This week’s video explains how portraying your character’s faults, as George Eliot did in The Mill in the Floss, will make them more sympathetic, not less.
Video Transcription: We often discuss the importance of presenting realistic characters, whose personalities are neither entirely good, nor entirely bad. But sometimes putting this principle into practice can be more easily said than done. When in the thick of writing our first drafts and forming our characters on the page, we can sometimes get so caught up in making certain that readers will empathize with these characters, that we quiver before the thought of doing anything that would make them unlikable.
A reading of George Eliot’s classic The Mill on the Floss
should be more than enough to give us the courage to paint on both the weaknesses and strengths of our characters with a broad brush. Every character in this story shows us both sides of his personality. We see the good points of characters we dislike, such as Tom Tulliver and Stephen Guest, just as we see the flaws of the more sympathetic characters, such as the heroine Maggie Tulliver. Eliot obviously didn’t feel that her readers needed her to hold their hands throughout the narrative by protecting them from the dichotomous nuances in her characters’ motives and actions.
Perhaps one of the best characters in the book is Tom and Maggie’s father, whose flaws and virtues are both obvious on the page. His foolishness, anger, and pride are on display in the scene in which he forces his son to inscribe in the family Bible a perpetual curse against his long-time enemy, the Lawyer Wakem. But his kindheartedness and generosity are just as obvious is another scene, in which he forgives a debt against his sister’s husband, even though he’s in desperate need of the money to pay off his own debts. Eliot presents all these facts without passing judgment on the good or the bad—and the result is a striking portrait of real humanity, the honesty of which makes its characters sympathetic in their very faults.
Tell me your opinion: What less-than-likable traits have you given your hero?
Related Posts: What Dickens Can Teach Us About Complex Characters
Characters: Likability Is Overrated
11 Dichotomous Characters - And Why They Work
Story by K.M. Weiland
Tags: antagonist , Characters , protagonist , verisimilitude
Heh. I actually really disliked that book and all of its characters. ;)
Very interesting!! In an effort to keep my MC from being flat, I made sure to give her weaknesses (doesn't stick up for herself, being babied helps her feel safe)... too many, I think. She ended up being very unlikable, and I've had to go in and give her much more strength.
It is very hard to find that balance, I find!
I've been enjoyed your posts for some time. You do a great job with them.
When my agent told me the hero of my historical romance was too nice and needed to have some flaws, I reworked him. He's now battling pride, has a tendency to speak before thinking, and is a touch chauvinistic at the beginning of the story. What's neat is that he's a more likable--and believable--character than he was before.
in the first book i wrote, i have a likeable but flat character. in the sequel, i'm fleshing him out and making him a little arrogant, but also exposing his fears about himself. not easy to do.
One of my MCs can't see that her pursuit of what began as a hobby has become obsessive and is ruining her marriage. She's naive and stubborn, and her denial makes me want to slap her upside the head! LOL.
@Sarah: I'll admit it wasn't my favorite of Eliot's by far.
@Marisa: If balance were easy, we'd all be pros at this writing thing. It's achieving that balance - in so many areas of the craft - that makes it challenging.
@Keli: Amazing how that works, isn't it? Who'da thunk that giving a character *unlikable* traits would actually wind up making him more likable? Go figure!
@Michelle: As a reader, I adore complicated, deeply flawed characters. But, as a writer, I'm often amused to see my own insecurities coming out when I start creating unlikable traits in characters and then worrying that readers will hate them. :p
@Carol: Sounds like a great character!
In my current novel I have 2 POV characters. The first (and real main character) is very harsh, brooding, and his whole existence revolves around unforgiveness. However, he is not a bad guy. He chose to let some events in his past consume him, almost to the point of destruction.
Be he is really not evil or bad. He loves to read, especially out loud. He really just desires love (he never felt loved and so withdrew into himself), and to give love, but doesn't know how.
My other protagonist is very likeable, but I think perhaps too good. He loves his family and farming, and come to think of it I don't know that he really has any major flaws... or even any at all. :-P Except he is very cautious to trust people, especially the other protagonist.
The first protag sounds like the kind of characters I absolutely love (both to read and write). I have a definite soft spot for anti-heroes.
My hero is obsessive, cruel and pushes others away even though without them she's helpless. She's a lot of fun to write!
Sounds like she's giving you all kinds of opportunity for conflict!
an excellent point, KM! I try to do this in my own writing, and it's tough. But it makes the characters so much more believable. Thanks~ :o) <3
My WiP has two MCs on utterly opposite ends of the spectrum. The FMC is physically weak, and a bit passive (understandably so); while the MMC is such a jerk--kills off his family--that I wonder why I keep loving him
This is one of those areas where it's especially valuable to get input from objective readers. Sometimes we'll write thoroughly obnoxious characters whom *we* love, and we need to be shaken back to reality by readers who can point out that we really haven't given them a good reason to share our love for this character.
@Galadriel: It's important to identify to yourself *why* you love him, so that you can emphasize those points, in contrast to his unlikable actions, to readers.
Great post! So true. Although it may depend on how annoying the character flaw is. LOL But the characters will definitely seem more real that way.
True, true. We want our characters to possess unlikable traits, not to be unlikable themselves!
Do I have enough room to list them all? Gosh, my MC has more of an unlikeable past, but I've been told her vulnerability--despite everything she does to hide it--makes it easier to sympathize with her situation. Her traits aren't necessarily *unlikeable* so much as they're the result of years of repressed fear...and lies, too.
It annoys me when characters are written as if they're wholly moral and good. No one is completely good. Even the noblest of people have *some* undesirable traits.
Truthfully, I would much rather read about a character who is unabashedly bad, rather one who is entirely good.
I like keeping my character grounded in the real world, no one is perfect. The main character internalizes his distrust and resentment for the world. His partner has a constant need for approval and hides her emotions from him. Each have distinctive flaws that keep them from getting along. Deeper flaws are fine so long as they fit the the narrative and never seem out of place.
In many respects, deeper flaws *are* the narrative. Discovering and overcoming those deep flaws is usually what drives the character arc.