Going against the grain

[Sarah Anderson]

I have a good story idea. It could be even better when I flush it out. However, there is one problem. My MC doesn't show many emotions. Others see him as cold. He doesn't care for most people and thinks his way is the only way. He does care about helping others but not because of his humanity but because of his principals.

This is a fantasy and he is on a quest that will require him to travel to many parts of the kingdom.

He is not evil nor is he singing in the rain. He just is.

My issue is that this character will not grow, he will not change. The story will not end happily ever after. From what I have read, this is against the grain. Characters should grow and conquer their perceived weaknesses. They should be different when the story ends from what they were in the beginning. Mine won't.

He will have magical powers but will use his powers in unconventional ways. Sometimes for the betterment of those he encounters, sometimes not. It will depend on his principals and how he perceives the event.

This is the type of story that I find entertaining since nothing in it will be predictable. Just because he reacts one way to an event doesn't mean he will act the same way if the event occurs again.

My question is, are there any fantasy authors who write characters similar to mine and is this type of novel doom to fail?

 

[Xanados]

My protagonist is generally in the same position as yours. He's extensively introverted and cold. The cultute into which my protagonist was born is universally devoid of emotion. They are hardened warriors. I think I may have backed myself into a corner because of that. Well, not really, because I'm only in the documentation/planning stage of my narrative...

I think, perhaps, you could give your character a quirk so as to make him more interesting?

 

[Shasjas]

Purely from what I would like to read, I would say this type of character is not necessarily a bad thing, probably a good thing. Going against the grain is usually a good thing.
however the world should change around him, otherwise the story is a bit pointless.

I think that if the character is going to stay the same, you need to make him interesting enough that he doesnt need to. give him interest opinions and quirks.

 

[sashamerideth]

Quirks are good. I don't think there is anything wrong with having a cold character. Having no change may be a mistake, even a change for the worse would be better, and possibly more fitting to the story.

 

[Xanados]

Quirks are good. I don't think there is anything wrong with having a cold character. Having no change may be a mistake, even a change for the worse would be better, and possibly more fitting to the story.

Agreed. Actually, I think that having a cold character is quite interesting. If your protagonist has a quirk, and a few side characters are peresnt that are actually more vibrant in personality, you can balance it out fairly well.

 

[Steerpike]

My issue is that this character will not grow, he will not change. The story will not end happily ever after. From what I have read, this is against the grain. Characters should grow and conquer their perceived weaknesses. They should be different when the story ends from what they were in the beginning. Mine won't.

Change doesn't have to mean positive growth or conquering. It can be change for the worse. I think you can work with virtually any premise if it works well enough. The only question that comes to my mind is this: what is the point of the story? If it is just a series of events happening to the character, and his seemingly random reactions to the events (based on you saying there is no predicting how he'll act in a given situation), I think that would bore me stiff. Why do I want to read about this guy?

Cold is fine, but if he's completely static, and worse completely random in his actions, I doubt I'd read for long simply because that wouldn't hold my interest. Others may differ.

 

[ThinkerX]

I have a good story idea. It could be even better when I flush it out. However, there is one problem. My MC doesn't show many emotions. Others see him as cold. He doesn't care for most people and thinks his way is the only way. He does care about helping others but not because of his humanity but because of his principals.

This is a fantasy and he is on a quest that will require him to travel to many parts of the kingdom.

He is not evil nor is he singing in the rain. He just is.

My issue is that this character will not grow, he will not change. The story will not end happily ever after. From what I have read, this is against the grain. Characters should grow and conquer their perceived weaknesses. They should be different when the story ends from what they were in the beginning. Mine won't.

He sounds...human.

There are quite a number of fantasy protagonists like this character - those in Glen Cooks 'Black Company' being the ones that leap to mind, as do a few fantasy detective types.

That said, what you are describing appear to be 'core traits' of this character. It seems to me that this might leave the door open to changing minor traits - maybe he gives up drinking, or starts regularly dropping change in poor boxes.

Also, presumably there are other significant characters in your story: just because your main character does not change, does not automatically mean that the other characters must remain static as well. Maybe your MC changes their lives without being changed himself.

