This topic sheet was originally devised for the Exciting Sitcom Writing course. There is a table of links to other teaching resources towards the bottom of this page.

Characterisation is arguably more important in situation comedy than in any other medium.

Characters Matter More than Plot

In story-driven forms such as novels and plays, the boundaries are primarily defined by the plot, while characters are important only insofar as they motivate and support the plot, adding credibility and depth.

In situation comedy, by contrast, the central characters are the defining feature, while the plot is often little more than a vehicle for communicating the characters' obsessions, idiosyncrasies and conflicts.

Idiosyncrasies Matter More than Biography

Perhaps the best way to approach the issue of characterisation is through the eyes and ears of the audience: by considering the aspects of character that make for successful situation comedy.

The essence of the comedy is the human situation, in the sense that people rarely perceive themselves precisely as others see them. One person's instinctive behaviour is another's eccentricity. One person's well-meaning action is interpreted as stupidity by others. One person's imagined skilful efforts at deceiving others are viewed with amused incredulity, and so on.

In short, the mindsets and idiosyncrasies of individuals are the atoms of character humour. The comedy enters new dimensions when the individuals interact with one another and engage with the events that occur around them.

This perspective provides a rapid route to effective situation comedy characterisation. To create effective comedy characters, we need do little more than identify the potential for misunderstandings and conflicts between them. Biographical details are important insofar as they add credibility, but they are not nearly as important as mindsets and idiosyncrasies.

Viewing Characters As If through Filters

Observing a character in a situation comedy is rather like viewing an image through a series of filters that change the shape and colour of the image. The subject being viewed is nothing more or less than the character's behaviour.

The first layer of colour is applied by the character's interpretation of and response to his/her behaviour. For example, if the character is a chronic liar, his/her interpretation may lie anywhere on the spectrum from self-justifying conviction to self-destructive guilt. If the character has a guilty secret such as compulsive sweet eating, his/her response may be to yield to the compulsion while alone and seek to cover it up when in the presence of others.

The next layers of filtering are applied by the other characters.

Their objective views of others are coloured by their own idiosyncrasies and their subjective view of themselves. This provides many permutations based on any single character trait already identified. For example, one character may may be taken in by the chronic liar while another may respond by assuming the opposite of everything the liar says.

Characters also have the potential to shape others' behaviour through their own. For example, a mischievous observer of the secret sweet eating may seek to expose the guilty secret, thereby creating interesting new conflicts and new creative opportunities in terms of the character with the guilty secret.

The final layers of filtering are applied by the members of the audience. Like the characters in the comedy, they take an objective view of each character's behaviour. More importantly, because they stand outside the comedy, they are able to see things that the characters cannot. For example, while the ever-rowing couple fight about whose turn it is to bring in the milk, their disgruntled neighbour gleefully targets the bottles on the doorstep with an air gun.

Characterisation Made Easy

Perhaps the quickest route to situation comedy characterisation is to start with the idiosyncrasies and work from there, along lines such as the following:

• Sketch a few characters in about 50 words each. Concentrate on objective description (sex, age, work, aspirations, etc) without seeking to judge the characters in any way.
• Apply flaws that will define the characters and dictate the situations in which they will find themselves. It may help to establish a preliminary list through brainstorming, taking a deliberately negative or cynical view of humanity: stupidity, arrogance, pedantry, halitosis, over-confidence, tactlessness, poor clothes sense, etc.
• Consider how characters' flaws might clash with one another as a means of adding depth of characterisation and defining conflict-based relationships. For example, if a clever, ambitious woman marries a man for his money, only to find only that has has not, but that he is incredibly stupid as well, there is much to be learned about both characters by considering how each might respond to the other's behaviour. This form of exploration may be enhanced by asking questions that probe the relationships between the characters: e.g. How does X (insecure and socially inadequate office manager) cope with the fact that his secretary (hired for her good looks and seemingly timid personality) could obviously do his job better than he is able to do it.