed with that a lot.
There were too many 'what','how' and 'why's with the 'current lives' of Spike and Charles. Pretty much all I knew were that they lived in a close-to-dilapidated little house in the middle of the forest, far away from anyone. Spike went to school, Charles was at home getting drunk. Spike walked through the woods for over an hour every day to get to school, as there were no roads nearby and he'd have to walk really far anyways to get to the bus stop - which Charles wouldn't give him bus fare for. No one other than Sam knew that Spike lived with his uncle, and no one else even wondered about anything. He showed all sorts of signs of neglect and no one even raised an eyebrow - and to be fair, very few people would in real life too, sadly, but it made even less sense in this story because not even Saunders seemed to care..! And out of all the characters who would've cared about a kid's well being to ask scrutinizing questions to make sure he was taken good care of, Saunders would definitely have been that character. If 8-year old Spike had shown up at their door on the coldest of winter days not wearing winter clothes, Saunders would not only have asked questions but taken action. Either he'd tell Spike's uncle to make sure the kid was properly dressed for such weather, and/or offered to provide Spike with proper, warm clothing himself. He would definitely not just shrug it off and sent the poor icicle of a kid back out again later in the evening when he had to go home. No way; he'd offer to give him a ride home, or let him stay with Sam until morning when the sun was up again, insist that his uncle came to pick him up, or if none of the above; he'd make damn sure to pack him into some exaggeratedly warm clothes before letting him anywhere near a single snowflake, having made sure he'd gotten plenty of warm food and drink before that.
Saunders would have been the first to word his suspicion. He'd insist on contacting Spike's parents at the first sign of neglect, or in a kinder sense; to get to know them or invite them over too some day. He'd figure out Spike's actual living situation early on, and so Saunders and Charles would be bound to have conversed on at least one occation, most likely much more frequent. Charles would obviously want to avoid any suspicion or involvement with anyone of authority, and would have made some effort to make sure there weren't any suspicion. And I'm not saying Charles is super-intelligent, I'm just saying he's not stupid; he would've known or at least figuring out how to make sure he could let Spike leave the house without anyone getting suspicious of what went on inside the house. They could've come off as lower-class or even poor, and people would accept that as long as it didn't appear Spike was in any sort of danger - though some people woudn't have cared about that either - at least not bothered actually doing anything. I'd say it's Spike's friendship with Sam that ensures Spike's living conditions are improving, 'cause Saunders would definitely be one to ask questions.
And Charles would have to deal with that. Like improving things in Spike's life just to shut Saunders the hell up; proving that there was no reason to worry about Spike. "Spike showed up at our house with a black eye today.. Mind telling me how he got that?" A question like this would ensure that the next time Charles hit Spike, he'd be careful to not hit him anywhere visible. Any punishment that left marks would have been inflicted in areas on his body that could be covered up. He'd be even stricter with forcing Spike not to tell anyone, anything to make sure there would be no more questions.
The way Charles looks here might not be how he was when Spike was little; it might be the way he eventually became after many years of practicing being inconspicuous.

(omg I've rambled on for too long now; I'm running late for a meeting sorry for babbling, but thanks for your comment! I really appreciate it, as it made me think and made me aware and helps me keep in mind not to let him fall into any cliché category; sort of like a guideline on what not to do seriously; thanks )

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

mutat In reply to oomizuao [2016-10-02 01:45:58 +0000 UTC]

