Sidekick, or partner? How do you tell the difference?

[DAgent]

Ok, random brain thought that made me sit bolt up right in bed and log right back in before I forget, but how does everyone tell the difference in fiction between two types of characters that might hang out with the main character a lot? What makes say Robin a sidekick to Batman but makes Riggs and Murtaugh partners in "Lethal Weapon"?

 

[THX1138]

I don't know. Maybe because Robin is really a student of Batman while Murtaugh is a trained and seasoned cop? Just a guess.

 

[soulsinging]

I believe the chief made them partners in Lethal Weapon.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

It’s to do with equality I think, but that’s not always straightforward, particularly in something like a military setting where one has seniority and takes most of the key decisions. when that’s the case, there may need to be something additional to smooth that relationship to one of peers -

I’ve used two key things to do that in a military setting: a switch in seniority where one was previouslz senior to the main character, but the mc then becomes senior to - that can lead to a developing relationship of respect. And then I added a family connection by marriage, which reduces the formality in the relationship somewhat. lastly, the second character has a key point of view, and has his own story arc and character development. It’s a complex relationship then formed (it’s the one I recently had mood-checked on critiques) that is partnership rather than sidekick.

 

[Wayne Mack]

For me, I find there are several aspects to partners as opposed to sidekicks or secondary characters. For partners, there needs to be a balance in competence; each one must be the one to resolve certain challenges. A second characteristic is that a reader or viewer spends time alone with a partner, but not with a sidekick. In the Lethal Weapon series, we see Riggs and Murtaugh alone and living independent lives. The Joe Pesci character, however, only shows up when one or both of the others is present. We have no view into his life as an independent character.

 

[Bramandin]

I think that near-equality is a main factor. Maybe not in what they can do, but how much they're allowed contribute and how much respect they get. Batman tells his sidekicks what he can and can't do, to the point that they're often shown being resentful. Scully and Mulder can but heads on equal footing, J isn't on the same footing as K, but K expects him to earn it fairly quickly.

 

[sknox]

Sidekick is very much a modern thing. Partner is older but not tons older. There are a bunch of other terms related here, including friend, follower or disciple, student or acolyte, sibling or other family member, and so on.

All these are relationships, so rather than trying to figure out what category a character falls into, why not just explore the relationship? Just because we say X is sidekick to A doesn't mean we've said much in story terms. For comparison, if we say X is brother to A, what have we learned? Not much, for there's a lot of ground covered by that word, and that doesn't even get into step-brother or half-brother. Or blood brother.

I don't disagree with any of the other posts. It's just that the OP sent my brain down a different trail. (now I have to go find it again...)

 

[Phyrebrat]

Something something something Blackadder something something

 

[Parson]

For me, I find there are several aspects to partners as opposed to sidekicks or secondary characters. For partners, there needs to be a balance in competence; each one must be the one to resolve certain challenges. A second characteristic is that a reader or viewer spends time alone with a partner, but not with a sidekick. In the Lethal Weapon series, we see Riggs and Murtaugh alone and living independent lives. The Joe Pesci character, however, only shows up when one or both of the others is present. We have no view into his life as an independent character.

Hm, but I would call Tonto the Lone Ranger's partner rather than side kick. But there is little equality there. (Perhaps there's more equality in the remake?) When I think of a side kick I think of a role that's there for a bit of comic relief rather than a full blown character in their own right. Chewbacca to Han Solo and Han Solo to Luke Skywalker in Star Wars. The first is a side kick, the second is a partner.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Hm, but I would call Tonto the Lone Ranger's partner rather than side kick. But there is little equality there. (Perhaps there's more equality in the remake?) When I think of a side kick I think of a role that's there for a bit of comic relief rather than a full blown character in their own right. Chewbacca to Han Solo and Han Solo to Luke Skywalker in Star Wars. The first is a side kick, the second is a partner.

Ha! I’d see Chewie as Han‘s partner before Luke. But maybe that’s from reading some of the extended universe building that relationship

 

[paranoid marvin]

Something something something Blackadder something something

Blackadder is an interesting case in point. In the first series, Baldrick is the intelligent one, whilst Blackadder is the fool; for the rest of the show it's entirely the opposite way around.

I think that the difference between a sidekick and a companion is in how the main character perceives them. A sidekick is often treated (rightly or wrongly) as inferior - sometimes physically, usually mentally. Any suggestion that the sidekick comes up with is usually dismissed as foolhardy. A companion is respected by the character, and treated as an equal, or at least worthy of consideration.

The lines can be blurred though.

Is Rodney Trotter a sidekick (when he and Del dress up, guess who is Batman).

Is Samwise Gamgee a sidekick? Frodo treats him so; having affection for someone isn't the same as having respect for their views and opinions.

Is Stan Laurel a sidekick to Oliver Hardy?

 

[Parson]

Ha! I’d see Chewie as Han‘s partner before Luke. But maybe that’s from reading some of the extended universe building that relationship

I'll bet it is from the "extended universe." In the movies IIRC Han and Luke join forces on several occasions, and mostly Chewie bellows. --- This is especially true in the earliest 3 movies, and even more especially the earliest Star Wars movie.

 

[DAgent]

For me, I find there are several aspects to partners as opposed to sidekicks or secondary characters. For partners, there needs to be a balance in competence; each one must be the one to resolve certain challenges. A second characteristic is that a reader or viewer spends time alone with a partner, but not with a sidekick. In the Lethal Weapon series, we see Riggs and Murtaugh alone and living independent lives. The Joe Pesci character, however, only shows up when one or both of the others is present. We have no view into his life as an independent character.

