On characterisation and background
This is largely for my own use - just wanted to get some thinky-thoughts down somewhere - but on the basis that others might find it interesting I thought I'd share.
I'm currently writing what I hope will be a very long fic (novella or novel length) about Arthur and Ariadne from Inception. The current draft is 6,000+ words, I've written at least 20,000 words, and I'd say I've not yet got 1/8th of it down. Moreover, this feels like a lengthy tale that can't be told as a short story: basically it's about how Arthur returns to the life he had before running off to help Cobb, and how being introduced to dream sharing causes Ariadne to re-evaluate her future. I've got Arthur and Ariadne going from strangers to colleagues then friends and eventually in a romantic relationship, it deals with Ariadne's relationship with Professor Miles and her family, Arthur's relationship with Cobb and his family, and it explores legal dream sharing, which means significant world building.
I have never done anything like this and gotten as far as I have. I also feel like finishing it is within the realm of possibility because I've got it really well plotted - I don't have a strict layout that I'm following but I do know the events that have to happen in order to produce the needed developments in the action plot and the emotional one.
One of the difficulties I'm having is with characterisation because, except for Cobb, all the characters are really thinly sketched. The performances are good and they hint at more than the script offers but it's still tricky.
Not viewing Arthur and Eames with shipper goggles, I'm trying to keep their relationship as close to canon as possible. For me (because keeping something close to canon is still subjective) this means that there is mutual respect on a professional level but they are fairly antagonistic on a personal one. I think that Arthur would probably ignore Eames (but not what Eames contributes in terms of knowledge) but Eames pushes his buttons. I base this off of the "This is a kick" scene
We have Eames seeking to annoy. Arthur's response is a death glare but otherwise he doesn't engage.
So Eames is something of a multi-tasker. Whether you think he's flirting or being annoying, he's doing that plus answering Ariadne's question. I think he's intelligent and grasps things quickly and probably doesn't have Arthur's need to pick everything apart; Eames has good instincts and senses when something will work. He just knows that it will.
Arthur does not just know that something will work. He has good instincts too but he senses danger, risks, and problems to be solved. When he sees something new he tries to understand it and appreciate it for what it is rather than what it can be. That's not to say that Arthur can't see potential in something, he can. Rather, he doesn't get caught up in the potential, to the exclusion of everything else (like, say, Cobb).
Conflict possibly arises from the different ways they process information. My mother recently pointed out that was the reason my sister and I were having difficulty working on a project. My sister didn't understand why I needed to know what she was doing for her part - she thought I doubted her abilities; I couldn't understand why she didn't want to make a highly detailed plan of both our responsibilities - I wanted to make sure that we were both literally on the same page and that all the work would get done. She knew times and figures in her head and thought I should trust her; I needed to see them written down for me to do so.
(Interestingly, my sister is, like Eames, a performer and I, like Arthur, am a researcher. So if given information - say a copy of Hamlet - we would categorize and express that information differently: her with a performance of a character (so a lot of her knowledge would remain internal), me with an analytical essay (look at everything I know!).)
Arthur's not going to accept anything Eames says unless he can see the research Eames has done to back it up. In the film, Eames provides justification for his opinions on Browning so Arthur is impressed; of course, Eames then thanks Arthur for his condescension.
But I don't think Arthur is being condescending. I think he's remarkably open about what he thinks and feels and gives his opinions freely, but this doesn't come from a place of false superiority. When people aren't doing their job right or well he tells them so.
Arthur: Arsehole, how'd you mess up the carpet?
Nash: It wasn't my fault.
Arthur: You're the architect!
Nash: I didn't know he was going to rub his damn cheek on it!
Cobb: That's enough.
Arthur: And you, what the hell was that all?
Cobb: I have it under control.
Arthur: I'd hate to see out of control.
Cobb: We don't have time for this.
Firstly, he calls Nash an arsehole. Warranted? Well, the job failed partially as a result of his mistake so they're in trouble with their employers (Cobb, at least, now has a price on his head - maybe they all do?). Also, that kind of name calling is readily found in the military and word of God states that Arthur is ex-military (and that's something I have incorporated into my fic). More interesting to me is his tone, which is terse but not overly angry. He probably would have just chided Nash and then dropped it but then Nash denied responsibility. Arthur comes back with the slightly more forceful "You're the architect!", which justifies his criticism: "Yes, it was your fault because you didn't do your job right," is implied.
