Going Gollum: A tricksy way for writers to think about character interiority

*Confession: I have never read a lick of Tolkien. This piece centres around a playful idea sparked by the films.

This past winter break, I did what I suspect many people did: I bundled up on the couch with a few snacks and bevvies to comfort-watch (okay, binge) my favourite films.

While champagne bottles popped and fireworks crackled outside ringing in the new year, I was six hours and a bottle of wine into The Lord of the Rings trilogy declaring my love for Gollum.

I am so much fun at parties…

Why is he my number one? Apart from Andy Serkis’ iconic performance, I live for Gollum’s unhinged and unfiltered inner world. Thanks to this character’s unique plight—I’m not here to diagnose, so let’s call it a bad case of word vomit— the audience is privy to his sneaky little thoughtses, wicked, tricksy, false!

This movie marathon got me thinking about how Gollum can be a helpful reference point for folks struggling to write character interiority. Stick with me on this one…

What is interiority?

Interiority is a reflection of all the things that make up a character’s inner world: their thoughts/thought processes, feelings, struggles, secret desires, and memories. When applied strategically in a narrative, interiority can build empathy, amplify tension, strengthen characterization, and enhance emotional resonance.

If you are anything like me, understanding the intention behind interiority is easy. Sitting down to write it, on the other hand, is a slog. I have an unhelpful default of initially writing moments of character interiority using a series of questions, seldom answered.

[Why was he looking at me like that? What did he want from me? How long was this staring contest going to last?]

But thought processes are more nuanced than stacked questions, and this approach offers the reader minimal insight. To set a better base, there needs to be a call and response. This is where our creepy little friend comes in.

Going Gollum

Let’s have some fun with this thought experiment.

I propose an easy entry point (I stress that this is the start and not the finish) for framing up interiority is to write it like an exchange between Gollum and Smeagol.

A complex character is likely to have their own Gollum/Smeagol dynamic in their brain. You could think of it as a struggle between good and evil, but you’ll achieve greater depth if you think of it as pitting a want against a need, or an obligation against another competing obligation.

In the second film, when Gollum returns to Frodo and Sam after being captured and beaten by Faramir’s rangers, he is filled with anger and doubt regarding Frodo’s trustworthiness. He then grapples with continuing to help the Hobbits or sabotaging them for his own desires. It plays out like this:

Smeagol: Master. Master looks after us. Master wouldn’t hurt us.

Gollum: Master broke his promise.

Smeagol: Don’t ask Smeagol. Poor, poor Smeagol.

Gollum: Master betrayed us. Wicked. Tricksy, False. We ought to wring his filthy little neck. Kill him! Kill him! Kill them both! And then we take the precious... and we be the master!

Smeagol: But the fat Hobbit, he knows. Eyes always watching.

Gollum: Then we stabs them out. Put out his eyeses, make him crawl.

Smeagol: Yes. Yes. Yes.Gollum: Kill them both.Smeagol: Yes. No! No! It’s too risky. It’s too risky.

Gollum: We could let her do it.Smeagol: Yes. She could do it.Gollum: Yes, precious, she could. And then we takes it once they’re dead.

This conflict between duty and desire shows us how the character is feeling and helps the audience understand why Gollum does what he does next, even if we don’t agree with it.

Application in writing

When you reach a point in your narrative where a character is faced with new information, a choice, or a desire, this usually marks a place where you can bring in some interiority. It’s a good opportunity for the reader to learn something about a character based on how they weigh the scenario and confront their feelings around it.

When you put pen to paper, think about the character’s competing inner voices in this moment and bring that battle to the page. What you’ll likely end up with is internal dialogue – a technique to draw out interiority.

You could stop there. At this level, like Gollum, your interiority will be a bit skeletal.

How do you stick some meat on those bones? Add another layer. Start to consider how the inner world is expressed through action in the physical world (this too is interiority!). How is your character holding their body? Are they pacing or picking at their clothes? Are they folding in on themselves? Most people give clues as to how they are feeling, even if they don’t speak the words out loud.

A watch out

Offering up interiority will have a direct effect on pacing. Not every scene will merit an extensive Smeagol/Gollum back and forth with physical clues on top. And sometimes one of the inner voices might not be present at all.

Think of spreading interiority in a scene like peanut butter. A light layer will offer some flavour without impairing pace, whereas a thicker layer will demand more time to chew and digest. A combat sequence, for example, likely merits far less interiority than a break-up scene.

--

For me, interiority feels much more accessible when I use a Smeagol/Gollum framework. It’s not a silver bullet solution, but it provides me with a solid starting point that can be further developed in second- and third -round edits when I have a clearer picture of each character’s emotional world.