I've been wondering for a while now how character death should be handled in fiction, especially when planning my own ideas. For example, in the Worm thread some posters have almost criticised how all the Undersiders have survived so far, others have complimented on how recognisable characters were killed in the past and some feel that character death in imminent. So it got me thinking:

When should a character die? What reason should a writer have to kill off a character? Is it a requirement for writing good fiction (in genres where physical conflict is likely at least)? How significant should the character who died be to the protagonist, the reader or the plot?

 

The occasions and guidelines for character death are as varied as there are types of stories. One cannot easily generalize. It's not a requirement, but good fiction does have high stakes. The threat of character death, be it physical, spiritual, career, or whatever makes the stakes high by default and ratchets up tension.

Understand that when you kill characters off, particularly sympathetic characters, is tends to be a big deal and generally shouldn't be done just to add "seriousness" (though GRRM probably might argue otherwise, as his killing of

Spoiler

Ned Stark

shows). Killing Dumbledore in book 6 was a big deal. Turning Deathly Hallows into a Tarantino blood-fest was an even bigger deal, a large part of why so many fans dislike the last book so: you had a generation who grew up with Lupin, Tonks, Dobby, Hedwig, Fred, who learned to, if not like, at least tolerate Snape. And then they're gone, culled with little time for reflection or for the impacts of their deaths to settle with the reader (for many of them, anyway). Had JKR killed off one of the principals (besides Harry, of course, who got better), I've no doubt the book would have become the most reviled piece of YA literature extant.

Approach death carefully in fiction.

 

As Perspicacity said, it really depends on the work in question whether or not such should be done.

The way I tend to look at this topic, the audience needs to think characters can die before you go around chopping heads off. The important thing is that the characters feel vulnerable, that there's a sense that if things go wrong, they'll fall off a cliff or something.

That's the deciding factor in whether or not one should start killing off characters IMO. If you don't have that, killing them feels like it a cheap way to raise the stakes.

 

The amount of deaths and the method of death is important. Without going into spoilers or anything, the mix of those two elements in A Song of Ice and Fire is part of what has made me reluctant to continue with the series.

As for Tonks and Lupin's deaths in Deathly Hallows, it wasn't so much that they died that bothered me, but how they died. Rowling never shows it happening. That just makes it feel like she wanted the body count to be a little higher, so she drew some names out of a hat and threw a paragraph in there. If you're going to kill characters who are popular and have had a big role in the story like that, fucking do it right. Make their deaths have actual purpose instead of "I'm so edgy by killing off all these characters, am I cool and dark yet?"

 

I would second that you have to be careful how and who you kill, but I'll add another viewpoint than those already stated. As a reader, when a writer just kills side characters while sympathetic characters get a free pass to do dangerous shit and get away with it, it irritates me and often prevents me from getting into a book. If your characters go into dangerous situations, then I think it is necessary for someone to die.

 

The only way character deaths make sense, I think, is if they're the natural result of the plot or certain character interactions. You can't just kill folks off left and right. If you write a character into a corner where death is incredibly likely, they can still survive provided the reason for being able to make it out is already established (even if the reader doesn't know it until after the confrontation is over).

Conversely sometimes randomly killing off a character is genius. Especially if the reaction from the reader (e.g. how senseless) is mirrored by the protagonist.

There's not really a rule to this stuff.

Paradoxically character death should always add something to the story, even when you're taking someone away.

 

I always think that there should be a logical lead-up to important character death. Like, say you want someone to be shot by an assassin during the climax. Set up some early warning markers, like a criminal threatening him over the phone, things like that.

That way, the reader can look back and be like, "Oh yeah, that's right, this makes sense." Or perhaps have them be seriously injured at some point earlier in the story, to show that grievous harm doesn't just fall out of the sky. Even a non-impairing wound that's soon healed could be a good reminder that our heroes are not invincible.

Sometimes you can even use that to set up a sensible demise. Perhaps a character took a bullet to the leg and has to walk with a limp for the rest of the story. People will forget about that, even if it's referenced a lot, because it soon becomes background. Then you have some kind of lethal threat that has to be outrun. All of a sudden you can remind the readers, "This guy has a limp, he's fucked."

I suppose, when you get down to it, don't pull a death ex machina. Make me believe the character can die, and that the method is justified. If not, have a sudden death make more sense after the fact. A sudden demise with no warning OR explanation makes me feel like I've been cheated out of a character.

 

It depends a lot on the kind of story you are writing. In a War story, or a story where characters are in a state of war, senseless death is part of what is going on and it makes sense for important characters to suddenly be killed off without much build up and little time to mourn or react.

In a horror/slasher story, half the point of the story is killing off big, important characters. But unlike a war story, there really has to be that moment of highlight and drama so that the horror can sink in.

Adventures are different. Generally speaking, character death is optional in adventures. Including character death can serve to make the story grittier, maintain the sense of danger to the hero, or provide powerful motivation that fuels the heroes further on. How much to include and to which characters depends on the effect you are trying to create.

In non-adventure stories, character death should almost always be about the drama and emotion of relating to that death. (Even in adventure stories that is normally something you want to include.)