Is your MC likable?

[Bluma Bezbroda]

The thing I enjoy the most in writing is creating my characters. I want them to be interesting, complex, and, most importantly, believable. Therefore, I always ask my partner, who is always my first reader, what did he think of the MC(s). After reading my latest WIP (which he, to my no small surprise, really liked) he answered the customary question by angrily rolling his eyes and saying "Oh, yeah, I know this type. Think they're so smart, but they don't even read any books." I was quite delighted, as this was exactly what I had in mind while creating the characters in question, but later it came to me that the first reaction to them was a negative one. It's not bad, not in my books anyway (hue, hue, hue), but I have to say it is a sort of trend in my stories.

In my first book, "Kusjes", which is now nearly finished and resting so I can come back to it with fresh eyes in some better times, I have the narrator openly poke fun at the MCs and their inadequacies (yes, I know, risky business). I ruthlessly adorn them with qualities that I myself hope do not posses and make them act in ways that can inspire pity in the best case (a desire to slap one across the face in the worst). I like them, not to say love them, as my creations. But as people? One is a pathetic coward that would rather risk his happiness than face and resolve problems, the other covers up his insecurieties by being a hedonistic egotist. Granted, I allow them to grow a bit as the story goes.

I can't say if this is really a problem. As a reader I came across books which MCs were so antipathetic that it ruined the whole experience for me. On the other hand, in Elfriede Jelinek's prose I failed to find one sypathetic character and she is regarded (also by me) as brilliant. I guess that I'm trying to get away with it by making the heroes of my stories real, so the reader can relate to them, hence inspiring at least some sympathy.

How do you like your MCs? Grim, complex, troubled or easy to go with?

 

[Sea-shore]

To read, I like any interesting MC. To write, my MCs tend to be headstrong with their own agenda (annoying for me as they need to stick to the plot!) and not very likeable. My side characters are, however, always nice.

 

[David Newrick]

I think any main character has to be interesting. By that I mean they don't have to be especially likable, just as long as they are not some cardboard cut out version of human frailty, i.e. melodramatic or poorly drawn. If a main character does or says horrible things I am happy to go along with it if there is clear justification for that behaviour. So the writer has a real job cut out for themselves if they are going to sufficiently convince the reader to go along with them on it. King Lear isn't a particularly likable main character, yet Shakespeare's play has recently been rated the greatest ever written.

Of course I am only talking about a main character here. They have to carry the book. To do so they have to be interesting for one reason or another. They don't have to be likable.

 

[Katie-Ellen]

Lear's a vain old idiot, I just think King Lear is disgusting. It does keep me at a distance if I can't relate to the MC. It doesn't mean they have to be a saint.

 

[Marc Joan]

Some good, some bad. Current MC is immature and self-centred, but he also has severe psychological problems. An object of pity.

 

[Peggy Lou]

I have two so far. They change - one from a spoilt brat to less of a spoilt brat; the other from a knowall to someone who admits to a level of ignorance. Would that make them interesting? No idea.

As for reading I have no particular preferences; I don't like abusive or weepy characters, or those who are overtly violent especially towards children and animals - as for the rest it depends on the story.

 

[echo.]

I think mine are pretty normal. They have their quirks and stuff, but they're the sort of people you say hi to in Waitrose when you're all buying your four pints of skimmed and loaf of bread. I like normal, and nice, and the little, normal peculiarities that go with them.

For me, there has to be some measure of likability, even if they're not especially nice, there has to be some facet that makes you bother about them, whether it's humour or pity or whatever. I remember feeling sacrilegious after reading 'Birdsong' and not liking it, because the main character was a proper bellend and I wouldn't have cared if he'd got blown up by a five nine.

 

[Peggy Lou]

I think mine are pretty normal. They have their quirks and stuff, but they're the sort of people you say hi to in Waitrose when you're all buying your four pints of skimmed and loaf of bread. I like normal, and nice, and the little, normal peculiarities that go with them.

For me, there has to be some measure of likability, even if they're not especially nice, there has to be some facet that makes you bother about them, whether it's humour or pity or whatever. I remember feeling sacrilegious after reading 'Birdsong' and not liking it, because the main character was a proper bellend and I wouldn't have cared if he'd got blown up by a five nine.

Agreed about Birdsong. And he survived while the woman died. Still it was an interesting book.

 

[James Marinero]

In general, well developed and based on insight. As to my own - they just come out of nowhere, mainly because I don't 'design' my stories in detail.

I listened to an interesting piece on the radio the other day (Radio 4 Book Programme) when they discussed Dashiel Hammet's characters - mainly Sam Spade. He only appears in The Maltese Falcon and is barely developed at all in the text - 'We learn very little about Sam Spade'. Yet, he has almost mythical status in the genre. Certainly, Bogart brought him to life, but with very little to go on from the book.

 

[Jay Aitch]

My greatest challenge with main characters is this apparent "need" for them to have evolved by the end of the story. Yes, they can learn something new, but surely real (enough) people do not change that fundamentally within short periods of time (unless through massive trauma)?

 

[Paul Whybrow]

I worried, that the protagonist of my series about the murder investigations of a Cornish detective was too likeable. As writers and actors have found, villains are more interesting to create. One of my serial killers was so complex and vulnerable as a human, that the reasons for his murders seemed entirely reasonable, making the detective look like a boring spoilsport.

