Person and Persona
There is a gap in complex characters between who they are and the character they show. You need to understand both to write them convincingly.
Human Nature and Contradiction
Complex characters are both the costume they put on, and the naked body underneath.
Most contemporary movies assume that humans contain inner contradictions that govern our behaviour and, by doing so, limit our free will and agency – even more than external obstacles do.
And dramas presume that psychological health consists of resolving those contradictions, and that the story is the narrative of that journey.
By contrast, comedy often suggests that true integration is impossible—but luckily you can still learn to live with your contradictions.
And that dreadful hybrid dramedy suggests that storytellers can have their cake and eat it. That you can point out the inconvenient truths about the enduring nature of humans and human society, and at the same time sell the idea that salvation is always within reach.
Are we in control of our lives?
We like to think that we are in control of our behaviour. That we are in control of how we respond to the world around us and the people we interact with. But that’s clearly not always true.
Everybody sometimes finds themselves thinking, ‘Why on earth did I do that?’
In reality, we all shift our behaviour depending on who we’re with and what’s happening around us. We put on different personas as if they were costumes—sometimes consciously, sometimes not.
But what if these personas aren’t just costumes we choose, but more like tattoos—deeply imprinted, sometimes beyond our control?
Our behaviour is often contradictory, flowing from an ongoing inner struggle between our true selves and our protective personas.
Where does this inner tension come from?
It comes from two sources: learned responses and trauma. And a process of imprinted instincts that combines the two.
Learned responses.
Our families and cultures teach us to hide or suppress certain feelings and behaviours so we can fit in. We internalise messages like:
- “Spare the rod and spoil the child.”
- “Never show weakness, or you’ll be taken advantage of.”
We also learn to justify bad behaviour toward “outsiders”:
- “Never give a sucker an even break.”
- “The man who does not steal for his family steals from his family.”
Trauma
Almost everyone experiences trauma—especially in childhood. Trauma is a psychological wound that remains unhealed, shaping our behaviour as we try to protect ourselves rather than heal.
A child who is beaten every time they question their father is going to have a problem facing up to authority. A woman who was raped in a dark alley is going to have problems with dark alleys and with men.
These wounds are deep, and very painful. So, instead of dealing with them, we protect our wounds, and by doing so, prevent them from healing.
Together, learned responses and trauma create habitual, sometimes automatic reactions—especially in stressful situations.
Imprinted Instincts
Some learned responses are useful, even life-saving.
Having your mother shout at your three-year-old self as you reach for that tempting handle sticking out from the edge of the stove is better than pulling a pot of boiling water over you.
And if she does it strongly enough, we will never forget the lesson. It will be imprinted on our behaviour, just like trauma is.
Three emotions protect us from potentially fatal danger. They are a mixture of instinctive autonomic responses and learned ones:
- Fear: Protects us from external threats (like predators).
- Disgust: Shields us from internal threats (like rotting food).
- Shame: Guards us from social rejection (a fatal condition when we lived in small wandering tribes).
You could call these learned responses useful trauma, because they are imprinted on us through a quasi-traumatic process imposed upon us by people who love us, or are our peers.
Integrating Person and Persona
Many stories follow a character as they move toward integrating their person and persona, gaining more freedom and control over their actions.
That integration requires:
- Recognising and acknowledging the difference between the true self and the presented self.
- Facing up to the (destructive) emotional habits that govern behaviour, and the traumas that caused those habits and continue to feed them.
- Eventually moving forward to a new integrated person who can acknowledge her flaws and weaknesses but is not trapped by them.
- An integrated character is free to be different in different circumstances. Integration does NOT mean one-dimensional homogeneity.
- Integration is a movement towards freedom in how the character responds to circumstances, no longer trapped by habitual responses.
- The moment of integration – if it is in your story – is rarely the end of the story. It’s what makes the end possible, because, before the character can confront the external world and change it, they first have to change themselves.
Drama vs Comedy
Most contemporary drama says that change is difficult, but possible. But you can’t change the world without first changing yourself.
Comedy says that change seems within reach, perhaps even at hand, but is actually impossible. You can’t change the world because you can’t change society, other people, or even yourself. All we can do is change the costume we wear.
Some Examples
Don Draper: ‘Mad Men’
- Persona: Don Draper is a suave, successful advertising executive—confident, charming, and in control.
- Person: Underneath, he’s Dick Whitman, a man haunted by his past, plagued with insecurity and shame.
- Conflict: The series repeatedly confronts Don with moments where his persona cracks, forcing him to face the pain and truth of his real self.
Fleabag: ‘Fleabag’
- Persona: Fleabag presents herself as witty, sarcastic, and in control.
- Person: Underneath, she is grieving, lonely, and deeply self-critical.
- Conflict: Her search for love peels back her persona, revealing the pain and vulnerability she tries to mask with humour.