That's all good to hear. Helped clear up some of the questions that the singular post couldn't cover. I figured there was more to it, so I decided to bring up some of the immediate responses I had. I've always found that getting completely positive feedback is nice, but not always helpful.
In response to Charle's essence remaining the same, with his actions not, I totally get that. At the same time I'd caution to ask you if that is always applicable. This may be a bit much, but from an existentialist point of view, "existence precedes essence". Existentialism essentially states that man is not given a predetermined nature (or essence), and is instead free to choose/invent himself. Basically, a person's actions and choices create them. Cowards aren't born cowards, no matter what the environment they were abandoned into at birth. It is their actions that make them cowards. (This is all just my way of playing devils advocate).
There is simply no way a writer, as a person with their own set of bias, can write something that will appeal to everyone, or be absolutely free of any "errors" (Also, who would want that anyways?). An existentialist would also say that there is no one right answer to anything. Because humans are free to choose, with no "essence" to escape this burden that is freedom, humans must decide what they believe is the right thing to do. Of course this means that they do what they think anyone else would do in their shoes. Which from the sounds of it you have delved into to get the feel of the characters and to know their responses as individuals. 
I personally see a lot of truth in existentialism, but honestly that's going a bit off the edge there. Overall you have sound characters, all of whom you know quite well by now, so I understand that you're just cleaning up the details around them.
I'm going to quote Toni Morrison (she writes some pretty cool stuff, and also really likes metaphors) here and say, "If there is a book you want to read, but it hasn't been written yet, then you must write it". Cliches aren't a horrible thing, but sometimes they can take away from what YOU have to say as a writer, and your own voice/experience. So basically, glad you're keeping the characters true to the story, and making things fit together. Anyone can see that you've really challenged yourself, by being honest in getting your story to where you know it should be. Very happy for you and the progress you've made as an artist.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

oomizuao In reply to KyleWhisper4 [2016-09-21 13:57:07 +0000 UTC]

I'm glad to hear you're looking at the changes/upgrades that way ^_^ Thanks

Also, the plan is to have finished writing all of it by November 2017, the publishing-part comes afterwards. I want to send it to publishers first to try my best to give it the option of taking up some space in a bookstore-shelf And because I personally preferr physical books over e-books  but if that doesn't work, then ebooks and self-publishings are Plan B options, yes I just want to give Plan A my best shot first Also I know a handful of people in the publishing industry that I will most likely ask for advice before I sending the script anywhere to see if there's anything I can do to improve my chances (like tips on where I should send it first, whether I should send it to several publishers at once, or just whatever advice I might need ).
So unfortunately there are next to zero chances of it being published next year, but the script will have been completed by November next year, and that in itself it a huge step in the right direction. So from there on it's more hard work and fingers crossed to do what I can to see it published

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

brechdaslicht In reply to oomizuao [2016-10-01 14:59:19 +0000 UTC]

I hope it will be available as an ebook eventually (Kindle store perhaps?) because I don't think there's a high chance the physical book will make it to Greece (where I live) anytime soon I have a Kindle and it's really changed the way I read books. I was one of the people who said they preferred physical books too (I still love the small of a book and the way I can flip the pages and see at a glace how much I've read / how close I am to finishing it) but I hadn't actually ~tried~ e-reading. The two biggest advantages are the following: 1) you can carry hundreds of books with you and they only take up a tiny bit of space! 2) you don't have to sit in uncomfortable positions (especially in low light conditions) in order to be able to see the pages! I can read anywhere and for much longer due to less fatigue + being able to take my books with me anywhere

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

oomizuao In reply to red-mohawk [2017-01-10 04:06:55 +0000 UTC]

Sorry for the late reply.
Spike actually has a rather high degree of PTSD. The abuse has traumatised him badly and the effects it has had on his psyche shows in various forms. I mean, I could provide a really long list to be honest, but I'll let the novel speak for itself when it's done. Or if you're curious, read more about the effects of sexual assault in children, PTSD in both kids and teenagers, and see if you recognize Spike in any of it. I mean, there's no one recipe for how it affects someone, everyone has their own way of dealing with things, so Spike's symptoms might not necessarily match someone elses, etc..

Hatred was originally intended to be more of a self-defense mechanism his brain created, yeah. Sort of how major trauma can sometimes cause dissociative identity disorders. I used to speculate in whether or not Spike could suffer from that or even schizophrenia - which can also be triggered by childhood trauma and long term / acute stress - but the more I got to know Spike the less it fit with who he is, like, looking at who he is beyond the abuse part. I mean, the abuse is a huge part of his life, but it is not who he is.
Hatred isn't so much a mental disorder anymore as it is this nagging voice in his head that repeats negative things that Charles has made him believe. Hatred might still have been somewhat of a "Guardian Demon" type of imaginary friend Spike had when he was little, made to be scarier than the things that scared him - in order to protect him. But Hatred became less and less present the older Spike became, vanishing the most noticeably after Spike became friends with Sam. Before that he had no one else, you know?

