Character vs plot driven stories:Which do you prefer?

[JKtheMac]

I kind of want to cite Parker's Spectacular Foes of Spider Man as Character Driven.

Yes, its a caper book but the reason its a caper book is because the main characters are compulsive crooks.

None of those guys could escape their own nature not even the Shocker.

You could be right. And in a similar vein his Ant-Man book is pretty much The Wrestler as superhero story, which I would never have considered before.

P.S. I am presuming you mean "Spencer's Superior Foes..."


I guess we could count Simon Spurrier's X-Men Legacy.

But, on reflection Old-Man Logan has an awful lot of plot impetus. Does anyone want to take a stab at exactly what that story is about in a single sentence?

[Carabas]

Does Diamond track sales at normal book stores, or on Amazon?

They don't track sales, period.

Diamond's sales lists are about how many books Diamond sold to retailers, not about how many books retailers sold to readers. And yes, Diamond does supply Amazon and book stores.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamon...c_Distributors

[CentralPower]

Monsters are a necessary ingredient in comics.

The problem with Wanda is not that she is a monster. The problem is that the other characters never try to solve the problem of Wanda. The minute it was brought up in "House of M", there should have been no going back.

[gurkle]

It's very hard to separate the two.

The characters in superhero comics are not deep enough to just sit still for a character study without some kind of compelling plot. Some novels and plays and films can just focus on character without a big story, but if superheroes aren't out punching people and fighting monsters, they're really not interesting enough to hold our attention for very long. Even something like Vision has a big plot and lots of violence.

On the other hand, there are so few plots available to superhero comics that the plot can't hold our attention without some character interest to back it up. We know how most of these stories are going to end, we know that the dead will come back to life. The only thing that makes it interesting is to see how characters react to the plot developments. Fine, this character is dead, none of us care, but we do care about seeing how their friends and enemies react to their "death."

So I guess it's about seeing how character development is driven by the plot. You can't have one without the other.

[JKtheMac]

It's very hard to separate the two.

The characters in superhero comics are not deep enough to just sit still for a character study without some kind of compelling plot. Some novels and plays and films can just focus on character without a big story, but if superheroes aren't out punching people and fighting monsters, they're really not interesting enough to hold our attention for very long. Even something like Vision has a big plot and lots of violence.

On the other hand, there are so few plots available to superhero comics that the plot can't hold our attention without some character interest to back it up. We know how most of these stories are going to end, we know that the dead will come back to life. The only thing that makes it interesting is to see how characters react to the plot developments. Fine, this character is dead, none of us care, but we do care about seeing how their friends and enemies react to their "death."

So I guess it's about seeing how character development is driven by the plot. You can't have one without the other.

And while I agree with everything you say here, this is the problem with the question. These are technical terms, not preferences. Plot Driven is not the same as great plot or even better plot than characterisation, conversely Character Driven is not the same as good characterisation. Plot Driven means the story is moved along by external conflict, Character Driven means the story is moved along by internal conflict.

for example, Hamlet prioritises character over plot, but it is plot driven.

[yet another]

So I guess what the OP really wanted to ask then was something like:

Do you prefer stories with pedestrian/recycled plots and good characterization or stories with innovative/complex plots and lacking/invalid characterization?

[JKtheMac]

So I guess what the OP really wanted to ask then was:

Do you prefer stories with pedestrian plots and good characterization or stories with innovative/complex plots and lacking/invalid characterization?

But surely not! Which is where that quote comes in. We shouldn't let the writers off the hook by claiming plot prioritised stories don't need good characterisation. On the other hand this isn't the same as consistent to cannon characterisation which is a different issue.

[JKtheMac]

I have been thinking about what the question might be in more exact terminology. Maybe it is really about allowing character to serve the story.

There are two related issues here, idiot plotting which has gained loaded connotations and is subjective, and the problems with interpretive characters, i.e. characters that have had long histories and whose character is open to interpretation.

The cry of 'my favourite character wouldn't act that way' can stem from a few places.

The character has been interpreted based on source material the fan doesn't hold in high regard or is unaware of.
The character is being interpreted uniquely as part of a character study or focus of the story.
The character is moved out of his generally recognised characterisation to make the plot work.
The character is twisted beyond recognition to make the plot work. (Related to idiot plotting but not identical).

There could be others, and you could merge them.