By the time Cobb says "That's enough" Arthur has disengaged from Nash: his head is down and he's working on the PASIV. When Arthur questions Cobb his tone is completely different, more measured and there's genuine concern there even though it's not tactfully phrased. Cobb, not for the first time in the film, brushes aside Arthur's concern so Arthur let's him know that his issues are an issue for Arthur. So naturally, Cobb does it again because if he were to tell Arthur the full extent of what is going on, Arthur would shut their shenanigans down (also, Arthur might stop being his friend and Cobb could not deal with that on many, many levels).
What about when Arthur does something wrong? Well, he cops to it, immediately. This is me tracking his tone.
Cobb: Has he been shot, is he dying?
Arthur: I don't know.
Cobb: Jesus Christ.
Arthur: Where were you? What happened to you? [CONCERN]
Cobb: We were blocked by a freight train.
Arthur(to Ariadne): Why would you put a train crossing in the middle of a downtown intersection? [CURIOUS]
Ariadne: I didn't.
Arthur: Where'd it come from? [CURIOUS, SLIGHTLY ALARMED]
Cobb: Let me ask you a question: Why the hell were we ambushed?! Those were not normal projections, they'd been trained for god's sakes!
Arthur: You're right. [CONCILIATORY]
Ariadne: How could they be trained?
Arthur: Fischer's had an extractor teach his subconscious to defend itself so his subconscious is militarized. It should've shown on the research, I'm sorry - [FRUSTRATED, CONCILIATORY]
Cobb: So why the hell didn't it?!
Arthur: Calm down. [TENSE]
Cobb: Don't tell me to calm down, this was your job god dammit, this was your responsibility! -you were meant to check Fischer's background thoroughly. We are not prepared for this kind of violence-
Arthur: We have dealt with sub-security before, we'll be a little more careful and we're gonna be fine- [STRAINED]
Cobb: This was not a part of the plan, he's dying for Christ's sake!
Cobb's getting cranky right in his face but Arthur does his level best not to inflame the situation. He explains, he apologises, you can see him actually hold back from saying more (in his defence, how the hell do you find out someone's been secretly trained?) because he has realised that now is not the time for a discussion. He'll take it on the chin and get on with the job, but I bet in an ideal situation Arthur would drag everyone to a post-mission debrief and there would be a whiteboard and some markers and he would write "What did we do well, what did we do badly, and how can we improve?" and everyone would have to come up and make a comment.
Because of the nature of the film we don't get to see Arthur off the job so it's hard to figure out what he'd be like when not working (or when working under less stressful, more healthy circumstances). I think his interactions with Ariadne are really useful here and for reasons aside from the fact that I ship them. Unlike Cobb and Eames, Ariadne is new to him: they don't have history, baggage, or issues. Now, when most people interact with someone new who they're going to be working with, they tend to be the best version of themselves and smooth off the hard edges: I like to show people that I'm intelligent and funny, but I ease them into the grammar pedantry and sarcasm. In the "Cobb said you'd be back"/paradoxical architecture lesson sequence Arthur is polite, friendly, easygoing, and informative without being condescending. He's pleased when Ariadne gets concepts, chuckles appreciatively at one of her comments (i.e. he's laughing with her not at her), and he gently tells her of Mal's death. From Arthur's interactions with Ariadne, I get the sense that he's good with people, not awkward or cold as some have characterised him. I think he likes people and is generally well-liked by them.
Looking to his interactions with Cobb and Eames for a baseline of his personality doesn't work for me because those moments are usually tense and Arthur is being provoked towards an emotional response; while he might be pissed about Eames knocking his chair, I don't think he's pissy by nature.
So, Arthur's good with people but hasn't figured out what's up with Cobb while Ariadne, who has just met him, gets it quickly? Well, Ariadne is a heck of a lot more intuitive about this kind of thing. Arthur can sense that something is wrong but Ariadne can intuit what is wrong: she's a natural (or maybe she learned this kind of behavioural knowledge from one of her parents? Haven't decided if I want to justify it yet). She doesn't really have the vocabulary or the techniques that a professional counsellor (or perhaps Eames) would use but she senses that Cobb needs to be pushed and being confident but not particularly tactful, she's just the girl to do it. Very pragmatic and practical is our Ariadne, underneath all that imagination. It's why she gets along with Arthur: neither of them have a high tolerance for bullshit.
Other thoughts that I'm building into my characterisation:
- Arthur is extremely loyal. Once you are on his team he will do anything for you.
- Getting on his team is hard. He doesn't trust people easily.
