the "main character"

[Fyle]

So, I must have stated this a dozen times here, but it is relevant. I was influenced to write from aSoIaF.

When I think of aSoIaF I always ask myself, who is the main character? Some people say Jon, Daenarys and Tyrion... maybe so, but couldn't you argue there is no MC truly?

So when I set out to write my novel, I went in with the idea that I didn't want an MC. I wrote about 6 characters that hold equal weight give or take. I may not have successfully done it, but that was the original concept.

The question to the forum is - would you enjoy a formula with no stand out MC? Or do you personality like that role to be obviously filled with an MC (or a few characters who stand out as MCs?)

☆I'm not asking pros and cons, just what you like to read/see and why.

 

[Rorick]

I think the concept of a single protagonist versus many protagonists is something that the story itself will work out. Write it, let it carve its own path. If you need all six character arcs to tell a story, then so be it, but make them count. Have a think about whether all of these characters have agency, whether they are driving the plot rather than being pulled. Think about whether some of them are needed at all.

The most compelling characters are the ones which do something to the plot. The ones which propel the story. It's a writing cliche, but it's also a truism, that everyone thinks they are the protagonist. If you think like that then that's when really deep and intriguing characters emerge.

 

[Penpilot]

As long as the story is told well, I don't care how it's presented.

On a side note, I'm not sure I agree that ASOIAF has not main character.

When I look at ASOIAF, I see collectively all the POV characters as the main character. They each have agency and are playing their parts in moving the greater story along. They struggle to establish peace before the threat of winter and the Others arrives.

The way I see it, the story of ASOIAF is a story about Westeros, not about an individual, but the land. So in a weird way, you cold say the land it self is the protagonist of the story, and we're seeing the story of Westeros through the eyes of all the different POV characters.

 

[Fyle]

The way I see it, the story of ASOIAF is a story about Westeros, not about an individual, but the land. So in a weird way, you cold say the land it self is the protagonist of the story, and we're seeing the story of Westeros through the eyes of all the different POV characters.

This is a good way to put it, that's another thing I was thinking, I would be telling the story of the world through personal stories.

And ya, when you think about it ASOIAF is moreso about Westeros than anything, the personal stories end but the land doesn't "end." I mean no matter who wins the throne, its just gonna be someone else after them somehow... it's never ending. I have often thought, okay, the story can end, Tommen is king, that's it. Imagine Dany took the Iron Throne, one day someone would win it from her... rinse and repeat.

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

I enjoy stories written in either fashion. If you're going to write multiple, equally featured POVs though, the trick is to make them equally interesting and distinct.

Avoid characters essentially performing the same story role.

Avoid one POV character being more compelling or intriguing than the others. This is more difficult to manage since it comes down to reader preference & subjectivity. Keep in mind, readers don't have to like characters to find them interesting, even as POVs.

 

[Queshire]

Game of Thrones has proven that approach is a valid one of course, but I personally prefer strong central characters. I've had it where I'm reading something and really getting into it only the author keeps cutting away to some B-plot, and I'm just like "arrrrrrgh, get one with it already!" Actually, now that I think about that can even happen with a team of main characters so it's less a matter of trying to juggle multiple main characters as it is trying to juggle multiple plots.

 

[Mythopoet]

I like reading stories that focus on one main character and stories that focus on a few main characters.

But I think it is very possible to go overboard with main and/or POV characters. Because the more main/POV characters you have the bigger and more complicated the story has to be to support them all. The bigger and more complicated the story is the more you run the risk of losing the focus of the story and/or having difficulty wrapping it up and ending it.

LOTR is a story with more than one main character. People usually point to Frodo as the Main Character, but in reality I think Frodo, Sam, Gandalf and Aragorn are all equally "main" in the story (and you could probably argue for others). You can't exactly have one main character who isn't even there in the narrative a significant amount of the time.

The classic epic fantasy The Worm Ouroboros is probably the earliest example in the genre of a story that focuses on many different characters/factions. From Demonland I think you could count Lord Juss, Goldry Bluszco, Brandoch Daha and Lady Mevrian all as main characters. From Witchland you can count King Gorice, Lords Corinius, Corund, Corsus, Lord Gro and Lady Prezmyra all as main characters. In fact, the way the story doesn't really emphasize one side of the struggle over the other (even though the Demons are obviously the good guys) reminds me a bit of ASOIAF.

Personally, I think Martin has gone too far with ASOIAF. He's got so many main characters and so much going on in so many places that I get the impression the narrative is running away from him. And I wouldn't be surprised if he ends up having a very hard time wrapping up every thread he's introduced in the story so far. I don't think I would use a series that isn't even resolved yet as my model for how to write personally. I'd rather see if Martin's style pays off satisfactorily in the end first. Because while the beginning of the story is what gets readers interested, the ending is what determines whether the story is a success. Martin's in a kind of unique position there since he's already near the end of a long career and because the HBO series renewed interest in the property even though it's not finished. (It'll be interesting to see what happens if HBO exhausts all the published material and doesn't want to wait around for Martin to finish.) But for a newer writer, I would be more cautious.

