TuesdayTips143

Balancing The Ensemble.

For the last couple of weeks, I have spent longer than I should hanging around on Star Trek Facebook forums. A couple of topics for discussion got me thinking about how a strong ensemble cast can make all the difference between a successful show and one that doesn't quite work. The same is true for a novel, especially if your book is centred around a team, which a lot of police procedurals are.
First of all, I'm not talking about how good the actors are. Rather, I'm looking at it from the storyteller's perspective. In previous posts, I've spoken about character development, especially the need for rounded characters with a broad range of traits. This is even more important for an ensemble, where different characters can take on different traits and roles. In a good ensemble cast, none of the characters are superfluous. Their importance to a particular story may vary, but they bring an essential component, such as a skill or a perspective, that the storytellers would struggle without
Star Trek has always been at its best when the ensemble is balanced.
Using the original Star Trek as an a example:
At the centre is the 'triumvirate' - Kirk, Spock and Dr McCoy. These three characters bring contrasting and complementary character traits that allow for a broad range of stories to be told.
Spock is cerebral and logical with a cool head. He can think through situations without allowing emotion to cloud his judgement.
McCoy is emotional, and wears his heart on his sleeve. He is incredibly intelligent but often prefers to go with his gut than his head. He and Spock are two sides of the same coin.
Captain Kirk balances the other two men. As Captain, he weighs up what others have to say and makes a decision. He brings a physicality and willingness to accept risk.
Between them, these three men have sufficient character traits to tell a broad range of stories. Importantly, you need all three of these characters to exist if you want to keep on telling new stories that don't get predictable. If Spock wasn't there, Kirk and McCoy could be goaded into doing what feels right at that moment and missing some subtle clue. If McCoy is absent, Spock would tend towards ruthless logic, perhaps persuading Kirk to strictly follow the rules, rather than bend them to achieve a compromise that means everyone wins. In the absence of Kirk as mediator, Spock and McCoy would argue endlessly about the best course of action and no decisions would be made.
This doesn't mean they have to be in all stories - in fact, some of the most interesting episodes involve one of these three being temporarily unavailable. In that case, we see how the others struggle without the traits of that character. However, long-term, all three of these characters need to exist for the series to work. A car can limp on for a short while with one of its wheels missing, but pretty soon it is too badly impaired to continue. Ensemble casts are the same.
Who does what in an ensemble can change.
The catalyst for these thoughts came from a different star trek series, ST Discovery. Someone started a discussion about one of the characters, Ensign Tilly. Some posters like her, others want to see the back of her. However, I argue that Tilly is an integral part of the ensemble cast. She starts as the most inexperienced of the main cast, and thus she acts as a bit of an audience substitute, explaining everything for those of us at home. She also brought an infectious enthusiasm and loyalty, and an endearing naivety. She was also willing to admit to being terrified on occasion (something earlier Star Trek series tended not to show). Over the course of the four seasons to date, she has evolved into a more confident and mature character. Which means that some of those original qualities have had to be redistributed to a degree between other characters, both new and existing, to maintain that breadth of character traits.
Not all members of an ensemble have to be likeable.
And now I continue to my favourite of the Star Trek series, The Next Generation, and its most recent incarnation, Star Trek Picard. Without giving too many spoilers away, ST Picard is set two decades after the Next Generation cast (always a strong ensemble) finished their run on TV and the big screen. This third and final season delivers what all us fans have desperately been waiting for - the reunion of the beloved original cast. However, this ensemble is joined by other characters; some previously established in other trek series (eg Seven of Nine from Star Trek Voyager), some unique to ST: Picard (eg Raffi) and others invented just for this season.
The biggest marmite character of the lot is Captain Liam Shaw, commander of the USS Titan, the ship on which much of the 3rd season adventures take place.
Abrasive, rude and sarcastic, some viewers really dislike him and would rather see the back of him. I can't disagree more strongly. Shaw is a stroke of genius. The Next Generation crew are shipmates with 35 years of shared history. They may disagree sometimes, but they are bonded and love each other deeply (off-screen as well, apparently). Many of the rough edges that caused narrative friction during the TV series have been smoothed away. Shaw is the grit in the oyster that leads to the pearl. Without his contrariness, the reunion of the Next Gen cast would be too comfortable. The story would plod along and we'd enjoy it, but it wouldn't be the magnificent spectacle that is currently showing. Time and evolution have sanded down some of the contrasting character traits from the TV series and so Shaw and other characters add those traits back to the ensemble.
So what does all this mean for your stories?
Essentially, I am suggesting that you should craft your ensemble of characters the way you craft an individual. Who is the character that the audience relate to? Who is the audience's 'explainer'? Is there a character who brings optimism to situations? Are they balanced by someone who is pessimistic (and can you flip these characters for an unexpected emotional punch?). Who brings the heart, who brings the intellect?
What happens if the ensemble becomes unbalanced temporarily by the absence of a character?
If characters leave permanently or join how do you compensate? Do you redistribute character traits, or balance it by making other changes to the cast?


What do you think about ensembles? What character traits do you think are essential for a strong and versatile cast - what traits do you think need to be balanced out by more than one character?
As always, feel free to comment here or on social media.
If you are a writer with a tip to share, or fancy writing a fictional interview between you and one of your characters, please feel free to email me.
Until next time, live long and prosper!
Paul