The fine line between unlikeable and despised

[Feo Takahari]

I'm trying to write my first longer story, and I'm having a hard time writing one character, a young would-be terrorist who allies with the protagonists for mutual gain. His philosophy is deliberately somewhat offensive, and I make a point of having the viewpoint character dislike him, but I don't want readers to hate him so much that he drags the rest of the story down.

In brief, his virtues:
* Brave in the face of danger.
* Honest and forthright.
* Respects and compliments the others' strength.
* The closest thing to a "cool" character among the main cast.

And his points of offense:
* Holds a social Darwinist philosophy, and wishes to see a world where strength decides power.
* Tells the one person who likes him, a biological male, that she's "not a real woman," causing her to cry.
* (Possibly) refuses to protect a homeless man from attack, calling him a "drain on society." (I'm debating whether or not to include this--it's a logical consequence of his way of thinking, but it may be too evil.)

How do you handle this sort of character?

 

[Philip Overby]

This is one of those instances where knowing who your audience is for a story helps. Certain people may find offense with a character with certain philosophies and therefore no matter how redeemable he is, may not be able to accept his more controversial traits. Having characters who are sort of "gray" is a popular thing now, so I think as long as you are aware that some people are not going to like your character just because of certain qualities, then having these traits are acceptable.

I personally handle sort of morally gray characters by making their good traits sort of overpower their bad ones. Or by having their bad traits actually help people at some point. If you worry that a character's bad traits may make him or her alienate readers, then having them as a minor character or a supporting character may be the best option. A big thing I notice in some writing is that the main character can be unlikeable to the point I don't want to read a story anymore. It's pretty hard to offend me though, but it is easy for me to give up on a story if a character has no morals or any sort of force to guide them. I think anti-heroes are tough to create without making them a stereotype or a blatant jerk. I think Han Solo is a good example of an anti-hero who is morally ambigious at the beginning, then makes some sort of transformation. I think a way to make these sort of characters likeable is to have them change in some way so the reader can see them evolve.

I think calling a homeless man a drain on society and refusing to help him would traditionally not be a good thing for a main character to say. Again, this depends on your audience. If your audience is not so worried about these sort of statements or decisions, then you can get away with it. However, more sensitive readers may be turned off by this sort of attitude toward society (that the world finds a way to get rid of the weak.)

I'd also hope that you'd want to make all of your characters "cool" in some way. If you balance his views with the views of the rest of your characters, then I think you can get away with it.

 

[Jess A]

I'll add my small two cents to Phil's comments. Instead of having your character not help the homeless man, perhaps he could help him, but hesitate first. He could then berate the poor fellow and tell him he ought to learn to help himself (etc). My point is that you could dilute that situation a little. The homeless man could have at least attempted to stand up for himself, showing traits which your character finds admirable. Strength and guts. So it would be a toss up on whether to let the stronger person win, or help the homeless man for seeing strength there, but then berating him and telling him he should not have bothered to rescue him.

Another option is that the character attacked the person attacking the homeless guy - for purely selfish reasons - as a challenge to himself. The homeless man thanks him, and he marks a smart remark about doing it for himself, not for the 'drain on society'.

 

[JCFarnham]

You've already done something to temper this character. From what I gather he isn't your protagonist. The best cheat when presenting awkward potentially story breaking characters is often to distance your point of view from them.

I've got nothing much to add to what the guys said.

I guess what it come down to is you being true to the character. If he is exactly the kind of person to be an arse to a homeless man then you should follow that through. There's nothing worse for me than expecting a character to be something then having that whipped for no good reason from under me. If you want him to act out of character, make sure it become part of his character. ie, give him a damn good reason.

 

[Mindfire]

Interesting character. Definitely an unlikable bastard. You want this to be a character we love to hate. In other words, a heroic villain. I think the best way to accomplish this would be to use the "rule of cool". In other words, make him a supreme bad*ss. Show that he has the high strength and intelligence appropriate to someone who follows his philosophy. Avoid the urge to make him a caricature or Straw Darwinist and give him a few valid points to support his worldview. His worldview is still rubbish, but make it intelligent rubbish.

Also, I think you're pretty much obliged at this point to give him at least one comeuppance, probably from the main hero. This comeuppance could come from being on the receiving end of a beatdown for once, being shown what it's like to be weak. Or it could come from him witnessing surprising strength from a character he thought was weak. If that homeless man picks up a fallen soldier's broadsword and starts massacring orcs with it, your Darwinist's jaw is going to hit the floor, at which point your hero can deliver a short lecture about not judging by appearances. Alternatively, you could show that the homeless man was once rich and powerful, illustrating to the Darwinist that the world isn't always cut-and-dry and that people don't always get what they "deserve". Sometimes bad luck is just bad luck and even the strongest can't do anything for it.

