Stoppard v Fowles: Characters
Characters are the most important aspect of a good story. They steer the audience through as they move on their own journey. A good character can influence that audience’s own views or actions, draw them closer into the story or create fandoms of loving members but a poor character can disinterest the audience, confuse them and this results in driving them away from the story entirely.
Tom Stoppard with the limited time available in a play such as Arcadia purposely created unrealistic characters in his play to force the audience to think about their actions and relationships and this allows for a successful play. Whereas John Fowles with The French Lieutenant’s Woman was able to use all 445 pages of his novel to define what he wanted his characters to be and how the audience should feel about them.
Round One: Stoppard
Stoppard himself claims that his characters “aren’t realistic in any sense” and he couldn’t be any closer to the truth. Thomasina’s genius, Chater’s ignorance, Bernard’s timidness and the unwelcome relationship Septimus has with Thomasina are all examples of this.
The audience is exposed to Thomasina and her genius extremely early in the play, as it rightfully so, makes up her character. Only in this first scene does she theorise that “if you stop every atom in its position … you could write the formula for all the future”, confusing both Septimus and the entire audience. Now; it cannot be denied that her genius is impressive however, it seems quite unrealistic for both: A. Thomasina talking on such a complicated topic just after talking about sex with her teacher and B. Her talking about this at all as a 13-year-old living in the 1800s. Thomasina’s theory predates any similar theory devised by career mathematicians and physicists — but Stoppard is lucky no one in the audience knows this.
Luckily, we do not have to turn many more pages to find our next best example. Upon finding out Septimus had sex with his wife, Chater (rightfully so) asks Septimus if he “will fight [him] or not.” This response is seen as absolutely acceptable to the viewer but only one page later do they watch Chater “welcome [Septimus’] regard”. This exchange undoubtedly, has had people as they’re watching the play in the past (as I did while reading it) squint their eyes and move back in their chair; as to say ‘what just happened?’. This exchange between the two (with Thomasina present) appears to be the opposite of what a story creator attempting to create realistic characters would do but Stoppard here can take success in again drawing in the viewer. After having their little ‘what’ moment, each of the audience members will feel further inclined to discover what becomes of both the pair’s relationship and also with Mrs Chater (who they’re yet to meet). This curiosity is what playwrights and novelists can use to reel in their audience to continue consuming their content as they feel they must find out more!
Now Bernard. If this were a high school movie Bernard would be the weird nerd that sits in the middle row and is constantly blurting out information to the class (which no one asked for). Upon first glance, as he meets Hannah, Bernard is presented as being oddly timid and unprepared and as the stage directions say, “he is overdoing it” in trying to impress her with his wit. This is a direct contrast to the gloating he does toward the end of the play. Act 5 Scene 2 quite literally begins with this gloating. Bernard is pacing around the room with Valentine, Chloe and Gus as his audience, beginning with “Did it happen? Could it happen? Undoubtedly it could.” before being cut off by Hannah to save the audience from their sorrow. Bernard’s ‘character arc’ and progression could be admired if their portion of the story advanced 3 years just as Thomasina and Co.’s does but the forced change of his character, by Stoppard, creates confusion in who his character may be as the audience struggles to believe that he truly is realistic.
Round 2: Fowles
“Characters must be realistic.” -Every English Teacher Ever
Without realistic characters, a novel simply will not last. Just like a movie; it may tweak the heartstrings or make people laugh as they see it in the cinema, but without realistic characters, movie-goers won’t be flocking back to the movie to show their children in 20 years. Fowles ensures his novel can withstand time by creating realistic and meaningful characters.
The French Lieutenant’s Woman is undoubtedly a feminine piece and Fowles can be commended on creating realistic feminist characters (or at least feminist to be). In Chapter 17, the narrator makes a comment about Ernestina and how “she [is] only woman” and that there are “many things she must never understand”. In this paragraph, Fowles not only addresses how society accepts women at the time (1867) and the expectations from them but displays that Ernestina is one who will grow up to witness (and possibly partake) the landscape changing where her “world was rather more than a dress and home and children”. Not only is Fowles creating realistic characters in his novel for the time period (such as Mrs Polteney) but he is also setting them up with a future as if they were still alive after the novel had been written and published. This realism allows the reader to view characters as actual people with both backstories and futures which can shape their perception of them and draw them into the novel even further.
Now instead of focussing entirely on characters, let’s talk about Mr John Fowles himself. Specifically, the unlucky chapter 13 where I would estimate Fowles kills most of his readers… but not the ones analysing it.
Fowles is addressing the reader for almost the entirety of the 13th chapter and begins his monologue by addressing that “these characters I create never existed outside my own mind.” This sentence alone sets up the rest of the chapter beautifully as Fowles begins to talk to the reader and explain his own mind. The direction that the characters he has created himself never existed solidifies Fowles’ own knowledge of creating realistic characters and is almost a moment of boasting where he is trying to ‘wake up’ the reader and get them to see that the characters he has created are only fake; that he has developed the perfect and most realistic characters.
Fowles later acknowledges that he as a novelist must “pull the right strings and his puppets will behave in a lifelike manner” but he, as a “god” comments that his characters only “begin to live” once they start disobeying the author. For this, he provides the example of when “Charles left Sarah on her cliff edge”, and how Fowles “ordered him to walk back to Lyme Regis. But he did not”. Through this, Fowles is implying his characters are so realistic they’re autonomous; that he does not always control them as the author of the novel, again almost boasting to the reader.
Fowles knows what he’s doing. He knows that his characters are realistic and he uses it to his advantage. Not only do the realistic characters allow the reader to put themselves in the ‘character’s shoes’ but by addressing the audience and displaying how realistic these characters are, could allow the reader to open their own mind outside of The French Lieutenant’s Woman and think about other stories and their own characters.
Round 3: Why?
A play requires suspense and a novel requires development and Tom Stoppard and John Fowles respectively display this perfectly.
Instead of creating suspense in a way that may be seen in an Agatha Christie murder mystery, Stoppard uses his unrealistic characters and their hollow development to draw audience members closer to the story and forces them to become increasingly invested in the outcome of each character’s own path. By having almost every character have their own fatal flaw (in development) Stoppard ensures he can draw every last audience member into the play, regardless of their favourite character(s) or scenes as anywhere they look, they will be increasingly intruiged into the characters.
In contrast with a playwright, a novelist is able to create their novels to almost any length (as well as expected to be long) and this expectation creates the requirement for the characters within a novel to be realistic; developed well by the novelist. John Fowles, with each of his characters displays both the ways which he has created them, but the thought behind curating their entire “existence”.
Round 4: Wrap
Both Tom Stoppard and John Fowles with their respective pieces use their knowledge of character development to create either unrealistic or realistic characters. This knowledge allows them to create the best plays or novels possible as they influence the audience’s own views, draw them closer into the story or create fandoms of loving members.
References
- Fowles, J. 1969. The French Lieutenant’s Women.
- Stoppard, T. 1993. Arcadia
