Writing Characters: Is It Me or My Character Talking?

What does a wizard, a politician, a bodybuilder, and a goblin have in common? They can all be created by the same author—in a single novel, or even in a short story. As a writer myself, I find this to be one of the great joys of the craft: creating rich worlds and the people who inhabit them. And really, there are no limits. If I want to create an autistic goblin nurse who is accidentally teleported to a distant star under siege by AI-driven household appliances, all I have to do is put it on paper and share it with my readers. Sure, it might not become a bestseller, but that’s beside the point.

As someone who regularly follows the writing community, as well as many of my favourite authors on social media, I have noticed a long-running debate about the nature of fictional characters and their relationship with their creator—the writer. There seem to be two schools of thought. The first draws a clear line between the writer and their characters. The second, however, tends to see fictional characters as reflections of the author’s inner self, or even their subconscious. Which of these schools of thought is right? And does it really matter?

I’ll start with the latter question, as I find the answer more straightforward.

Yes, it matters. A lot.

In a world where fictional characters are perceived by readers as extensions of the creator’s personality, writers are inevitably limited in what they can create—or, at the very least, in what they feel comfortable sharing with their readers. Social norms, after all, impose expectations about what is perceived as “right”, “fair”, and “acceptable”.

In a world where fictional characters are perceived as… well, fictional, writers have much greater freedom of expression. They are less likely to be constrained by the fear that readers will associate them personally with the beliefs, behaviour, or opinions of their characters.

So, which school of thought do I belong to?

Neither.

You see, both schools of thought tend to homogenise writers. One assumes that all—or most—writers inevitably put parts of their own inner nature onto the page. The other assumes that all—or most—writers are capable of creating characters entirely detached from their own nature.

The reality is that writers are just as different from one another as the characters they create.

Some fiction writers deliberately use their characters to convey their own worldview and ideas, treating them as vehicles for communicating a message. Think of authors living under authoritarian regimes who use fiction to circumvent censorship and discreetly express political ideas through their characters.

Other writers are able to completely detach their own views from those of their fictional characters. And then there are countless writers somewhere in between.

The real challenge, therefore, lies in understanding which of these groups a particular author belongs to. In other words: what is the author’s actual intention?

Is the author trying to communicate an idea they genuinely believe in? Or are they simply creating a character who fits naturally into the fictional world and the story they are telling?

If a writer creates a racist protagonist, does that make the writer racist? Or does the writer simply believe that such a character fits the story?

Answering such a complicated and delicate question requires the reader to make an effort to understand the author and their body of work. A few questions might help:

1. What does the writer’s body of work tell us? Is there a pattern among their fictional characters? Do the protagonists in most of their stories consistently support liberal—or conservative—ideas? Or is this particular character an exception?

2. Are there other elements of the story that convey the same idea? Characters are only one of many elements that make up a story. What about the setting? The plot? The themes? Are there recurring patterns—patriarchal values, climate-change awareness, religious themes, political ideas, and so on?

3. What does the writer say about their own characters and writing? Some writers are quite open about their intentions, explicitly stating that they use their characters to convey certain ideas. Others are less transparent, denying any intention to communicate their own beliefs. Some simply remain silent on the matter.

4. What is the social, economic, and political environment in which the writer lives? A fictional character created by someone living under an authoritarian regime may be more likely to carry a message rooted in the author’s personal beliefs than a character created by someone living in a liberal democracy. This is certainly not a rule, but it can provide useful context.

As for me, I try my best to detach my own beliefs from my characters. I consider myself an advocate of democracy, but that doesn’t stop me from writing an authoritarian protagonist. I believe in meritocracy, but that doesn’t prevent me from creating a socialist protagonist who is the “good guy”.

You get the point.

However, despite everything I’ve said above—and whichever school of thought you subscribe to—there is one thing that should never be ignored: the reader’s perception of a character is also shaped by the reader’s own beliefs and biases.

Someone who is fixated on a particular issue will be more likely to interpret a character as confirming or challenging their own beliefs. In many cases, this can become a trick played by the reader’s own subconscious.

Ultimately, what we should keep in mind is that a story is never a one-player game.

There are always two players: the writer AND the reader.