Personally I would include the bit about the homeless man, but leave out the bit about the transgendered person. The homeless man situation seems to offer more narrative possibilities, while the insult to the transgendered person is more likely to be controversial.

 

[The Din]

My favorite characters are usually on the dark side, and I mean darker than this. If he plans on becoming a terrorist, potentially killing many innocents, why would he care about a bum? To stay true to his philosophies, he could always give the bloke a knife to protect himself. Give him a choice between that and a bottle of whiskey/top-shelf crack?

Whatever you do, don't betray character ideals for the sake of a few bleeding hearts.

 

[Christopher Wright]

The thing with the homeless man can be used to make him even more infuriating... say, for example, that he initially doesn't exactly come to the defense of the homeless man, but he takes actions that would give the homeless man the opportunity to defend himself -- show that, in this character's eyes, he's trying to give the homeless man the *opportunity* to rise up, take control, defend himself. And then either the homeless man has no idea what he's talking about, or is too bewildered to react, or whatever, and finally the guy steps in and saves the day, but with disgust and contempt written all over his face. He's saving the homeless man because in his eyes, the homeless man failed and needed to be shown what success looked like.

If I read that scene I would hate that guy. But it would be a very complicated hate.

 

[Twook00]

I'm reading a series where the same issue arises. C.S. Friedman's Coldfire Trilogy takes place on a planet at the end of the galaxy. Our descendents crashland there and begin to colonize with hopes of sharing our theology and science, but the planet is governed by a natural force that works much like magic and eventually renders all of our tech and knowledge useless.

Thousands of years later, a priest (good/honorable) ends up teaming up with an undead sorceror (ex-priest who hunts down women and feeds upon them) who is everything he is not.

And they hate eachother. The hero is constantly saying things like "When this is over, I will kill you."

The author pulls it off really well, though. The sorceror is detestable, but charming and cool and completely necessary (because of his power). There is constant friction and conflict, and the relationship between these two characters becomes very twisted as the hero finds himself admiring and understanding the sorceror's motives.

 

[Feo Takahari]

I'm getting some very good responses here. I'd like to respond to a few things:

1): He'll definitely get his comeuppance. To a large extent, this is a story about the ways people lie to themselves, and the terrorist's big lie is that he's a strong person who doesn't need to rely on others for help.

2): I think I'll have to keep his distaste for transsexuals so as to fit the pattern I'm setting up. Each character winds up liking the person they expected to dislike, but disliking the person who likes them, an unstable situation that necessarily falls apart. The fascist (as I call the transwoman) is initially impressed by the terrorist's strength of will and dedication to his convictions, whereas the terrorist thinks the fascist's magical abilities are an offense to nature. Having him be disgusted that she doesn't accept her "true nature" makes things more personal.

 

[Steerpike]

I'm reading a series where the same issue arises. C.S. Friedman's Coldfire Trilogy takes place on a planet at the end of the galaxy.

Excellent series of books.

 

[Mindfire]

I'm getting some very good responses here. I'd like to respond to a few things:

1): He'll definitely get his comeuppance. To a large extent, this is a story about the ways people lie to themselves, and the terrorist's big lie is that he's a strong person who doesn't need to rely on others for help.

2): I think I'll have to keep his distaste for transsexuals so as to fit the pattern I'm setting up. Each character winds up liking the person they expected to dislike, but disliking the person who likes them, an unstable situation that necessarily falls apart. The fascist (as I call the transwoman) is initially impressed by the terrorist's strength of will and dedication to his convictions, whereas the terrorist thinks the fascist's magical abilities are an offense to nature. Having him be disgusted that she doesn't accept her "true nature" makes things more personal.

So the fascist is a magic-user also? That brings up another issue. Was there magic involved in the... uh... transgendering? Or was it done by more "mundane" methods? "Mundane" transgendering has to be supplemented by hormone therapy and requires (re)constructive surgeries while magical transgendering has no such restrictions. The end result being that a magical transformation would be more "complete" and it would be far harder for even someone like your terrorist to argue that the transgendered person is not a "real woman" because... well... magic.

 

[Zero Angel]

Responding to the OP, if you want to avoid the readers feeling contempt for this character, it may help to describe him from your narrator instead of as your main character sees him. That is, let your main character's actions tell us how he or she feels about the terrorist character, but don't have a bunch of internal dialogue going on and on about what a loser this guy is. If you show how this character is and how others feel about him instead of talking/thinking about him, then the readers will be able to make up their own minds.