Hatred isn't going to be in the story as a character, but mentioned in a way that somewhat acknowledges his "excistence". That there was at some point a 'creature' of sort that Spike communicated with, but more like a product of his own thoughts and imagination rather than a symptom.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

red-mohawk In reply to SaitirWolf [2016-09-05 04:24:56 +0000 UTC]

I never made that contrast between Saunders and Charles. Kinda shows that no one is really innocent or purely good. I like Saunders, but I frown upon how he gets his money.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SaitirWolf In reply to red-mohawk [2016-09-06 23:58:24 +0000 UTC]

I guess the rules of society make people confused about morality. Succesful dont mean the same as "good person", non succesful dont mean the same as "bad person".  Of course there is exceptions, but most of the people tend to judge according to the social status. I like Saunders too, i dont judge him because ...at least marijuana is the less worst of the drugs lol

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

BlueBlazeOwO In reply to J-Harper [2016-09-05 16:11:52 +0000 UTC]

GOSH, SAME

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

red-mohawk In reply to J-Harper [2016-09-04 05:22:15 +0000 UTC]

I don't know whether to laugh my ass off or not.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

oomizuao In reply to red-mohawk [2016-09-09 23:15:59 +0000 UTC]

^ what red said

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

red-mohawk In reply to oomizuao [2016-09-10 02:07:12 +0000 UTC]

I think you got the wrong person.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

oomizuao In reply to red-mohawk [2017-01-10 08:18:28 +0000 UTC]

Naw I agreed with you on not knowing whether to laugh or not Kinda like "I am sorry lol" I nearly spat my drink reading J-Harper's comment

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

red-mohawk In reply to oomizuao [2017-01-10 09:39:52 +0000 UTC]

But he's got a point. Charles is rather attractive in the 'gentlemanly' sense at first glance. I've been thinking more about that one chapter that threw probably the Spike fan base off even. This might not make much sense, but it gives me an idea of what Spike and Charles' relationship could have looked like if Charles hadn't tainted it. Make me wonder what skewed Charles' expression up. I think he genuinely wants Spike's love, but doesn't know how to get it, other than by force??? But I don't think this fucked up 'expression' happened over night.

Don't know why this suddenly came to mind. I was listening to a sermon by a guy named Afshin Ziafat. At some point he mentioned the arrest of this one pastor than molested children. What I found surprising was that Ziafat said when he heard about it, "God, save me!" rather than just bash the molester. "Because I know that didn't happen over night." I thought it was weird when I first heard it, but I think I get it now. People are complex, capable of turning good intentions into atrocities, sometimes unbeknownst until it's too late. I'm not sure if that's the case with Charles, but that one journal where you wrote he told you about certain emotions and things he wasn't sure about got me thinking more about it. Ehhh....does that make sense? 

The way you make villains reminds of the Chef guy from Treasure Planet. Very bad guy, but fleshed out.

I can't seem to stop going into the seriousness of your work.... Hope I'm being a Debbie Downer. But yea, Harper's reaction was priceless!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

oomizuao In reply to red-mohawk [2017-01-12 23:11:37 +0000 UTC]

I like to read your in-depth theories about my characters and story though But in one way it is somewhat frustrating? Poor choice of word maybe, sorry, but more like it makes me so tempted to just reveal the whole story and answer all your questions right away, but I know I can't/shouldn't cause I don't wanna ruin the reader experience when the novel is finished, you know? That type of 'frustrating'  

Charles has been a tricky character for me to figure out, or get to know, mostly because I've had this strong moral thing against him, like, subconsciously not wanting to hear him out fully because of how I despise his actions, you know? In order to really listen to this character I have to temporarily set my own thoughts and morals aside, which I try to do with all my characters so that they can just be themselves, but with Charles this has been particularly difficult. In the first 16 chapters (0-15) that I wrote, I just sort of wrote Charles the way it felt like he wanted to be written, if that makes sense? Charles has always been this character that I feel was a completed character right from the start, like how with him I never really had to imagine what he would do, say, think, etc, because he sort of 'wrote himself', you know? Even at the times when I felt he was too much or even too little or not in-character, he actually always was very much in-character.

