@shylarahCURSE IT refreshed the page and lost my half-post. Anyhow. @Shoryu Magami, I've seen the cosmos/existence done only once, but it was fun. Noice~
I know that feeling.
On the subject I mentioned about my cosmos, I'm probably going in a very different direction to that person you've mentioned, but I won't comment on it further -- it's both complicated and a huge spoiler. All I'll say is it relates directly to this discussion we're having about importance between characters and the setting -- my setting is in direct
opposition to some of my characters.
The delay was because I was looking for Character Calculus terms that I didn't manage to find, but basically I think that it is possible to have a story without (main) characters as such. Telling the story of a lake over time, or the movement of glaciers in the ice age, or the slow decline of a dying rural town, these would all work, because the setting itself is a character.
Firstly, I'll give this quote as the basis for my attitude towards this.
It isn't going to be the world that'll be memorable; it's the characters. It isn't going to be the world that people love and cry over or despise and want to see the death of; it's the characters.
With this in mind, I'm sure someone could write a story like that, but I don't believe I would ever find it interesting. This is why the characters are more important to me -- they create the reason the story is even worth investing my time into.
As a side note, in the instance of that very obscure and unconventional example you gave, I'd actually consider that lake or that glacier to
be the main character. By its very dictionary definition, an 'antagonist' doesn't actually need to be a person -- it's simply the antagonistic force that gets in the way of the main character or 'protagonist'. The protagonist is, by definition, the focus point of the story. Why is this relevant? In the example you gave, the settings are actually characters because they're the protagonists, meaning that I don't think it's even relevant to the debate of characters vs. settings because in those examples they are
both; however, I once again emphasize that I'd never find a story like this interesting or engaging
personally.
For that matter, while it might be possible to have a story in a black void, the void will have an effect on the characters, and they may not have started there -- thus the settings of their pasts are also important. If A is part of B, and also important on its own, I'd say A is more important that B. ^.^
I never said a character's pasts aren't important, nor the world they come from, but simply that they're not as important as the character themselves. I have a lot of characters who - in representation of myself and my own principles - have overcome incredibly terrible pasts or very adverse backgrounds that would've broken most people or at the very least moulded them into more horrible people. These characters have refused to let their origins corrupt them, rising up as independent souls who created who they are today with their own will. This summarizes my attitude towards settings pretty much perfectly -- where we come from isn't unimportant since it gives us information, but compared to the importance of who we are and who we become the past and our origins are completely meaningless, even worthless. In my eyes, the setting is only important as something for the characters - the true focus of the story - to overcome.