>he uses "the book has no character development!"

>>8030297
you don't know many human beans, do yo?

File: images (26).jpg (8KB, 206x245px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 206x245px

>>8030297
Very valid point. This is obvious in many genres of fiction, even in movies and series. An antagonist can't be 'just' an evil person or even someone who is just in it for x (money, power etc.), just like le ebic antihero can't be a hero without having some grave issues in his past. Even in mindless sitcoms, the clown often can't be 'just' a funny guy, but he has to have some childhood trauma that he is surpressing through humour. I hate this kind of pretentiousness.

>>8030331
>human beans

>>8030297
Character development means fleshing that character out so you get to know them, not changing them. Even if someone's just an asshole, it's usually more interesting to show them being assholes all the time than to simply say "he was an asshole to my father and now I'm going to kill him."

>>8030331
Do you?

Seriously, anyone who has had the displeasure of working in any social setting has learned that human beings are at most, oblivious assholes with no desire to change or learn.

I didn't want to believe it, but it took about 5 months of working at a shitty fast food job with horrible people to learn this.

>>8030297
Reminder that the mark of a pleb is the enjoyment of any of the following:
>plot twists
>"deep" backstories
>changing character traits
>violence whenever unnecessary
>"good guys"
>"bad guys"
>fanservice
>"obscure" references
>pop-culture references
>human nature theme
>blank slate theme
>nihilistic themes
>the bashing of a religion
>the defense of a religion
>memes

>>8030603
Then I am proudly a "pleb"

>>8030355
Most people are like this, yes, but if I'm going to read about someone's life I don't want to read about those people. There are other ways of character development than the main character having an epiphany and changing; underground man is very well developed, for example

File: biggerb8.jpg (70KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 1000x1000px

>>8030603

>>8030603
So what is patrician anon?

>>8030603
>"bad guys"

Joke from DC, a fucking comic book, shows more depth than you you fucking nitfuck.

File: F8hIAON.png (475KB, 680x474px) Image search: [Google]

475KB, 680x474px

>>8030603
>memes
>pleb
"No"

>>8030671
>Joke
I love Joke. I love his rivalry with his arch-foe, Bate, in particular.

File: 1462491885053.jpg (197KB, 650x430px) Image search: [Google]

197KB, 650x430px

>>8030680
>bate
>bateman
>Batman

Damn... you got me

>>8030603
dont forget

"""prose"""

>>8030297

It actually is a valid critique as character development is a primary source of satisfaction within literature. Not all forms of storytelling require it, but that's usually in styles that intentionally leave them out and have other positive qualities as their focus. If a book or play is primarily character driven, the characters must change in some way, otherwise there is little entertainment. Just as if it were driven by its plot, things actually have to happen in the plot.

And to say character development isn't important because it isn't realistic is very stupid. Most of storytelling is unrealistic. Moby Dick isn't realistic. Hamlet isn't realistic. Harry Potter isn't realistic. My diary isn't realistic.

>ctrl+f: modernist bias
>0 results
Well folks, it's modernist bias (Bildungsroman-fetish), like 80 % of the criteria for high literature.

>>8030652
>I don't want to read about those people

That doesn't make it a more valid criticism.

>>8030603

I only enjoy fanservice of those but only with my anime. How patrish am I

>>8031593
>character development is a primary source of satisfaction within literature
You base this on what exactly? Your opinions? Characters don't have to change. Character development is by definition a change in the character over the course of the narration. Some characters can stay as they are from start to finish, as normal people do. You don't change dramatically over the course of a month or two even if you think you do. So for a story to have a main character who does not change makes sense and character development would not be necessary for the story so judging a book based on character development is a horrible metric.

>>8031908
>You don't change dramatically over the course of a month or two even if you think you do
Depends entirely on the situation

But it is a pretty well-defined principle in fiction that a plot, character or even theme has to be going somewhere, developing, otherwise its just static and boring.

Rom and Juliet take their love to the grave, so does Coriolanus with his pride, the Shrew is "tamed" but is she really? etc

>>8030297
It depends

There are instances where the lack of character development is the point

No 'critique' of any art is 'justified'

Ultimately, it all boils down to this is what I like, this is what I don't like.

:)

File: 1462849097899.jpg (14KB, 238x192px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 238x192px

>>8030341
Is this bait, or are you this new?

>>8030297
People change all the time, you're just too young/self centered to notice.

Plus who cares about realism, books are supposed to distill the interesting parts out of life.