 

[Graham Irwin]

I like the idea of an apathetic center around which a story revolves. As long as the reader feels something, it doesn't matter if your MC does. Think about someone you know who is cold and distant. They certainly make you feel things, don't they? A story needs an arc of some sort, be it the character's or the world's or an overarching idea. Otherwise, what's the point of the journey from the front cover to the back cover?

 

[Benjamin Clayborne]

I like the idea of an apathetic center around which a story revolves. As long as the reader feels something, it doesn't matter if your MC does. Think about someone you know who is cold and distant. They certainly make you feel things, don't they?

Yeah. Mostly "I don't want to spend time with this person."

 

[Johnny Cosmo]

Yeah. Mostly "I don't want to spend time with this person."

Yeah, it seems like a bit of a gamble to evoke negative feelings towards a main character.

My issue is that this character will not grow, he will not change.

Yeah, it's going against the grain. I think you need to consider why the grain goes the way it does to begin with; many would argue that the point of a story is change. That said, he doesn't need to change in an immediately obvious way. Does it serve your story for him not to change? I only ask because it is likely it will serve your story if something does change.

A story needs an arc of some sort, be it the character's or the world's or an overarching idea.

And I'd expect that changes in the world or overarching idea should at least affect the main character in some way, or else why is he the main character?

 

[ThinkerX]

I like the idea of an apathetic center around which a story revolves. As long as the reader feels something, it doesn't matter if your MC does. Think about someone you know who is cold and distant. They certainly make you feel things, don't they?

Yeah. Mostly "I don't want to spend time with this person."

Yeah, it seems like a bit of a gamble to evoke negative feelings towards a main character.

Unless the MC keeps actively butting into the affairs of the other characters, making them change. Then you have an unsympathetic, unchanging MC, who brings about major change despite all that.

 

[Johnny Cosmo]

Unless the MC keeps actively butting into the affairs of the other characters, making them change. Then you have an unsympathetic, unchanging MC, who brings about major change despite all that.

Maybe, but that sort of thing sounds like something an established, successful writer could easily get wrong. If you like a challenge, just try it.

He doesn't care for most people and thinks his way is the only way. He does care about helping others but not because of his humanity but because of his principals.

Sometimes for the betterment of those he encounters, sometimes not. It will depend on his principals and how he perceives the event.

If he doesn't care for humanity, why does he have principles to begin with? Why is he butting into people's affairs? What could possibly lead him to care enough to use his magic for the betterment of those he encounters, if he just does not care at all?

 

[Voldermort]

My MC doesn't show many emotions. Others see him as cold. He doesn't care for most people and thinks his way is the only way. He does care about helping others but not because of his humanity but because of his principals.

This is a fantasy and he is on a quest that will require him to travel to many parts of the kingdom.

He is not evil nor is he singing in the rain. He just is.

My issue is that this character will not grow, he will not change. The story will not end happily ever after. From what I have read, this is against the grain. Characters should grow and conquer their perceived weaknesses. They should be different when the story ends from what they were in the beginning. Mine won't.

He will have magical powers but will use his powers in unconventional ways. Sometimes for the betterment of those he encounters, sometimes not. It will depend on his principals and how he perceives the event.

This is the type of story that I find entertaining since nothing in it will be predictable. Just because he reacts one way to an event doesn't mean he will act the same way if the event occurs again.

My question is, are there any fantasy authors who write characters similar to mine and is this type of novel doom to fail?

This is a destiny question. The simplest way I can put it is this: you start off with problems and in hell and go on the journey, change and escape hell. If you don't change, then you remain the same and are destined to remain in hell. It's like a drunk whose lying in the alley. If he doesn't change, he'll be back there tomorrow night.

Your MC can be cold. Your MC will embark on the journey and if he doesn't change, then he will return to hell. This is actually quite normal and is a standard hero archetype. The drunk will wake up, impact other lives and end up back in the alley tomorrow night.

A story is change. The journey will have an impact, be it positive or negative.

You don't have to have a happy ending, but something must be resolved. Normally, the resolution is the putting down of the physical or psychological monster. If the monster isn't put down, you haven't finished the story.

