Grow up, please!

All right, so I've been fed books since the first grade. That was about the time my mother tricked me into reading the first Harry Potter book, and I've been reading--A LOT--since then.

That means that I've read a lot of series. Some of them, like the awesome, fantabulous, utterly amazing Harry Potter series have nothing wrong with them. (Well, there's probably something, but I guess I'm a tad biased. -coughs-)
But here's the thing with series. When you grow up with a character, isn't it nice when . . . well, when they grow up too?
I mean, look at Harry. I started reading about him when I was six and finished at like . . . thirteen? Every year, he got older. A little more mature. So did I--it was great. Granted, that isn't true with everyone--at least not in the similarity--but it is nice to watch a character change. You aren't the exact same person with every book you read, especially when the series spans years. It's weird when the character is.
Just look at the Percy Jackson series.

Percy starts off as a scared little kid. By the end of the series, he's a kick butt teenager. It's part of what makes the books great--watching the characters grow.
It sets up dedication, too. If I had to sum up my childhood in a book, I would name Harry Potter. Not because I was a Witch

(if only)
but because I grew up with them. I don't think it matters the literal element to that, though I'm sure it makes my devotion stronger. Any amount of watching the character change makes you like them more. It makes you empathize, and even grow to love them. I mean, it would be kinda creepy if Hermione had looked like this for 7 years.

Yes, she's adorable. But unless she had taken a dip in the fountain of eternal youth, or even just stepped into Never Never Land, it's not practical to look like that forever.
What set off this rant?
The book I'm reading now is part of a series. I've been reading it for YEARS. I've seen dozens off new covers, and a maybe movie in the works, and guess what?
When I started reading, I was younger than the main character.
I'm now older.
It's kind of annoying, actually. In a one or two book series, fine, that's okay. Even in a trilogy, I suppose. But in a --six? seven?--book series? It's getting kind of annoying. I'm reading about the same character that I loved a long time ago--but I'm different. Why the heck isn't she?
I mean, I started reading when I had bad hair and a strong attachment to pink. I think it might have been pre braces. The character at the time seemed like this in my mind.



(Okay, not really, but she's cute.)
Anyway, five years have passed. She shouldn't look like that anymore. I don't care if it's two years or three, but more than six or seven months should have passed. She should be resembling this, now.

Or something similar. For one thing, she's learning how to solemnly pose and offer a great brooding look. That alone deserves major kudos.
And the romantic interest? Yeah, he definitely shouldn't be staying young. It's one thing if you're a vampire.

Emmet Cullen allowed to look like that forever. In fact, I approve.
But otherwise? Come on. The characters just need to grow up.

--note--
Myra McEntire interview soon! If I don't get more questions, I'm just going off of what I want to know. That seems to generally work.
Comment if that seems okay, please.

Accesorize

I've always had a thing for princess's. I blame Disney for that. My heroes when I was younger? Yeah, well. I'd love to tell you I, like Einstein and many other brilliant minds, worshiped political leaders or a murdered saint or something.
Not quite.
After all, they didn't wear pretty dresses. My heroes totally did.

Belle was smart. She knew about books and she got a really cute prince in the end because she wasn't shallow. (Oh, the irony.)


Anastasia was sarcastic and so there for, a kind of goddess. Plus, she hit Dimitri whenever he was being annoying. Of course, you know, that was before I knew all about abuse and how bad it was.
Fine.
I still find it amusing.

Jasmine had a pet tiger. Really, do I need to say more?
Yes? Well, fine. She was smart, too, and she ran away from her palace because she didn't want to get married. She got to ride on a magic carpet, and she yelled at the guards. So, other than the tiger, she was still pretty cool.
Why am I rambling about Disney Princess's, you may ask?
Well, I'm rambling because they are characters that have enchanted little girls for years. What makes us like them? Is it the dresses, the jewelry and the pet tiger? Or is it the other stuff--the smart stuff, the fiesty stuff, all that?
I think it's kind of both. I mean, it's shallow, but the dresses were really attractive to little girls. The dresses and the jewelry and stuff are their accessories.
In books, you don't like characters who have no accessories. I'm not just talking about the sparkly stuff, either. I mean the sort of thing that makes them individuals. People, on some level, can be defined by what they like. You don't define them by that, but it makes them more real.
For instance, Jace from City of Bones.

He's a character that teenage girls across the country seem to adore. Why? Well, he's snarky, he's cool, and he kicks demon butt. Accessories that define him? Just look at the picture! Tattoos, or steles(Knife thingys, for those of you who haven't read it.) These certainly aren't the things that make who he is, but they help round out the character.
Or what about Hermione Granger? (No, I will not tell you what she is from. If you do not know, then shame on you.)

Well, I guess the shame is void, since it's in the picture. . .
But anyway.
She's bookish. She's always defined by books and by good magic. If she didn't always have a book, it wouldn't matted how much you were told she loves to read. It just wouldn't be the same.
It doesn't have to even be material goods, but I think the material things do help flesh out a character.
It isn't even the immortal battle of showing versus telling in writing. It's just making a character seem real. You can use little things, quirks or weird addictions, to make it happen. A hobby even. In Beastly, by Alex Flinn, the main character likes to garden.

That makes it so much easier to find him human. The accessory is enough to make him real, and turning paper to human beings is amazing.
It's also really difficult. In my opinion, one of the hardest things about writing is making a character real. Yes, I am kind of stuck on this lately. It doesn't matter how well you write, though, if people can't see the character. It doesn't even matter if they love them. It just matters that your character comes to life on the page, breathing and reading and kicking demons back into their dimensions.
I loved Disney princesses because they seemed real. They weren't fluffy, candied girls; they seemed like actual people. Belle had her books. Anastasia had a desire to find her family. Jasmine had her tiger and her curiosity. You could actually see it in them. To make real characters, I think you have to write human (of fayrie/elves/vampires/ect) qualities into the people.
Of course, easier said than done.
However, as many a stylist has said . . .
Thank god for accesories.