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

Personally, I think Martin has gone too far with ASOIAF. He's got so many main characters and so much going on in so many places that I get the impression the narrative is running away from him. And I wouldn't be surprised if he ends up having a very hard time wrapping up every thread he's introduced in the story so far.

He'll wrap them up by killing them off until only a few remain.

 

[Mythopoet]

He'll wrap them up by killing them off until only a few remain.

That does actually sound likely. But it also honestly sounds like the easy way out of the situation he's in and certainly not one that I would find satisfying. How many characters can he get away with offing before his audience gets sick of it?

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

Yes...I can see some readers being turned off by that method. For myself, I enjoy the unknown factor...the uneasiness that comes with knowing none of the characters I love are safe from death.

 

[Mythopoet]

Yes...I can see some readers being turned off by that method. For myself, I enjoy the unknown factor...the uneasiness that comes with knowing none of the characters I love are safe from death.

Do you think there is a point for you at which it could become to much? Or would you be ok with it if no one was left standing at the end? I ask out of curiosity.

It seems to me that ASOIAF is a huge experiment with surprising and shocking the reader. Most people consider it to be a huge success, but they forget that the experiment isn't over yet. I found out relatively early on that the books weren't for me and stopped reading them. But I've been trying to keep informed about them and the reaction they receive because I do find the experiment interesting. I've seen a lot of people say that the books went too far for them and they stopped reading. And I've seen many people claim they love the surprise factor. It seems very polarizing. It's hard to tell, amidst the constant media attention the TV show is always getting, just how well the more recent books are being received by the reading public.

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

Do you think there is a point for you at which it could become to much? Or would you be ok with it if no one was left standing at the end? I ask out of curiosity.

It seems to me that ASOIAF is a huge experiment with surprising and shocking the reader. Most people consider it to be a huge success, but they forget that the experiment isn't over yet. I found out relatively early on that the books weren't for me and stopped reading them. But I've been trying to keep informed about them and the reaction they receive because I do find the experiment interesting. I've seen a lot of people say that the books went too far for them and they stopped reading. And I've seen many people claim they love the surprise factor. It seems very polarizing. It's hard to tell, amidst the constant media attention the TV show is always getting, just how well the more recent books are being received by the reading public.

Hard to answer that until we reach the end, I suppose. If the death of all fits the story to that point, I'd likely be fine with it. I don't think it'll go quite that far though...I expect 2 or 3 main POVs to survive the ending. I'll let you know how it makes me feel when that time comes...probably another 12 years.

That polarization you reference, isn't a bad thing in my view. When you're talking about a series with such a rabid fan base, it's a positive. As a writer, I'd rather have audience reaction on the extremes. I'd be quite content with the knowledge it's not for a large portion of readers if I have another group that cannot wait for the next installment and pour over the possibilities on forums dedicated to the story I'm telling. That's far better ground to tread, in my opinion, than writing in the middle of the road.

I don't want to hijack the thread too much so I'll turn it back to character cast. One of GRRM's biggest criticisms is his use of new POVs many readers find less intriguing than the beginning characters. Many readers point to Brianne of Tarth...some love her role others get bored. What I do like though, is Martin's attempts to keep each distinct. They each play vastly different roles in the story. Where he occasionally misses though, lies in the interest level. Some I find more interesting than others & I want to get back to those more compelling POVs. As stated before though, that's the hard one to deliver. Reader opinion, on what they find interesting, will vary.

 

[JoiceArcher]

In ASOIAF I even had to stop myself sympathizing with characters after the first pages

(although no fantasy) Shan Sa wrote The Girl Who Played Go from 2 perspectives, 2 separate yet intertwining stories of Go opponents, a Chinese woman and a Japanese soldier. It was a great read, she managed to structure the novel like a game of go: the way the characters closed in on one another, yet did not meet really caught the reader in the story. They were separate stories and views, even the characters culture could not have been more different, but it was still structured and well framed. It made me want to read more stories with more than one main MC.
But they have to be good, otherwise stories with several MCs can quickly be superficial. I have read other authors try the same and they failed to capture my interest in their story, the stories were not as well intertwined, it seemed like a "book in a book" sort of reading. It wasn’t that it was too much, it just really became superficial. But I guess it depends on what the reader wants, I like following one MC but if you take Martins books I wouldn’t say his novel is superficial, he shocks the reader enough to make it interesting and constantly finds new ways to keep it that way.

 

[Chessie]

I'm totally with Mythopoet on ASOIAF. I stopped reading after the first book because I didn't want to go there mentally. And we all know what "there" means, haha! But what really irked me was the many povs in the book. I don't do well with that, as a reader. I prefer 1-2 povs. When I'm really immersed in a story, the last thing I want is to be pulled out of it (for suspense's sake) and taken to another pov that doesn't have much action happening. I'll put a book down right there.