That's a pretty good observation, I hadn't realised that about Pesci's character's screen time. that said, it's pretty much true of all the other characters in those movies that hang around with Riggs and Murtaugh at all, as the duo are pretty much front and centre all the time.

 

[DAgent]

Blackadder is an interesting case in point. In the first series, Baldrick is the intelligent one, whilst Blackadder is the fool; for the rest of the show it's entirely the opposite way around.

I think that the difference between a sidekick and a companion is in how the main character perceives them. A sidekick is often treated (rightly or wrongly) as inferior - sometimes physically, usually mentally. Any suggestion that the sidekick comes up with is usually dismissed as foolhardy. A companion is respected by the character, and treated as an equal, or at least worthy of consideration.

The lines can be blurred though.

Is Rodney Trotter a sidekick (when he and Del dress up, guess who is Batman).

Is Samwise Gamgee a sidekick? Frodo treats him so; having affection for someone isn't the same as having respect for their views and opinions.

Is Stan Laurel a sidekick to Oliver Hardy?

And in all three cases, Rodney, Sam and Stan are the real power behind the throne so to speak. Stan did all the writing, Sam kept Frodo on his feet, Rodney had enough smarts to spot the errors in Del Boys plans. Regardless of how the others treated them (in character in Oliver Hardy's case, off camera they were the greatest of friends) they were the oil that kept the machines running.

 

[therapist]

Is Samwise Gamgee a sidekick? Frodo treats him so;

This is quite interesting. If a sidekick saves the day, does that elevate them to partner status? Are they just a competent sidekick, or a sidekick that evolved, or were they a partner all along? Or maybe we should think of it as the sidekick/partner spectrum instead of a black and white issue.
Can anyone think of a well written side kick character that is a clear sidekick?
Also, is Watson Sherlock's sidekick?

 

[Jo Zebedee]

This is quite interesting. If a sidekick saves the day, does that elevate them to partner status? Are they just a competent sidekick, or a sidekick that evolved, or were they a partner all along? Or maybe we should think of it as the sidekick/partner spectrum instead of a black and white issue.
Can anyone think of a well written side kick character that is a clear sidekick?
Also, is Watson Sherlock's sidekick?

I think Watson is definitely a sidekick. It’s all about Sherlock really and Watson provides support for his cleverness and little of his own arc.

 

[Bramandin]

Can anyone think of a well written side kick character that is a clear sidekick?

I'm not sure about well-written, but cartoon version of Arthur from The Tick is the sidekick. He's a guy in a suit, and that suit could be replaced by a reconnaissance drone which would make him the guy in the chair... unless he actually needed his hands for something like defusing a bomb, but that sort of thing is still better left to the Tick. Arthur is still the brains and if he understands that the Tick's main superhero strength is charging in and saving the world through dumb luck and chaos, they'd be more effective with flipping the hero/sidekick dynamic.

The Doctor's companions have their moments to shine, but like Watson they're mainly there so the mad genius is forced to explain what he's thinking. I know of Romana but the only episode I've really seen is the one with DaVinci so I don't know what their status is to each other.

 

[Toby Frost]

I really like the cartoon of The Tick, and I think Arthur is a good example of a sidekick - I suppose he's a parody of Robin-type superhero sidekicks.

George Orwell had an interesting take on this: to him a lot of partnerships were a high-minded, righteous, "proper" (and sometimes pompous and ridiculous) character partnered with a shrewd, streetwise (and sometimes disreputable) sidekick. He claimed that it was a very satisfying structure to read, and suggested that it went back to Don Quixote and Sancho Panza. I wonder if Frodo and Sam are a similar master-and-squire setup.

(It just occurred to me that I've used this setup at least three times, so it must work for me at least!)

 

[paranoid marvin]

I think Watson is definitely a sidekick. It’s all about Sherlock really and Watson provides support for his cleverness and little of his own arc.

Sherlock likes Watson; he is his lifelong friend. Occasionally Sherlock will send Watson on missions, but it's usually as a diversionary tactic. Nigel Bruce was a marvellous Watson; laugh out loud humorous at times - but he was definitely a sidekick. But the literary Sherlock and Watson did everything together, from dining to watching the latest London show; Sherlock considered Watson as an indispensable companion, and whilst Watson was intellectually his inferior, in other ways he was his steadfast companion.

I suppose a good example of sidekicks are Timon and Pumba from The Lion King, and so is Robin. And Passepartout is definitely a sidekick rather than a companion.

 

[paranoid marvin]

This is quite interesting. If a sidekick saves the day, does that elevate them to partner status? Are they just a competent sidekick, or a sidekick that evolved, or were they a partner all along? Or maybe we should think of it as the sidekick/partner spectrum instead of a black and white issue.
Can anyone think of a well written side kick character that is a clear sidekick?
Also, is Watson Sherlock's sidekick?

Samwise was Frodo's gardener. There's no evidence to say that they were drinking buddies, or would sit out on the lawn smoking pipes. As much as Frodo loves Sam, and Sam is devoted to Frodo, it's a master and servant relationship. And one that both are comfortable with. The thing is that Sam is more than competent in his own right, and arguably was more capable of carrying the Ring than Frodo was. When the two become separated in Cirith Ungol, Sam demonstrates this in no uncertain way. Perhaps by the end of the story, Sam has developed from a sidekick into a companion.