Starting with an unlikable character

[Abbas-Al-Morim]

The story I'm writing is divided into two plots taking place in different geographical locations. Over the course of the story, those plots will entwine until both main characters will finally meet. One of my main characters is cynical for her age but she's got a lot of likable traits as well. My other character... well he starts of as the world's biggest douche.

He's been ignored and shunned for a large part of his life and his way of dealing with it is by placing himself above others and acting accordingly. He strongly identifies with his social class (nobleman) and as a result he looks down on things beneath him. He's young (sixteen) but he often acts like a petulant five-year-old. He can be a bit cruel and he's almost always condescending. As the story progresses, he matures and his mentor (the knight he's serving as a squire) helps him find self-worth. He'll feel more valued and as a result, he'll no longer need to place himself on a pedestal to cope with years of neglect and even outright hate.

I want to tell this story (and I will) but I'm a bit worried the reader won't stick with it because he'll find the main character very unlikable. There have been lots of stories with unlikable characters before (The Malus Darkblade trilogy for instance) but those characters had certain qualities that were admirable (even though they used them for evil). My character doesn't really have an admirable qualities. He's not extremely good at something, he doesn't have many redeeming qualities (his best quality would be that he's not inherently evil). He wouldn't beat people up for fun. He wouldn't rape or plunder or whatever. He's just an asshole. And that might be a lot worse, because we all know assholes and we all face them on a day-to-day basis. That's why it would be so easy to hate this character, I think. The only thing he's got going for him is that he's a bit of an underdog.

The reason why he's such a dick is explained as the story goes on (so again, the reader has to stick with it to figure it out).

Any thoughts on this? Feel free to expand the conversation to the more abstract question (Does a main character have to be likable - or at least have redeeming qualities?).

 

[GeekDavid]

You might surround him with more sympathetic characters who -- for whatever reason -- like him.

 

[Abbas-Al-Morim]

You might surround him with more sympathetic characters who -- for whatever reason -- like him.

I'm surround them with semi-sympathetic characters (it's a dark fantasy, nobody's perfect!) and some of those like him (or at least tolerate him). Since they're stuck with him, they at least try to accommodate him.

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

You might surround him with more sympathetic characters who -- for whatever reason -- like him.

That is one way.

Another thing to consider would be giving your character just a touch of sympathy. He can still be a jerk while retaining a quality or two that makes him human, qualities which allow the reader to identify.

Take GRRM's character Cersei Lannister. She's definitely unlikable, BUT she loves her children and strives for their success. She also feels undervalued in a predominantly patriarchal society. These are the types of details which readers understand. Readers can relate to even a couple sympathetic traits.

 

[Mythopoet]

Sherlock Holmes is one of the most unlikeable people in literature. He's cold, calculating and emotionless. He looks down on others who aren't as intelligent or as observant as he is. He's more interested in problems than people most of the time. Also he's got definite psychological issues and a drug habit. And yet he's one of the most beloved characters in all of literature. Think about it.

 

[GeekDavid]

Sherlock Holmes is one of the most unlikeable people in literature. He's cold, calculating and emotionless. He looks down on others who aren't as intelligent or as observant as he is. He's more interested in problems than people most of the time. Also he's got definite psychological issues and a drug habit. And yet he's one of the most beloved characters in all of literature. Think about it.

I think Holmes is beloved because he helps people out of troubles... like when they're falsely accused of a crime.

Watson also helps humanize the character, I think.

 

[buyjupiter]

Take GRRM's character Cersei Lannister. She's definitely unlikable, BUT she loves her children and strives for their success. She also feels undervalued in a predominantly patriarchal society. These are the types of details which readers understand. Readers can relate to even a couple sympathetic traits.

I can't relate to even her sympathetic traits. Mainly because the rest of her character is so screwed up. But I do keep reading her sections because I don't want to miss when a Wight or a Dragon comes in and mauls her. Although, where GRRM left her character, I'm finally starting to get some of what I want. I feel slightly bad about this as I realize that she had an incredibly screwed up childhood, and in her society she doesn't really have agency, but darn it she did make the choices she's made. And even if she is protective of her children, manipulation to achieve power for its own sake and then saying she only wants it to keep her kids safe? Bleck.

Sometimes, I'll keep reading to find out what happens to the bad guy/gal and if they get punished for their crimes. You can make a character as foul as can be, but if you dangle the idea of retribution for bad behaviors in front of my eyes, I'll definitely be more interested.