- Arthur doesn't like Eames partly because he can't trust him. He can't trust him because of Eames's motives, which are money and intellectual curiosity, and Arthur is chiefly motivated by friendship.
- Also, Arthur thinks Eames still has ties to British Intelligence. Arthur fears what Eames might/will tell them.
- Cobb views/treats Eames more like an equal than Arthur does. Eames is aware that Arthur doesn't see him as "team" and that kind of needles him. So he needles Arthur in return.
- Eames sees himself and Cobb as innovators in the field. He sees Arthur as support. Arthur knows this. It irritates him.
- Arthur likes things that are visually interesting (Francis Bacon, the décor in Saito's palace, his suits).
- As such he actually likes how Eames dresses. He wouldn't dress that way but he admires style.
- He likes the way Ariadne dresses. He likes that she mixes patterns and colours. They have that in common.
- Arthur's family is lower middle class but arty.
- Thanks to his family he can draw fairly well and has a wide knowledge of and developed taste for art.
- Arthur's the black sheep of his family because he pays his taxes.
- Despite being the third of four children he often assumed older brother type duties.
- Arthur loves but is not particularly close to his parents. They've never really seen eye to eye.
- Ariadne's family is upper-middle class. Fairly intellectual but not snobbish.
- She is the oldest child of three.
- Her parents have always been very supportive of her education. Financially, too. Her dad's a lawyer.
- Her dad's also French-Canadian so she's been bilingual from an early age. She took lessons in Metropolitan French before moving to France, to help her adjust to the variations in the language. Perhaps why she's more intuitive about Cobb: she picks up and thinks about the nuances.
ETA: On taste
- Arthur watched the first season of Mad Men but hasn't seen any more. He thinks Don Draper is a jerk who needs to get over himself.
- Likes Lost, though. A much better blend of character and action. He developed quite a few theories. Hasn't seen the finale and has so far avoided being spoiled.
- Procedurals (CSI, Law & Order bore him.
- Prefers genre fiction over contemporary lit. Sci-fi, crime, fantasy. Well read in the canon of Eng Lit thanks to a favourite teacher.
- Reads more non-fiction though. A lot of history. Reads up on aspects of physics, chemistry, biology, that have nothing to do with work because he genuinely likes it.
- Loves hockey. Will shout/throw things when watching games.
- Doesn't much care for classical music.
I'm currently writing what I hope will be a very long fic (novella or novel length) about Arthur and Ariadne from Inception. The current draft is 6,000+ words, I've written at least 20,000 words, and I'd say I've not yet got 1/8th of it down. Moreover, this feels like a lengthy tale that can't be told as a short story: basically it's about how Arthur returns to the life he had before running off to help Cobb, and how being introduced to dream sharing causes Ariadne to re-evaluate her future. I've got Arthur and Ariadne going from strangers to colleagues then friends and eventually in a romantic relationship, it deals with Ariadne's relationship with Professor Miles and her family, Arthur's relationship with Cobb and his family, and it explores legal dream sharing, which means significant world building.
I have never done anything like this and gotten as far as I have. I also feel like finishing it is within the realm of possibility because I've got it really well plotted - I don't have a strict layout that I'm following but I do know the events that have to happen in order to produce the needed developments in the action plot and the emotional one.
One of the difficulties I'm having is with characterisation because, except for Cobb, all the characters are really thinly sketched. The performances are good and they hint at more than the script offers but it's still tricky.
Not viewing Arthur and Eames with shipper goggles, I'm trying to keep their relationship as close to canon as possible. For me (because keeping something close to canon is still subjective) this means that there is mutual respect on a professional level but they are fairly antagonistic on a personal one. I think that Arthur would probably ignore Eames (but not what Eames contributes in terms of knowledge) but Eames pushes his buttons. I base this off of the "This is a kick" scene
We have Eames seeking to annoy. Arthur's response is a death glare but otherwise he doesn't engage.
So Eames is something of a multi-tasker. Whether you think he's flirting or being annoying, he's doing that plus answering Ariadne's question. I think he's intelligent and grasps things quickly and probably doesn't have Arthur's need to pick everything apart; Eames has good instincts and senses when something will work. He just knows that it will.
Arthur does not just know that something will work. He has good instincts too but he senses danger, risks, and problems to be solved. When he sees something new he tries to understand it and appreciate it for what it is rather than what it can be. That's not to say that Arthur can't see potential in something, he can. Rather, he doesn't get caught up in the potential, to the exclusion of everything else (like, say, Cobb).