Yet, I do find Martin's experiment interesting. Most of the people I know that have read the series are not regular fantasy readers. They have entered the series from love of the show (which I haven't seen ever so I have no opinion on that). Then again, lots of fantasy readers also love the books. My take is that he just does well with keeping the characters real, engaging, and still involved with the main idea of the story.

I personally wouldn't do this in my own work because its not my style, but props to those who can. What will be interesting to see is how many other fantasy books out there will imitate his style of numerous pov characters.

 

[Incanus]

Sticking with Fyle's original question here--

Yes, I enjoy books (or series') that don't seem to have a clear MC. Love ASoIaF. I also enjoyed the Malazan books by Erikson that are similar in this one (and only one) way.

I'm wondering, though, if the story you are working on is your first novel. If it is, you might (emphasize might) be in over your head. It could be tricky indeed to pull off such a thing without solid heap of experience behind you. Not that it is impossible by any means. I've been struggling with a kind of similar issue, and decided to take on a more straight-forward, smallish novel before tackling my 'magnum opus' concept. (I explored this idea 'out-loud' in Philip Overby's thread about practice novels.)

I hope you'll give us a little of your project in the Showcase someday; I'd like to see some of your writing.

 

[Jabrosky]

I prefer to focus on one or a small number of characters when writing.

The big problem I had with Game of Thrones was really how disjointed the narrative felt. Not only were there a lot of viewpoint characters, but there didn't seem to be an overarching plot linking them together. It was really hard to follow the story or invest in any of the characters (and this was before I bumped into anything "grimdark").

The lesson I took home was that if you are going to have a lot of viewpoint characters, please give them something that links them together.

 

[Fyle]

I'm wondering, though, if the story you are working on is your first novel. If it is, you might (emphasize might) be in over your head. It could be tricky indeed to pull off such a thing without solid heap of experience behind you. Not that it is impossible by any means. I've been struggling with a kind of similar issue, and decided to take on a more straight-forward, smallish novel before tackling my 'magnum opus' concept. (I explored this idea 'out-loud' in Philip Overby's thread about practice novels.)

I hope you'll give us a little of your project in the Showcase someday; I'd like to see some of your writing.

You are correct, it is my first novel. I am an experienced writer however, I am not an inexperienced storyteller. I published a comic series in a two small newspapers in New York City and was hired as comic editor (part time hours) by a community college were I published an on going story as well for four years.

I am not going about this the proper way; building experience, practice novels etc. because I simply have no time do to so...

and... I will be submitting a 4850 word story to the next Iron Pen challenge as soon as I am able. So, you can read something of mine there if you like.

Thanks for the response!

 

[skip.knox]

I have to ask: why are you committed to giving all the characters equal weight? What is there in the story that seems to require this? Or is this merely an authorly (oh, it is too a word, spellcheck, I just made it up) exercise?

I'm not sure how I would judge equal weight. Word count? Emotional impact? Equal number of scenes? Everyone's still standing at the end? It feels like rather an abstract question.

 

[Fyle]

I have to ask: why are you committed to giving all the characters equal weight? What is there in the story that seems to require this? Or is this merely an authorly (oh, it is too a word, spellcheck, I just made it up) exercise?

I'm not sure how I would judge equal weight. Word count? Emotional impact? Equal number of scenes? Everyone's still standing at the end? It feels like rather an abstract question.

I would say "equal" is a strong word... I just think it is best that each POV holds importance, and as Jabrosky said, some kind of connection, even if it is just dialog about other POV characters. I guess "balance" is a better word than "equal." That's just semantics we're talking now though.

The OP was mainly a question about which you enjoy reading and why, not really a ask-for-help thread on how to balance my WIP. My WIP and ASOIAF is what made me think to ask that question is all. This thread is already off track a bit, maybe my fault for the way I phrased the OP?

Ya know, it also goes back to what Penpilot said ( I think it was the second response to this thread ), I am telling more so the story of my "world" than a story of characters, the characters are vehicles to tell that story in an interesting way and make you feel something along the way or its a history book. So, it would be good to gauge if people do or don't enjoy multiple POVs. I generally enjoy them.

To be honest, I would prefer to just make polls and skip the theoretical debates in most cases. I am not sure if I can make polls on these forums though.

 

[Helen]

So, I must have stated this a dozen times here, but it is relevant. I was influenced to write from aSoIaF.

When I think of aSoIaF I always ask myself, who is the main character? Some people say Jon, Daenarys and Tyrion... maybe so, but couldn't you argue there is no MC truly?

So when I set out to write my novel, I went in with the idea that I didn't want an MC. I wrote about 6 characters that hold equal weight give or take. I may not have successfully done it, but that was the original concept.

The question to the forum is - would you enjoy a formula with no stand out MC? Or do you personality like that role to be obviously filled with an MC (or a few characters who stand out as MCs?)

☆I'm not asking pros and cons, just what you like to read/see and why.

I don't care in the slightest whether it's single or multiple MCs.

I don't think choosing number of MCs is a random decision. With ASOIAF, underlying each series, episode and storyline is a theme and the MCs come about as a result of the method used to show the theme and the strength of the thematic arguments.