 

[Androxine Vortex]

I love anti heroes to death. Take my favorite fantasy character Malus Darkblade. He's a dark elf who just doesn't give a damn about anyone but himself. The whole society of the dark elves is violent and dark. They literally worship a god of murder. the atrocities he commits are obviously against my own personal Morales but I can't help but cheer him on sometimes. I love his constant negative and pessimistic attitude towards everything. I love the fact that he just doesn't care about anyone but himself. His almost unbelievable selfishness and attitude make me fall in love with him. Its just such a 180 degree turn from the usual fantasy hero. So I think that you could make some aspects about him that the readers enjoy. Think about this how many times in books or movies do the bad guys seem cooler and more appealing. In real life most of the time we would never side with the villains but everyone deep down likes the villains in some form or the other. Good luck!

 

[srcroft]

I find that if your MC reflects the theme well and the support characters act as Foil characters and also support aspects of the theme, you will naturally do the same with your antagonist. Now the enemy will usually be the antithesis of the theme, but it still reflects it. No one is pure good or evil. Some of the rudest characters end up the most likable, because if you are true to your theme and make a character round you'll have an amazing piece of work.

Usually only 2-D characters that represent allegory or symbols can be that hated. If you like your bad guy, chances are you'll put enough time into him, make his responses realistic, and people will like him too.

 

[Arielcat]

This is one of those instances where knowing who your audience is for a story helps. Certain people may find offense with a character with certain philosophies and therefore no matter how redeemable he is, may not be able to accept his more controversial traits. Having characters who are sort of "gray" is a popular thing now, so I think as long as you are aware that some people are not going to like your character just because of certain qualities, then having these traits are acceptable.

I personally handle sort of morally gray characters by making their good traits sort of overpower their bad ones. Or by having their bad traits actually help people at some point. If you worry that a character's bad traits may make him or her alienate readers, then having them as a minor character or a supporting character may be the best option. A big thing I notice in some writing is that the main character can be unlikeable to the point I don't want to read a story anymore. It's pretty hard to offend me though, but it is easy for me to give up on a story if a character has no morals or any sort of force to guide them. I think anti-heroes are tough to create without making them a stereotype or a blatant jerk. I think Han Solo is a good example of an anti-hero who is morally ambigious at the beginning, then makes some sort of transformation. I think a way to make these sort of characters likeable is to have them change in some way so the reader can see them evolve.

I think calling a homeless man a drain on society and refusing to help him would traditionally not be a good thing for a main character to say. Again, this depends on your audience. If your audience is not so worried about these sort of statements or decisions, then you can get away with it. However, more sensitive readers may be turned off by this sort of attitude toward society (that the world finds a way to get rid of the weak.)

I'd also hope that you'd want to make all of your characters "cool" in some way. If you balance his views with the views of the rest of your characters, then I think you can get away with it.

Fortunately, "morally ambiguous" is different from "having no morals".

 

[Arielcat]

I'm reading a series where the same issue arises. C.S. Friedman's Coldfire Trilogy takes place on a planet at the end of the galaxy. Our descendents crashland there and begin to colonize with hopes of sharing our theology and science, but the planet is governed by a natural force that works much like magic and eventually renders all of our tech and knowledge useless.

Thousands of years later, a priest (good/honorable) ends up teaming up with an undead sorceror (ex-priest who hunts down women and feeds upon them) who is everything he is not.

And they hate eachother. The hero is constantly saying things like "When this is over, I will kill you."

The author pulls it off really well, though. The sorceror is detestable, but charming and cool and completely necessary (because of his power). There is constant friction and conflict, and the relationship between these two characters becomes very twisted as the hero finds himself admiring and understanding the sorceror's motives.

That sounds very very very good.
And evil too of course.
I want to read these books now.

 

[Arielcat]

Excellent series of books.

Excellent avatar and Latin words to go with it.

 

[Arielcat]

I find that if your MC reflects the theme well and the support characters act as Foil characters and also support aspects of the theme, you will naturally do the same with your antagonist. Now the enemy will usually be the antithesis of the theme, but it still reflects it. No one is pure good or evil. Some of the rudest characters end up the most likable, because if you are true to your theme and make a character round you'll have an amazing piece of work.

Usually only 2-D characters that represent allegory or symbols can be that hated. If you like your bad guy, chances are you'll put enough time into him, make his responses realistic, and people will like him too.

We can make characters round?
That in itself might be interesting.
(I mean I'm just saying. )

 

[pmmg]

Not that I mind, cause good topics are good topics, but you are kicking the dust of threads that are over ten years old and many of these members are not around anymore.

While i do enjoy reading your posts, am not sure i can help these who posted them anymore.

 

[Arielcat]

Not that I mind, cause good topics are good topics, but you are kicking the dust of threads that are over ten years old and many of these members are not around anymore.

While i do enjoy reading your posts, am not sure i can help these who posted them anymore.

I know.
I just thought it was an interesting topic anyway, so I replied to it.