 

[TWErvin2]

Thomas Covenant, in Stephen R. Donaldson's The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant the Unbeliever was an unlikeable character.

He was a leper who pretty much didn't endear himself to anyone in the novel, but the two trilogies and the 4 book set now being completed attest to the fact that having an unlikeable main character can work.

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

I can't relate to even her sympathetic traits. Mainly because the rest of her character is so screwed up. But I do keep reading her sections because I don't want to miss when a Wight or a Dragon comes in and mauls her. Although, where GRRM left her character, I'm finally starting to get some of what I want. I feel slightly bad about this as I realize that she had an incredibly screwed up childhood, and in her society she doesn't really have agency, but darn it she did make the choices she's made. And even if she is protective of her children, manipulation to achieve power for its own sake and then saying she only wants it to keep her kids safe? Bleck.

Sometimes, I'll keep reading to find out what happens to the bad guy/gal and if they get punished for their crimes. You can make a character as foul as can be, but if you dangle the idea of retribution for bad behaviors in front of my eyes, I'll definitely be more interested.

I get what you're saying about not being able to relate on the "kids angle" (though I personally think it's subtlety effective). It also seemed well established to me that she does genuinely care about her children. However, are you saying you can't relate to a person feeling undervalued or not being given the opportunities they think they deserve? Or, that you can't understand a woman being forced to stay married to a man like Robert Boratheon...to be treated like no more than a noble whore...along with all the indignity?

I'm not trying to say she's at all likable, but Martin adds enough bits of situation and personality that most readers should be able to find something to identify with, if even a little bit. Sometimes, that's all we need.

Lastly, I agree 100% with waiting to see a character get their just desserts. Just a hint of a possible comeuppance can be powerful.

 

[psychotick]

Hi,

Thomas Covenant unlikeable? I liked him - or maybe I just felt sorry for him. And Cersei? I like her too - but I wouldn't turn my back on her! As for Sherlock you're not really supposed to like him - you admire him because of his brilliance which is Watson's role - to keep telling you how brilliant he is even when nothing much is happening.

Having an unlikeable MC is a risk. But you can manage it by giving them some traits to be respected or admired. Sherlock's brilliance, Cersei's unshakable love for her horrible son, or even something to be pitied - the man inside Thomas Covenant who so wanted to not be who he was. (I wonder if anyone's told Stephen Donaldson that there's a cure for Hanson's disease?)

Still somtimes nothing will work, certainly not for all people anyway. I just bought the first season of Orphan Black on DVD, and really enjoyed it. But I gave it to my sister to watch thinking she too would think it was good and she watched half the first epp and gave the rest away - because she couldn't get past the MC's abandonment of her child and druggy past.

Cheers, Greg.

 

[GeekDavid]

Thomas Covenant, in Stephen R. Donaldson's The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant the Unbeliever was an unlikeable character.

He was a leper who pretty much didn't endear himself to anyone in the novel, but the two trilogies and the 4 book set now being completed attest to the fact that having an unlikeable main character can work.

I never did like those books. Now I know why.

 

[TWErvin2]

I never did like those books. Now I know why.

There are more than a few that didn't care for the books, but if I recall accurately, they reached the NYT Bestseller listings, so there were enough that enjoyed the series despite the generally unlikeable main character. And in the end, Thomas Covenant was just the right man for the job.

 

[AnneL]

I
Sometimes, I'll keep reading to find out what happens to the bad guy/gal and if they get punished for their crimes. You can make a character as foul as can be, but if you dangle the idea of retribution for bad behaviors in front of my eyes, I'll definitely be more interested.

Or, conversely, the possibility of redemption. Which is what makes someone who is just a plain jerk instead of an out and out villain challenging, b/c we tend to think jerks can't change. Sounds like this MC is insecure and ashamed, which is pretty good motivation for change, but of course he has to admit that to himself. There has to be a crack somewhere in his facade, a crack which he can't conceal to himself. If readers can get a hint of that crack, then the root for the underdog thing will kick in.

Seems like there also needs to be something that makes him different from every other pompous ass -- maybe there's one thing he actually is really good at and deserves to be proud of.

 

[GeekDavid]

There are more than a few that didn't care for the books, but if I recall accurately, they reached the NYT Bestseller listings, so there were enough that enjoyed the series despite the generally unlikeable main character. And in the end, Thomas Covenant was just the right man for the job.

