Activity

Oh guys, we should make sure we have unique characters. Such as Sherlock Holmes he was super observent and a master of disguise, he studied human nature and random facts that he knew would help him with cases. Like his study of cigar ashes. It sounds useless but it really did give him clues. He was respectful, well mannered but blunt. Part of the charm was how he would solve the ‘unsolvable cases’. Or Father Brown, who knew a lot about human nature from the confessions felons had made to him or other people, he knew the Bible so he had a good understanding of both sin and God’s grace. Part of the charm was how much he acted like a father to everyone, and yet this mild mannered older catholic could solve cases that baffled everyone else. And the unique spiritual preceptive that the author often brought to the cases.

Or Eugene Valmont, he was resourceful, using everything that he had at his disposal. He was the only one who could solve the cases because of his position and his skill. He narrates like he is having a conversation with the reader, with a interesting mix of pride in his skills and humbleness in admitting his own mistakes, which happens every so often. It’s like he is telling a big fish story about the intricate plots of the really hard to catch criminals that he’s trying to capture. And he admits when he makes a mistake, such as the story when he doesn’t actually catch the criminal because he doesn’t have enough evidence.

But we have to make sure that the other characters in our story all have their own unique character traits and motivations to! 🙂