User blog:Weavillain/It's Okay to Be "Shallow": Why Character Development Isn't Everything

A few days ago (or was it yesterday?), I made a blog about character development and how far it should go to flesh out the characters of The Loud House. This time around, I'm back to talk about character development once again and like before, discuss its importance. Unlike last time, though, this has more to do with fan reception and endearment/apathy/hatred towards characters on the basis of character development alone.

Now, with my last "character development" blog, I went over two principles of character development, one of them being my basic definition of the term itself. Now, I'm going to be adding a third:

"Character development is most essential as a need and not as a want."

To put this more into context, when we "want" something, it's more than likely that we can do without it. A "need", on the other hand, is much more important in ensuring that one lives a functional way of life. Now, as my above statement alluded to, character development can be regarded as both but, and I must reiterate this, I believe that it should be strived for when it's necessary. In my opinion, and this is from what I see when I notice fans of any franchise talk about character development nowdays, to want it is to cherish it on the premise of character development alone, which is a sentiment that I really can't find myself agreeing with.

And again, it's time to place more context into what I'm dishing out here. I'll do that by talking about a certain character from The Loud House. Out of all of the Loud siblings, Lynn Jr.'s probably one of the least favorites with the fandom (that don't partake in Loudcest, anyways). Plenty of people point to her brutish, loud, bullyish tendencies as a reason why they don't enjoy her and wish that she was developed beyond those tendancies. Those people, to their credit, are placing character development on the highest and most dignified pedestal it deserves; they need her to change in order for her character's presnce to be meaningful to them.

But there are others, in my opinion, that take things a tad bit too far when one of their main criticisms of Lynn is when she's criticized comparitavely; labeled as a weak character, compared to her siblings, because she's not as fleshed out as most of them are. In this case, I find that to be more of a want because instead of placing importance on what should be changed and why it matters, they instead harp on the fact that change isn't happening at all.

And that, to me, misses the point about enjoying the characters for who they are. For some strange reason, there seems to be a lot of emphasis on character development with fans and consumers of written work these days. Some of them feel as though, without character development, a character is weak, unlikeable, and unworthy of any sort of lauding or approval. But really, this attitude only puts emphasis on one aspect of character development and that's the development itself. Developing a character is more of a mechanic of writing and while it's fine to be appreciated, it's utterly lifeless compared to what we're seeing on screen or on the pages.

For example, I like Lori alot and part of that reason is how far we've seen her character develop over the series. Without that development, she would'nt have risen to the top of my favorites list; I needed that to happen for me to full delight in her overall package, good and bad. But even with that in mind, there are still some "shallow" aspects about her that I'm endeared to and they have nothing to do with how developed she is. I like how she uses "literally" literally all the time, I enjoy her over-the-top indignant "first world problem" rants, I'm tickled by her snarkiness, and I adore her design. These things may be seen as "shallow quirks" and yes, they don't really offer much when it comes to explaining her personality and motivations, but it's still a part of her character, just the same. Talking about how strong her character is, because of her development, is fine and dandy but it's hollow and unfilling when every other aspect of Lori is left out of the equation to do so; it's falling in love with the writing behind the character rather than the character itself.

So when I think about it from that perspective, I'm not surprised, annoyed, or angered when fans unabashedly like characters like Lynn, Lily, and Lisa; characters that aren't the most developed, especially compared to their siblings, because I recognize that the "shallow, skin-deep" features have their appeal, regardless if character development is in play or not.

TL;DR - Character development has its place but it shouldn't be loved so much that the character itself is disregarded entirely. This also doesn't mean that "underdevleoped" characters aren't good if you're only basing their inadequacy on a lack of character development instead of what their character needs (remember that word?) to have fleshed out.