What is the term for an accessible character that knows nothing?

Question

In a lot of books, movies, or TV shows, there will be a character that knows little to nothing about the subject at hand. Most cop shows and medical shows will have someone who doesn't know very simple things so that the story can be accessible by all. Another prime example of this would be Marty McFly in *Back to the Future*. He knew nothing about time travel (just like the audience) so Doc Brown explaining to him about the inter workings of "flux capacitors" and how fast one must go in a DeLorean to travel in time were to keep the audience from saying "heavy."In all seriousness though, is there a term for that "literary device?" Is it a literary device?To follow up, a few movies recently are deciding not to include that character in the interest of realism. They feel in order to keep things as true to life as possible, you would not have a doctor who didn't know simple medical terminology or a cop who didn't know the proper collection procedure. They focus on the story or relationships rather than the jargon. Is this a better way to write? Is it better to alienate some and connect with a few or write to the masses (with the character question in mind)?**tldr:** 1. Is there a term for that character in many shows that knows nothing whose sole purpose for being there is so the audience can learn as he does? 2. Should you use this type of character in writing?

Answer 1

Interesting question. I don't know about an "official" term (official according to whom?), but people sometimes refer to that character as the audience's (or reader's) spokesperson, or the audience's way in, or speaking from the audience's point of view, or something like that. The character who needs the same information that the audience needs.

As for shows eliminating that character...that sounds like too broad a statement to me. The basic idea is that one of the big problems of dramatic storytelling has always been how to get the audience up to speed on the situation. You probably already know that information is called "exposition." Some writers manage this elegantly, in a way that not only conveys the information but also deepens the world of the story, and some are clumsy about it. There's a well-known cliche of English murder mysteries starting with a maid answering the phone--"Hello, Colonel Johnson's residence...No, I'm sorry, he doesn't see visitors anymore, not since his wife died so mysteriously one year ago today, and with the tide coming in every evening, the house is totally cut off..." you get the idea. And certainly the idea of a doctor who doesn't know medicine is absurd. A lot of medical procedurals start with the main character's first day on the job, which allows them to learn about, say, hospital procedure along with the audience, while also allowing the audience to trace their growth. Other shows find other ways to do it.

As for whether it's "good," well, what do you want to accomplish? If you want the audience to relate to your world, then somehow or other they need to be able to understand it. If you want them to feel alienated, then by all means withhold as much as you want. Form follows function.

But yeah, beginnings are hard to write well, and exposition is a big reason why.

Answer 2

To answer question 1, I would just call that a trope. That being said, there aren't typically academic terms each kind of trope. Here's an example of tropes where you can see that the names are more subjective and descriptive than academic: https://blog.reedsy.com/fantasy-tropes/

As for question 2, I'm not totally sure what you mean by alienating some. It sounds like you mean that some people don't find a show approachable because of technical jargon. I personally think there are plenty of shows that use technical jargon and they have perfectly relatable characters. Examples might be Bones, Brookline-99, Sherlock, or The Good Doctor. However, it is a really delicate task to avoid being too overbearing with technical terms which make people disinterested. The best advice I've heard in creative writing is to choose story elements over technical accuracy. My more whimsical answer to that question is to search your own soul on whether or not you want to add those details and risk losing audience. On a more practical level, if you feel a moral obligation to write a technically correct character, write a story like that and get it peer reviewed to see what people understand and how they are relate. This will give you a feel for how these elements change the story you want to tell.