: Re: If I remove the capacity for one of the primary flaws, is it inevitable I end up with a boring character? In this world, there are mortals (human beings) and divine beings (gods/goddess). The

@Annie587

Vote Up Vote Down

I agree with a lot of what @seallussus said. Let me just add some thoughts.
Just because a character has one great virtue -- courage, in this example -- doesn't mean he can't be flawed in many other ways.
I was amused that @seallussus mentioned Hamlet and I was thinking of the very same character. If you haven't read the play, you might read it. Hamlet is not particularly a paragon of courage, I mean, the point of the story isn't how brave he is. But he's an excellent example here because he faces many problems, none of which have anything to do with lack of courage. He wants to avenge his father's death, he's prepared to go up against the king himself to avenge his father's death. But he doesn't, not because of a lack of courage, but because he isn't sure of the king's guilt.
A person who has perfect courage could still have difficulties for all sorts of reasons.
Lack of information: He would bravely fight anyone to avenge a wrong ... but he doesn't know who the guilty person is.
Moral challenges: Sure, he'll face any danger to achieve his goals. But his goals are morally questionable, and ultimately he realizes this and struggles. For example, he faces many dangers in a pursuit of power and wealth, but at some point he asks himself, Am I right to pursue power and wealth so ruthlessly? I've killed people just because they stood in the way of me becoming king (or whatever). Did they deserve to die for challenging my ambition? Or maybe something less dramatic depending on the context, but same idea.
Complexity: Many problems cannot be solved by the application of raw courage. If you can't get your car to start, the problem is probably not that you aren't brave enough. It may be that you don't have the knowledge, maybe you don't have the skill, the right tools, etc.
It occurs to me that a story about a character with perfect courage could be an interesting vehicle to discuss just what perfect courage is and its role in achieving objectives. You mentioned a balance between cowardice and recklessness. A character with perfect courage might nevertheless struggle with where the balance falls. Maybe some times he takes unnecessary risks because he prides himself on his courage and is unwilling to back down. Or maybe, especially on one crucial instance, he overcompensates and backs down from a fight because he doesn't want to be reckless. Etc. Likewise, you could portray when he can solve problems by rushing full steam ahead and taking on any danger, versus when he tries this and fails anyway because the problem cannot be solved by being courageous, it calls for intelligence or diplomacy or whatever. Indeed, courage could be a liability at times, if it leads you to try to solve a problem with violence or assertiveness, and this backfires and leads the other side to fight back, but a more diplomatic approach might have succeeded. Etc.

(0)

Login to post a comment!