Conflict possibly arises from the different ways they process information. My mother recently pointed out that was the reason my sister and I were having difficulty working on a project. My sister didn't understand why I needed to know what she was doing for her part - she thought I doubted her abilities; I couldn't understand why she didn't want to make a highly detailed plan of both our responsibilities - I wanted to make sure that we were both literally on the same page and that all the work would get done. She knew times and figures in her head and thought I should trust her; I needed to see them written down for me to do so.
(Interestingly, my sister is, like Eames, a performer and I, like Arthur, am a researcher. So if given information - say a copy of Hamlet - we would categorize and express that information differently: her with a performance of a character (so a lot of her knowledge would remain internal), me with an analytical essay (look at everything I know!).)
Arthur's not going to accept anything Eames says unless he can see the research Eames has done to back it up. In the film, Eames provides justification for his opinions on Browning so Arthur is impressed; of course, Eames then thanks Arthur for his condescension.
But I don't think Arthur is being condescending. I think he's remarkably open about what he thinks and feels and gives his opinions freely, but this doesn't come from a place of false superiority. When people aren't doing their job right or well he tells them so.
Arthur: Arsehole, how'd you mess up the carpet?
Nash: It wasn't my fault.
Arthur: You're the architect!
Nash: I didn't know he was going to rub his damn cheek on it!
Cobb: That's enough.
Arthur: And you, what the hell was that all?
Cobb: I have it under control.
Arthur: I'd hate to see out of control.
Cobb: We don't have time for this.
Firstly, he calls Nash an arsehole. Warranted? Well, the job failed partially as a result of his mistake so they're in trouble with their employers (Cobb, at least, now has a price on his head - maybe they all do?). Also, that kind of name calling is readily found in the military and word of God states that Arthur is ex-military (and that's something I have incorporated into my fic). More interesting to me is his tone, which is terse but not overly angry. He probably would have just chided Nash and then dropped it but then Nash denied responsibility. Arthur comes back with the slightly more forceful "You're the architect!", which justifies his criticism: "Yes, it was your fault because you didn't do your job right," is implied.
By the time Cobb says "That's enough" Arthur has disengaged from Nash: his head is down and he's working on the PASIV. When Arthur questions Cobb his tone is completely different, more measured and there's genuine concern there even though it's not tactfully phrased. Cobb, not for the first time in the film, brushes aside Arthur's concern so Arthur let's him know that his issues are an issue for Arthur. So naturally, Cobb does it again because if he were to tell Arthur the full extent of what is going on, Arthur would shut their shenanigans down (also, Arthur might stop being his friend and Cobb could not deal with that on many, many levels).
What about when Arthur does something wrong? Well, he cops to it, immediately. This is me tracking his tone.
Cobb: Has he been shot, is he dying?
Arthur: I don't know.
Cobb: Jesus Christ.
Arthur: Where were you? What happened to you? [CONCERN]
Cobb: We were blocked by a freight train.
Arthur(to Ariadne): Why would you put a train crossing in the middle of a downtown intersection? [CURIOUS]
Ariadne: I didn't.
Arthur: Where'd it come from? [CURIOUS, SLIGHTLY ALARMED]
Cobb: Let me ask you a question: Why the hell were we ambushed?! Those were not normal projections, they'd been trained for god's sakes!
Arthur: You're right. [CONCILIATORY]
Ariadne: How could they be trained?
Arthur: Fischer's had an extractor teach his subconscious to defend itself so his subconscious is militarized. It should've shown on the research, I'm sorry - [FRUSTRATED, CONCILIATORY]
Cobb: So why the hell didn't it?!
Arthur: Calm down. [TENSE]
Cobb: Don't tell me to calm down, this was your job god dammit, this was your responsibility! -you were meant to check Fischer's background thoroughly. We are not prepared for this kind of violence-
Arthur: We have dealt with sub-security before, we'll be a little more careful and we're gonna be fine- [STRAINED]
Cobb: This was not a part of the plan, he's dying for Christ's sake!
Cobb's getting cranky right in his face but Arthur does his level best not to inflame the situation. He explains, he apologises, you can see him actually hold back from saying more (in his defence, how the hell do you find out someone's been secretly trained?) because he has realised that now is not the time for a discussion. He'll take it on the chin and get on with the job, but I bet in an ideal situation Arthur would drag everyone to a post-mission debrief and there would be a whiteboard and some markers and he would write "What did we do well, what did we do badly, and how can we improve?" and everyone would have to come up and make a comment.