I think you're trying to go against the grain just for the sake of it. I think you think it makes you innovative. Be careful that it just doesn't make you a bad storyteller.

 

[Johnny Cosmo]

I think you're trying to go against the grain just for the sake of it. I think you think it makes you innovative. Be careful that it just doesn't make you a bad storyteller.

I didn't really want to say that, because it's quite an assumption...but honestly, I agree.

Also, making a character cold and detached seems like an easy way to avoid the challenge of writing an emotionally compelling story.

Edit: Not to say that people shouldn't write cold and detached characters, but that if you do write them, and they don't change at all (or nothing is resolved), then it makes for a very flat and empty protagonist.

 

[Steerpike]

Unlikable isn't an issue for me.

Anyone who wants to see an example of that done well, check out Ian Graham's fantasy novel Monument. Come to think of it, that's probably a good recommendation for the OP as well. Graham does a nice job with just this sort of thing.

 

[Philip Overby]

I can't think of any story I've read where the main character doesn't change. There are basically two kinds of characters in stories, static and round. Static characters stay the same, round characters change. Usually the MC is a type of round character.

I personally am not interested in stories with characters without emotion (unless they're robots). I'll echo what others have said and that "going against the grain" isn't always the best idea. If you feel like this story would be awesome, then write it anyway. Perhaps it will be awesome, but you have to write it first.

I always applaud anyone that is trying something different. So I say go for it. Maybe some people won't like it, but a lot of people will. You never know.

 

[Lord Darkstorm]

If that character doesn't change, give the reader one who will. While you might not have decided on another character to travel with this one, it's simple enough to add one. Then you have someone whom the reader can identify with, and the emotional character can see the emotionless responses.

No matter how good the story might be, it won't be one I will read if the main character is as emotionless as a stone and will be nothing but...then toss on a bad ending. I doubt I'd read it long enough to get to the end though. Stories have to have something for the reader to connect to, or they are drab and boring.

 

[Sarah Anderson]

Thanks to everyone for helping me get a handle on this.

I am going for it! I am not going to back away from this character, he is presenting me with a challenge. He seems interesting and I want to see what he does as the story takes on some flesh. He certainly isn't going to win any personality contest but that's not his purpose. In fact, I don't think he cares.

Some posters knew that this guy isn't the only character in the story. They are correct. He will not be adventuring alone. There will be secondary characters and perhaps another MC. I don't know yet. The only thing I know at this point is what I said in my original post.

He will be a cold and almost uncaring character. He will be driven by his principals but not his humanity. The ending will not be happy ever after. I already know how it will end and unless the story changes dramatically that's the way it will be.

Could be a nice ride,

But changing him in anyway is out. To me, changing a character from who he is into someone he isn't seems like way too much interference from the writer. If he has a story to tell, my only part is to step out of the way and let him tell it.

The story may work or it may not. I just have to write it and see.

 

[Johnny Cosmo]

But changing him in anyway is out. To me, changing a character from who he is into someone he isn't seems like way too much interference from the writer. If he has a story to tell, my only part is to step out of the way and let him tell it.

So... you disagree with developing characters?

That aside, you're right; it's your story, so if you have the time to write it as an experiment (if nothing else), then go for it.

 

[fleamailman]

("...perhaps none of these speculations mean anything much until one actually starts writing the work out..." mentioned the goblin, not knowing if he should pass comment even here, normally he didn't though, just he was not normal tonight, adding "...funny isn't it, I mean how odd that we're all so objective in our calculations beforehand only to become so subjective about the result afterwards, why it's almost as if the writer becomes those parts he's writing about at the time to the point where he's someone else by them, that they grow themselves in the end...", "...ah, the dreaded practice of schizophrenia, look folks, told you he was mad..." went the slot's voice as he typed on into its mouth once more, replying "...well a least you keep me company, I mean if I'd ever been normal I had this my brain all to myself here...", in fact, the goblin somehow guessed that most writers lived a sort of shared lives with their characters, "...goblin, can I swallow this yet because nobody reads this far, well not if they are normal that is..." voiced the slot in a satisfied gulp without waiting for his answer)