How should we judge the characters?

[Sepul-Coloratura 765]

How should we judge the characters?

1. Consider the ideal veraion of the character that the writers had in mind in the episode. Even when the writers failed portraying their own ideal version of the character, we should theorize and presume what the ideal vision they had and judge the character if they lived up to that. Simply put, what the writers were thinking.
2. The collective perception of the character. Generally speaking, what the average fandom thinks about the character or what they want the character to be, and how close and true the character was portrayed according to that.
3. Archetypes and premise. No matter what people think, there is an archetype, and there are situations that challenges or interacts with the character. There could be few choices that the writer can steer the character towards, but character archetypes and how they would react is and should be quite clear. We almost instinctively know when the story or the character is wrong.
4. Everything that actually happened in the show is only relevant. No matter what you think, no matter what the ideal beraion is, only what actually happened in the show matters. Even the worst episodes are real. The character is only the collection of what that character went through.

What do you think? I personally are against number 2 and 4.

[Latecomer 441]

6 hours ago, Sepul-Coloratura said:

How should we judge the characters?

1. Consider the ideal veraion of the character that the writers had in mind in the episode. Even when the writers failed portraying their own ideal version of the character, we should theorize and presume what the ideal vision they had and judge the character if they lived up to that. Simply put, what the writers were thinking.
2. The collective perception of the character. Generally speaking, what the average fandom thinks about the character or what they want the character to be, and how close and true the character was portrayed according to that.
3. Archetypes and premise. No matter what people think, there is an archetype, and there are situations that challenges or interacts with the character. There could be few choices that the writer can steer the character towards, but character archetypes and how they would react is and should be quite clear. We almost instinctively know when the story or the character is wrong.
4. Everything that actually happened in the show is only relevant. No matter what you think, no matter what the ideal beraion is, only what actually happened in the show matters. Even the worst episodes are real. The character is only the collection of what that character went through.

What do you think? I personally are against number 2 and 4.

A synthesis of all, with an understanding that characters can be complex and sometimes contradictory. Some approaches work better for certain purposes than others - for instance, 3 can be cross-applied between FIM and EQG versions, while 4 cannot. That said, I find 2 the most dubious even though I can't deny it's importance.

[Rushing cash 845]

I would say 4 is important, but they are after all fictional characters, you can ignore some moments and retcon them in your mind. Just look at it the way you want, everyone will see it the way they desire. 

[EpicEnergy 23,247]

Firstly, point 1 is rather assumpteous, and I prefer to avoid judging characters based on a preconceived idea of what the writers intended them to be. Point 2 is basing the judgment of the characters off the majority's viewpoint, which is why I would not choose that approach either. Point 3 seems restrictive, as it means that a character cannot be changed in a significant way, which would be restrictive on character development. Archetypes also seem like generalizations, placing characters into categories. That is why I do not choose point 3. Lastly, point 4 seems to lack an open-minded approach as it is strictly canon-only, so I think that point 4 is flawed. In conclusion, I think the 4 points mentioned in the OP have some flaws, which is why I do not prefer to judge the characters those ways.

How do I judge the characters then? I judge the characters partially based on what I've seen in the previous canonical episodes. I also give them room for character development or negative changes, because major outward events that happen to a character can influence change in their characteristics. Additionally, I accept that characters can act OOC at times, and that it would be fine for them to do that depending on the situation and their response. So, I take a mixed approach to judging the characters, not too restrictive but not too lenient either.

Ultimately, I think it is best to judge the characters based on several factors, including their current situations and the context, and to avoid being too restrictive on characters when judging them.

Edited November 21, 2019 by EpicEnergy
changed wording

[Thrond 3,271]

I don't really subscribe to any of those because I'm not convinced that "judging" the characters is an objective process. I base my interpretation of the characters on my own perception of point 1, 3, and 4; I ignore 2 entirely because I'm not interested in other people's interpretations and I'm not sure I know what the majority viewpoint is regardless. In other words, from watching the show I build my own idea of what a character is supposed to be like. In a general sense, I judge the characters based on the depictions I find most satisfying and compelling, whereas on an episode-by-episode basis I tend to use other criteria than character consistency. Sometimes I disagree with how certain characters are depicted, but usually that's because I don't find the episode enjoyable or satisfying overall.

[Goat-kun 2,531]

Who are they? What are they? How they act? How they look? What purpose do they have?

[Sepul-Coloratura 765]

7 hours ago, Goat-kun said:

Who are they? What are they? How they act? How they look? What purpose do they have?

 

So shortly put, same as real people?

[Goat-kun 2,531]

13 hours ago, Sepul-Coloratura said:

So shortly put, same as real people?

For the most part. The ability of a character to convey what they are to us and the way they fit into the world are also important.

[Number62 1,267]

1. The writers had their goals and intentions, but whether that clicked with the viewer is another discussion. I do think some consideration of the writer's perspective can be useful, but it's ultimately how the viewer sees the character that matters.

2. Different viewers will have different perspectives, so I don't even know if there is a collective perception. Even if a majority felt a certain way about something, that's still not everybody.

3. I'm not sure I understand this. There may be character archetypes, but how closely the writer sticks to it is always up in the air, and there will always be variations of a certain archetype. If there's the smart character, they may be snobbish, humble, careless, and that's just the beginning.

4. Yes, everything that happens in the show is only relevant. If you have to disregard a fair amount of the show to get to an interpretation of a character you like, what does that say? If I like or even prefer how a fanfic interprets or expands on a character, the credit goes more to the fanfic instead of the show because the show didn't do what the fanfic did.

I generally judge characters based on what they do, what they think, how they act, and the various choices they make - pretty much whatever the show comes up with, I judge and make my own conclusions.