To get back on track - my main point was that an author shouldn't feel obligated to give every character a "flaw" just because it's considered "good writing". Same with character development. It should be either a) something the author specifically wanted to write about (or simply thought it would be interesting/cool) or b) a "natural" consequence of how the story/character works (a character is betrayed by his best friend and becomes distrustful of people). Imo it's entirely valid to not have those and the work of fiction to be no worse for it.
+1
Sometimes a character is changed by circumstances, at others they alter circumstances through their constancy and drive. Neither are inherently interesting, it is not what is done but rather how and more importantly why.