As I didn't want to resort to the boring trope of the hard-drinking, womanising detective, a wise-cracking misanthrope who kills without compunction, I gave my main character a bunch of eccentricities. These are things, that most members of the public wouldn't think of a copper being interested in—art and painting, green technology, reading literature, riding a chopper motorcycle and listening to alternative music. He's the son of a farmer, so also has an earthy and practical side, being intolerant of bullshit. He hates guns, and hardly drinks alcohol.

Getting to like a MC surely involves exploring their internal dialogue, their inner thoughts. I know we're all supposed to 'show and not tell', so one could demonstrate what a good person they are by their actions and conversation, but that would be to ignore the complexity of the human psyche.

As Jimithyh says, there can be a problem with the apparent "need" for them to have evolved by the end of the story." My protagonist is seen to evolve through the three novels, in what could be called a 'series arc' as he goes from depressed at the death of his wife, in book one, to optimistic at a fresh start in a new home by the end of book three.

Another concern, if the hero is likeable, is are they a reflection of you the writer? Readers have a tendency to attribute the good and bad traits of an author's characters to them. Should I ever have any success as a writer, my biographer will blow a fuse trying to work out the difference between truth and fiction!

 

[Bluma Bezbroda]

@Jimithyh and @Paul Whybrow you both raise great points. As to "growth" this, I think, depends largely on what kind of protagonist you are working with. Heroes of my stories are young people dealing with changes in their lives, so at least some degree of change in their psyche is inevitable.Or lack of thereof, underlining their impotency in dealing the challenges- that can also be very interesting.

We had many discussions about how much of you is/should be in the MC. And, once again, I will say it loud and proud : all my characters are me. They are created by parts of me, my feelings, my experiences, my fears, of what's best and worst in me. Which doesn't mean that they are me. They are separate beings, with lives of their own. At this point I'm past agonizing over whether that's good or bad. It is as it is.

 

[Paul Whybrow]

I'm currently pondering whether my main character is lickable. He'll have been a widower for seven years, by the time I start his investigations in the fourth story in the series.

Although, he's involved in a tentative Skype relationship with a woman in Wyoming, 4,500 miles away, he hasn't lain with a woman for so long that he's in danger of becoming a born-again virgin....

It presents me with a quandary, in that it's recommended not to mix genres—how romantic and lustful should I make the narrative of a psychological thriller? On the other hand, giving my main character a sex life might endow him with more oomph!

(I would deny rumours that my protagonist is based on me)

 

[James Marinero]

It presents me with a quandary, in that it's recommended not to mix genres—how romantic and lustful should I make the narrative of a psychological thriller? On the other hand, giving my main character a sex life might endow him with more oomph!

IMHO you should tell it like it is. Surely, there's a difference between a story which revolves around romance and sex, and one which has it a part of the story in the plot of a crime/suspense novel? Of course, if he is asexual then that's different.

 

[Boopadoo]

With one exception (and its mainly because that particular individual simply doesn't like me for some reason), everyone who has read my in-progress versions either wants to be, or falls in love with my MC (Paige 99). We're talking at least a dozen readers from both the US and UK...

I know I'm certainly in love with her...

All my MCs tend to be "rough around the edges" (some more than others), but nonetheless relatable and/or likable in some way, either from the beginning or through some sort of redemption.

 

[Bluma Bezbroda]

@Boopadoo major success then! Congrats! @Lex Black ugh, that sucks. Doesn't seem like very constructive critique, what you've got...

 

[Jay Aitch]

I'm currently pondering whether my main character is lickable. He'll have been a widower for seven years, by the time I start his investigations in the fourth story in the series.

Although, he's involved in a tentative Skype relationship with a woman in Wyoming, 4,500 miles away, he hasn't lain with a woman for so long that he's in danger of becoming a born-again virgin....

It presents me with a quandary, in that it's recommended not to mix genres—how romantic and lustful should I make the narrative of a psychological thriller? On the other hand, giving my main character a sex life might endow him with more oomph!

(I would deny rumours that my protagonist is based on me)

Paul, if you're going to write about me, I want equal share of any royalties. Oh, and please spell my surname correctly.

Oh, and I am very lickable ...

 

[Bluma Bezbroda]

@Jimithyh @Paul Whybrow do continue, I like where this thread is going

 

[Paul Whybrow]

Paul, if you're going to write about me, I want equal share of any royalties. Oh, and please spell my surname correctly.

Oh, and I am very lickable ...

OK—but who will play you— in the television or film adaptation?

 

[Katie-Ellen]

I like my MC in my first novel. Sunny. He's warm but with a hard streak. Humorous but carries his burden alone and in silence. I love him to bits. If I haven't heard yet from a beta-reader yet who really didn't like him or was just indifferent, maybe it's because he's drawn from life.
Not everyone in the story likes him. He works with a sergeant who refers to him a cocky shit and PC Fancy-Pants. But then, the sergeant's not likeable. He's a bilious miserable git and says Sunny's got a 'touch of the tar-brush', the racist pig.
I'm still getting to know my newest MC.

 

[Jay Aitch]

OK—but who will play you— in the television or film adaptation?

Odd, I had the same question asked of me not a fortnight ago at work ... my friends and colleagues suggested Simon Pegg ... and I have to say I would agree.

 

[Katie-Ellen]

Based on the feedback I got, this was one of my major problems. I really thought I had a diverse cast of interesting and distinct characters, but the all-but-unanimous choral responses of beta readers can be summed up as "I can't tell who any of these people are, don't know what they are doing or want to accomplish, and don't care enough to find out."

I never did figure out how to fix that.

'Any of these people' suggests it might be too 'busy' and it might help to draw one major character with the others firmly subsidiary.