/lit/ - Literature

>>15470611
No, it's actually the opposite.

Characters like Harry Potter never develop because if they did, you'd have a completely different Harry in each book. So Harry's character is set in stone. This is the case with every series.

Of course we see character development in literary fiction. Oedipus Rex goes from a beloved king to a blind pauper. Are you fucking dumb?

Other things genre fiction is focused on seem to be "the setting" and exploring some in-universe magic or whatever rules.

>>15470631
>>Of course we see character development in literary fiction. Oedipus Rex goes from a beloved king to a blind pauper. Are you fucking dumb?
It is you, who is retarded. The whole point of greek tragedy is that the main character brings on bad fate on himself by being unable to change. He is incapable of averting disaster, as he was both blind as a king and as a pauper.

Are you baiting? The example you've chosen is so bad.

>>15470631
>Characters like Harry Potter never develop
Pretty sure that one of the main points of stories for kids is that the main character HAS to change. Harry Potter learns self-sacrifice, he learns how to be a teenager, to be brave, friendship and so on - and only because of these changes he is capable to defeat Voldemort through the power of love or whatever.

>>15470642
If you seriously think there's no difference between the Oedipus at the start of the story and the Oedipus at the end I think you're the brainlet. He goes from being a strong and confident leader to someone who's so pathetic he stabs his eyes out to prove he has some semblance of free will. You're saying Oedipus doesn't change? Are you seriously mistaking character development for free will?

>Harry Potter learns self-sacrifice, he learns how to be a teenager, to be brave, friendship
I'm going to disagree with you there. Harry doesn't learn self-sacrifice. What does he sacrifice, exactly? How to be a teenager? How is teenage Harry different from the Harry in the fist book, exactly? How to be brave? Yeah, in the first book the sorting hat automatically puts him into the brave kids house, good development, real nail biter there.

>>15470730
>first oedipus king, then oedipus dirty
>that's character development!

>>15470742
Oedipus views himself differently, and so do his subjects. The chorus goes from adoring him to abandoning him. You're really grasping at straws. Did you even read Oedipus Rex or did you just read a wikipedia summary? Because if you didn't read it you can still save face.

>>15470767
I don't think you know what character development means.

>>15470611
It's more that character development isn't obligatory in literature, there are still books where characters change but it isn't an expected norm

Why do normies constantly praise character development as being some amazing thing? I get nothing out of it

>>15470770
Yeah, I don't know what character development is, Mr. I've-Never-Seen-An-Example-Of-Character-Development-in-Literary-Fiction-Before.

Maybe the reason you've never seen it is because you're an idiot.

>>15470807
Character development is somebody developing as a person, realizing their own flaws, becoming better. Or worse, although that's more rare. It has nothing to do with your material situation, or what others think of you.

>>15470839
>developing as a person, realizing their own flaws, becoming better.
That's just the case in coming-of-age fiction.

Character development is also learning a lesson, friends becoming enemies or enemies becoming friends due to intrinsic or extrinsic forces, discovering something new about themselves or about the world, finding or losing inner strength, etc. The idea that character development is only "I was selfish and now I'm not selfish" or "I was weak but now I'm strong" is extremely childish and doesn't take into account the complexity of human nature.

Besides cheesy serials like Harry Potter the only other example I can think of where you don't find character development is in allegories. Where characters are set in stone because they're meant to represent something.

>>15470916
>learning a lesson
aka becoming better
>friends becoming enemies or enemies becoming friends
not character development
> discovering something new about themselves or about the world
aka becoming better
>finding or losing inner strength
aka becoming better/worse

geez, just admit you're wrong and move on

>>15470949
oh so you admit discovering something new about themself and losing inner strength is part of character development?

And Oedipus doesn't develop as a character?

>>15471058
Of course not, because it is purely external.