Twilight also made bestseller lists. That tells me a lot about the majority of the reading public.

 

[buyjupiter]

I get what you're saying about not being able to relate on the "kids angle" (though I personally think it's subtlety effective). It also seemed well established to me that she does genuinely care about her children. However, are you saying you can't relate to a person feeling undervalued or not being given the opportunities they think they deserve? Or, that you can't understand a woman being forced to stay married to a man like Robert Boratheon...to be treated like no more than a noble whore...along with all the indignity?

I'm not trying to say she's at all likable, but Martin adds enough bits of situation and personality that most readers should be able to find something to identify with, if even a little bit. Sometimes, that's all we need.

Lastly, I agree 100% with waiting to see a character get their just desserts. Just a hint of a possible comeuppance can be powerful.

No, I can relate to feeling undervalued, and not being given a chance, and even what it's like to live in an unequal relationship. I cannot relate to the choices that stem from those feelings and how she reacts to those feelings. Like most of the women in A Song of Ice and Fire, she's mostly made sympathetic by being a victim.

If she had just killed Baratheon and put her son on the throne, without the power plays and manipulations behind the scenes, I would have bought the sympathetic traits more. As it turned out, her manipulation had been an ongoing thing. If she had gone full out 16th century revenge drama (think Titus Andronicus or The Duchess of Malfi), I would have bought that. (This is probably one of the reasons I like Abercromie's Best Served Cold--Murcatto reacts in a more believable way to the injustices life has thrown at her. She's still not all that likeable, but she's more sympathetic.)

Cersei is a difficult character to unravel why she's so distasteful to me. The gratuitous and unrealistic motivations for her relationship(s) do not help. I'm not blaming her character for reacting the way she has, but I am fully laying the responsibility of creating a disliked character by using sexuality or manipulation at the author's feet. It's lazy character motivation.

 

[Caged Maiden]

I think that by giving your ass of a character a weakness, it makes him seem more human in the eyes of a reader

i have a naive, unlikeable character by some standards, but for most of my crit partners, they liked her parts best. She's silly and makes stupid choices because she thinks she's in love, but her gradual change is a big part of the story and if she wasn't so silly at the beginning, her gathered wisdom wouldn't have the same impact in the end.

Sure, let us know he keeps the world at arm's length... but let us know why. Is it that he fears loss? that he's traumatized by how his parents fostered him and didn't ever show they cared? That he's never made anyone proud and he can't seem to find value in his own life? There are a lot of ways to make a despicable character human and real.

 

[BWFoster78]

You've made a choice to go with an unlikeable character. Some people aren't going to like your book because the main character is unlikeable. As I see it, you have two choices:

1. Make a change to your choice in order for him to be more likeable.
2. Accept that some people aren't going to like your story.

Note that, no matter what you do, you will never write a story that everyone will like.

 

[Mythopoet]

Keep in mind, as demonstrated by this thread already, that was is "likeable" and "unlikeable" is highly dependent on the individual reader. "Likeable" is a wishy washy sort of word anyway. I could successfully argue that everyone ever born is "likeable", that is, able to be liked. I'm sure there were people who "liked" Adolf Hitler.

People often talk about "interesting" or "compelling" characters, but that also is highly subjective. Look at the amazon reviews of any of your favorite books and you're likely to find opposing reviews praising and condemning the book for the same elements. (I remember reading a review of the Amber books by Roger Zelazny proclaiming that the MC, Corwin, was a terrible and one dimensional character and that the story was both boring and made no sense. My mind was thoroughly boggled, but that's tastes for you.)

I really think that a writer should focus on writing characters that he/she find interesting and compelling and that he/she likes to read about. If you are passionate about the character and the character's story then that will come through to at least some of the readers. You simply have to hope that readers who share your tastes find your book. They are the ones you write for.

 

[TWErvin2]

Twilight also made bestseller lists. That tells me a lot about the majority of the reading public.

While I would put the quality of Donaldson's prose on a different level than Meyer's, it is good to remember that the reading public (majority or not) will be the ones that buy and read your books (or not.)

 

[BWFoster78]

I'd read Twilight over Donaldson any day of the week. I enjoyed Twilight quite a lot. I did not enjoy any of Donaldson's books. In fact, there aren't a whole lot of books I've read that I've liked more than Meyer's. She obviously did something right...