From what I’ve seen on Tumblr, this is basically the dichotomy every fic writer finds themselves caught in. Myself, I like to split the difference and go with “bitter old soldiers who are secretly muffins despite themselves and feel a little less awful about life when they see the happiness of people they’ve helped.”
…sweats
Well, that’s a lot less …. ….. tough on the characters, to be honest. When I write, I don’t want to put in any sort of ideas on morality that I’ve been brought up with. It’s more a way of dealing with the repressed side of things
…So I guess, it’s like dealing with the Aenima and also the Id (??? idek about freud man)
Captain America has basically no bitterness, though. He’s just an angel who constantly saves people and inspires everyone around him to be a little bit better than they thought they could be.
Bucks sems like he could be my type, if not for CA also being kinda like the sort of guy who could live on a pedestal.
Yeah, when you put it that way, I guess it is kind of the cookie-cutter heroic ideal. “Virtuous despite all the awful things you’ve been through." I wouldn’t say it’s easier on the characters, necessarily. I was being flippant because replies have a short character count, but for me personally, what I like is thinking about the choice people have, when they’re suffering, as to whether they want to try to ease that by lashing out or by vicariously easing someone else’s suffering. Or, I guess, to just go head-down and try to stick to your own problems. And also, of course, the reality is that trying to help doesn’t always pay you back. Less about right or wrong and more about how a person chooses to shape themselves.
But honestly I really groove on the way you write without coding a moral compass into the narrative, so I’m hardly here to tell you what to do. You just seemed to be struggling with the dichotomy, so I hoped pitching in might help you kick it around. 😀 (And um. Optionally maybe write more.) Or possibly I’m just being an annoying distraction, in which feel free to tell me to hush now. >.>
Actually, I know you’re interested in Myers-Briggs, so looking into Jungian archetypes might be up your alley, at least for new and interesting ways of thinking about characterization. Freud is id/ego/superego, which mostly models repressed individual desire vs. sefless impulse. Jung is more complex, and includes anima/animus
and other archetypes
along with the shadow (the negative self, or shape of one’s self-destructive impulses). They’re more about understanding personality based on patterns of desire/motivation/goal/fears, etc. I think they can be dangerously reductive as a way of trying to understand or categorize real-life people, but for fictional characterization, they’re dynamite.
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/292HJwG