Charles was the easiest to write accurately because I just left him alone, I guess. And maybe he's easier to write because he's the character I relate to the least, so I don't have to agree with him or feel like he does as much as just trying to see things from his point of view, like how he sees it, try to understand him without forcing him to change.

This "updated" version of him might seem like a forced change, but it felt like it got so easily accepted by the character too that it felt kinda like this was the way his own destiny wanted things to go. He is a complex character who does go through a lot of changes in his life. He is also very adaptable, in his own way.

I gotta pause there before I get too carried away

Charles is the most unpleasant character to write, yet he is somewhat the easiest one to write because of how he feels like he, idk, like he never changes as a character, mentally anyhow. He has these mental rules that he follows very strictly, rules that were there even years before I figured out what they were. He's heavy to write in the abusive scenes, that's the worst part to write because letting go of my own views and opinions in that moment is hard. It's emotionally exhausting because there's so much anger and sadness I have to silence in me to be able to actually write it from his point of view. So I hate that :-/ but in any other scene, he is so easy to write.
Most of my other characters have a new type of mood they're in each time I write them, so I have to sort of match their mood in my head when I write them. They're very dynamic that way, I suppose.

Charles however, seem to be very static, in comparison. Where everyone else seem to wear their heart on their sleeve, more or less, Charles keeps his way on the inside where barely he gets to see it. He has this way of appearing very cold both on the outside and inside most of the time, which has lead me to think he has psychopathic tendencies and/or traits, but he's been next to impossible for me to put a "psychological profile" on. I try not to box my characters like that, but it often helps a bit to try an psycho-analyse them to get a better idea of them sometimes. Where the other characters have usually been very easy to 'read' and 'define', that is the very place where Charles has seem the most dynamic in comparison.

But as I realised recently and as I mentioned previously in this here Wall Of Text (sorry ), really getting to the bottom of this character's mystery has been made more difficult for me by judging him by his actions and not see him as the person behind those actions. I still firmly stand by that I don't think he's actions towards Spike can be justified or reconciled by anything, but I had to look beyond that while writing Charles' character.

I'm rambling, sorry..

But I can't wait to show you the whole story

I can't wait to show everyone the whole story actually, because then I'll finally get to indirectly answer all of your questions

Hopefully even spark new questions as well I want the story to have some unanswered ones too, because rather than telling someone what to think I most of all want to encourage people to think for themselves and make up their own mind

Also; You mean Silver? the bobcat-cyborg-chef dude? I never really saw him as a villain, to be honest, but I might be biased there cause he's one of my favorite characters from the movie ^__^ (Top four; Jim, Doppler, Silver, Amelia. Doppler is almost nr 1 he is wonderful lol <3 ). But omg all the characters in that movie feel so well fleshed out, yeah O3O

And I hope I'm not being conceited to arrogant, but; I take it as a compliment that you think my way of making villains remind you of Treasure Planet

...and just to sound cocky and bragging on top of that lol  I.. I hate to admit it, but I halfways agreed with Harper XD I mean, Charles was always supposed to look handsome, sort of because I wanted to break the stereotypical cliché of the disgusting-looking abuser; I wanted the looks to be irrelevant (and deceiving! Which I guess is a cliché though ) and rather have the actions speak for themselves.

..But I never intended him to be, like, attractive Physically, I mean. Or, wait, that came out wrong too, right? Idk, like, if he hadn't been such a gun-range-live-target-practice-candidate type of guy, then it'd feel more ok I guess

Charles is like the apples of a Manchineel tree. Looks yummy, but if you knew what that apple does then you would stay the hell away from both the apples and the tree altogether. Like "Ooh, that's an interesting looking appl-.. AW HELL NO!!"

TLDR;

I like your theories. All will be answered in the final novel.

Treasure Planet is awesome.

Charles' looks = Yes but no thanks.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0