Because of the nature of the film we don't get to see Arthur off the job so it's hard to figure out what he'd be like when not working (or when working under less stressful, more healthy circumstances). I think his interactions with Ariadne are really useful here and for reasons aside from the fact that I ship them. Unlike Cobb and Eames, Ariadne is new to him: they don't have history, baggage, or issues. Now, when most people interact with someone new who they're going to be working with, they tend to be the best version of themselves and smooth off the hard edges: I like to show people that I'm intelligent and funny, but I ease them into the grammar pedantry and sarcasm. In the "Cobb said you'd be back"/paradoxical architecture lesson sequence Arthur is polite, friendly, easygoing, and informative without being condescending. He's pleased when Ariadne gets concepts, chuckles appreciatively at one of her comments (i.e. he's laughing with her not at her), and he gently tells her of Mal's death. From Arthur's interactions with Ariadne, I get the sense that he's good with people, not awkward or cold as some have characterised him. I think he likes people and is generally well-liked by them.
Looking to his interactions with Cobb and Eames for a baseline of his personality doesn't work for me because those moments are usually tense and Arthur is being provoked towards an emotional response; while he might be pissed about Eames knocking his chair, I don't think he's pissy by nature.
So, Arthur's good with people but hasn't figured out what's up with Cobb while Ariadne, who has just met him, gets it quickly? Well, Ariadne is a heck of a lot more intuitive about this kind of thing. Arthur can sense that something is wrong but Ariadne can intuit what is wrong: she's a natural (or maybe she learned this kind of behavioural knowledge from one of her parents? Haven't decided if I want to justify it yet). She doesn't really have the vocabulary or the techniques that a professional counsellor (or perhaps Eames) would use but she senses that Cobb needs to be pushed and being confident but not particularly tactful, she's just the girl to do it. Very pragmatic and practical is our Ariadne, underneath all that imagination. It's why she gets along with Arthur: neither of them have a high tolerance for bullshit.
Other thoughts that I'm building into my characterisation:
- Arthur is extremely loyal. Once you are on his team he will do anything for you.
- Getting on his team is hard. He doesn't trust people easily.
- Arthur doesn't like Eames partly because he can't trust him. He can't trust him because of Eames's motives, which are money and intellectual curiosity, and Arthur is chiefly motivated by friendship.
- Also, Arthur thinks Eames still has ties to British Intelligence. Arthur fears what Eames might/will tell them.
- Cobb views/treats Eames more like an equal than Arthur does. Eames is aware that Arthur doesn't see him as "team" and that kind of needles him. So he needles Arthur in return.
- Eames sees himself and Cobb as innovators in the field. He sees Arthur as support. Arthur knows this. It irritates him.
- Arthur likes things that are visually interesting (Francis Bacon, the décor in Saito's palace, his suits).
- As such he actually likes how Eames dresses. He wouldn't dress that way but he admires style.
- He likes the way Ariadne dresses. He likes that she mixes patterns and colours. They have that in common.
- Arthur's family is lower middle class but arty.
- Thanks to his family he can draw fairly well and has a wide knowledge of and developed taste for art.
- Arthur's the black sheep of his family because he pays his taxes.
- Despite being the third of four children he often assumed older brother type duties.
- Arthur loves but is not particularly close to his parents. They've never really seen eye to eye.
- Ariadne's family is upper-middle class. Fairly intellectual but not snobbish.
- She is the oldest child of three.
- Her parents have always been very supportive of her education. Financially, too. Her dad's a lawyer.
- Her dad's also French-Canadian so she's been bilingual from an early age. She took lessons in Metropolitan French before moving to France, to help her adjust to the variations in the language. Perhaps why she's more intuitive about Cobb: she picks up and thinks about the nuances.
ETA: On taste
- Arthur watched the first season of Mad Men but hasn't seen any more. He thinks Don Draper is a jerk who needs to get over himself.
- Likes Lost, though. A much better blend of character and action. He developed quite a few theories. Hasn't seen the finale and has so far avoided being spoiled.
- Procedurals (CSI, Law & Order bore him.
- Prefers genre fiction over contemporary lit. Sci-fi, crime, fantasy. Well read in the canon of Eng Lit thanks to a favourite teacher.
- Reads more non-fiction though. A lot of history. Reads up on aspects of physics, chemistry, biology, that have nothing to do with work because he genuinely likes it.
- Loves hockey. Will shout/throw things when watching games.
- Doesn't much care for classical music.