When I was hired at my current job, I was given a battery of exams. One of them was for personality/suitability. The results showed, among other things, that I have a balanced look at things, and easily understand both sides of any conflict. In other words, I ride the fence a lot!
This could be a good or bad thing.
For one, according to the administrators, it makes me a bad candidate for being a manager. ‘They’ say it makes it hard for me to make a decision. On the plus side, it makes me easy to get along with, and a good advisor/arbitrator.
Well, aside from disagreeing about the manager thing, I have to admit they could be right. I often find myself in the role of peacemaker, whether among friends or relatives. And yes, I do have a hard time making up my mind about some issues. I see pros and cons, and am conflicted about which line to pursue. I welcome discussion with others. When I make a decision, though, I am able to defend it and explain why it is the right choice for me.
I owe this curse to my father. When I was a teen, we had long discussions about many subjects – from politics to current events to boys I wanted to date. He would grill me like a drill sergeant, bringing up items that he wanted me to consider, demanding that I defend my choices. Our discussions could get very vocal.
Years later my mother told me she hated to listen to us. She thought he was picking on me. She felt he was always negative to my positive, and that he always thought I made bad decisions. I wish we had discussed it back then.
You see, I enjoyed those conversations. I never felt he condemned my choices. I knew that he was just playing devil’s advocate, and his goal was to make sure I had considered all the alternatives before I settled on an action.
When I write, I get conflicted about my characters because of this pro-and-con thing. In my mind I develop backgrounds for each of them, so I know why they are greedy, or have homicidal tendencies, or don’t defend themselves. This enables me to reinforce whatever
actions they take, and be consistent. But it makes it difficult to think of them as ‘good’ or ‘bad’. Understanding both sides can do that to you.
(Many advisors tell us our characters should be sympathetic. I’d like to say mine are all sympathetic characters, but some of them end up with just no personality at all, and I have to go back and strengthen them.).
Does the reader NEED to know all that? I think at times it’s better not to reveal the background. If readers know too much, they can’t choose sides. And often the story requires them to cheer for someone.
Do you consider this at all? Is it just me? Weigh in!
Everyone should have to argue the “other” side, if only to strengthen his own arguments. Sometimes you even can convince yourself! (Debate should be a required course in school!)
Seeing both sides is a good thing and I have a feeling by this stage of life you know where you stand on the important thingos. Your dad was teaching you think. I’m still thinking about your questions about the characters we create. I prefer the background factors unfold with the story if they’re even necessary. Sometimes you just need a bad to persecute the good guy because there’s always one or two in the real world.
Only every day! I too see both sides to an argument. I’ve mostly considered this to be an asset, but it can be exhausting. I have a friend who says, ” I’d just like one day where I could see things as black or white.” I think those who see only one side of a situation are also more judgemental, or maybe not. hehe
Karen, I, too, consider it to be an asset – in spite of that ‘manager’ thing! In the long run, I think people respect my opinions because they know I consider things before rushing to a conclusion. But, shouldn’t a manager do that, too? Just sayin’….
and Yes, DJ – we need those villains…if only to make us love the heroes even more!