Lately I’ve realized that some things I’ve come across in my reading didn’t work for me because the characters’ motivations either were unclear to me, or ran counter to my own values. I think it’s very difficult in a romance to empathize with a hero or heroine who make choices for reasons we perceive as dumb, insufficient, unclear, or even wrong from the perspective of our individual value systems.
As an author, this makes me even more aware of the need for clarity in my characters’ motivations. Making sure that as it reads on the page, why he or she does and says the things they say and do makes sense, at least within the “rules” of the story. (Every story has its own internal logic and rules, which everything that takes place has to remain consistent with. This is as true for contemporary as it is for a story set on an alien planet.)
Fictional people have it tough. They have a higher standard than real people, who are often inconsistent, foolish, contradictory, make decisions for incomprehensible reasons. And yet, deep down, even the most seemingly erratic human behavior always has an underlying purpose or cause if we look hard enough. The trick is to bring that human quality to a fictional character without making them or their actions impossible to believe, or empathize with.
So, okay, we have fictional people whose motives are not murky and are consistent with who they are and the fictional world they live in. Now we come to the next sticking point, which is what to do when a character is faced with a choice that must be dictated by their value system…and I find it in conflict with my own? When faced with a choice between A and B, I would choose B without hesitation, I feel deeply that it is the right choice, the only choice…and the hero or heroine chooses A.
Is it right or fair to impose a real standard on a fictional character? No. And yet, I do it. But the author doesn’t necessarily lose me there, if I can see with absolute certainty that THAT character, based on who he or she is, could not make any other choice without undergoing some radical transformation. Their choice, however strongly I disagree, however hard it goes against my own sense of priorities, can be one that makes me nod and say, “Well, of course. That’s who he/she is. That’s what he/she had to do.” I may not like the character at that point. But I can believe them. Their actions and decisions are believable, and so I will read on.
Now we come to the real crux; a believable character is not necessarily a sympathetic one. I have read romance novels with unsympathetic heroines and yet they became classics. (Forever Amber, anyone?) Why? Because however unlikable, the characters were believable. Suspension of disbelief, plausibility, ringing true, consistency within the world and rules of the story, these all trump “likeable”.
What do you think? Will you stay with a story if you believe the characters even when you don’t like them or their choices? Do stories that fail for you often fail at character motivation, either because the motives were unclear or impossible to empathize with?
I’m not bothered by unsympathetic characters or by whether or not their motivation is clear. I prefer flawed characters. I find it more realistic. I like to read about complicated characters who experience ambivalence, make mistakes occasionally, and aren’t always logical. Every last little detail of a character does not have to make sense for me to enjoy the story. I don’t project myself into the role of the heroine so I have no stake in her being perfect or perfectly logical at all times.
by Barbara B. January 22nd, 2007 at 6:30 amWell, totally perfect would be dull!
by Charlene Teglia January 22nd, 2007 at 7:43 amI’m with you–as long as the characters’ motivations are clear, I don’t mind if their values differ from mine. I do, however, know a lot of readers who don’t feel the same: who cannot, for example, read a romance with a hero who’s an assassin or a thief, regardless of how internally consistent the character is.
The second part of your question made me think. I’d have to re-read books that didn’t work for me to be certain, but it seems that the main characters’ motivations have been pretty clear on the page. Maybe I’ve just been lucky with my reading, or maybe I’m just not remembering well, or maybe most authors get at least their main characters’ motivations clear.
What I have noticed, however, is that a villain whose motivation is murky, other than the generic “he’s a bad guy,” will make a difference in my enjoyment of a book.
by Darla January 22nd, 2007 at 7:54 amdepends on if the story is pulling me in or not.
by Shiloh Walker January 22nd, 2007 at 7:57 amDarla, I know that values can be a real sticking point in romance!
by Charlene Teglia January 22nd, 2007 at 8:09 amShiloh, I find that for me to be truly pulled into a story I have to believe the characters and care about the outcome. Or maybe just one character. Come to think of it, I loved the entire Travis McGee series just because of Travis McGee.
by Charlene Teglia January 22nd, 2007 at 8:11 amI agree with Shiloh, if the story pulls me in I’ll keep reading no matter what what I think about the heroine’s values. Naturally the characters have to be well-motivated in order for the story to do that.
Think of Becky Sharp and Scarlett O’Hara.
by Deborah January 22nd, 2007 at 8:48 amI read romance hoping to get warm, happy feelings at the end of the novel, and the RWA defintion of the genre even mentions “emotional justice”. But it’s hard to accept that what happens is justice if some people you really don’t like are confirmed in their belief in a value-system that you as a reader find personally abhorrent. And if you really hate the hero and heroine, why would you want them to find a happy ending? On Teach Me Tonight recently someone commented that they thought Les Liaisons Dangereuses had a happy ending because all the aristocrats were going to be wiped out by the Revolution. That’s not the usual understanding of a HEA, but if you hate the characters then yes, you’d probably rather see them dead or punished in some way than smugly producing little replicas of themselves.
OK, so that’s at the extreme end, and I can’t recall hating many characters, but if I begin to dislike characters, or find their choices upsetting, it’s not going to make for a ‘comfort read’. If I were reading the novel in order to analyse it, that would be fine, but if I was reading with the expectation of enjoying myself emotionally then I would probably choose to avoid books with characters whose value-systems irritated/upset me.
Characters whose motivations don’t make sense don’t make for an enjoyable read either, but for somewhat different reasons. It challenges my suspension of disbelief and I’m made aware that these are fictions rather than characters who feel ‘real’.
by Laura Vivanco January 22nd, 2007 at 8:50 amIf I truly understand the character’s motivation, then I’ll stick with a book. I may even walk away thinking that the book is well written, but I don’t always enjoy books where the character’s values are just too far away from mine. If I truly dislike a character, I probably won’t enjoy the book no matter what the ending is. I’ve finished some books just not able to like the hero and/or heroine and end up feeling disappointed.
Having said that, I do love flawed characters. I love seeing what drives them to do what they do and how they change during the course of a book. J.R. Ward’s character, Zadist, is a prime example of this. He’s mean and nasty, but we come to understand him over the course of the book and learn to love him as much as Bella does. Now that’s writing at its best!
by N.J. Walters January 22nd, 2007 at 8:58 am:smile:I have to like the characters and believe in what they’re doing. The thing with being human, though, is that there are universal ideals. That is, unless drummed out of us, almost all of us grow up valuing certain things. Motherlove. Loyalty to friends and family. Courage. Trust. Respect. Empathy. These are things all humans are born with and will develop IF they’re nurtured at least a little bit. No one is born perfect and no one obtains perfection. Therefore, perfect characters cannot be related to and are boring.
by Kimber An January 22nd, 2007 at 8:59 amI have to like the hero and heroine. I may not agree with everything they do or say but at the core, I have to believe that they’re nice people (and understand why they’re doing what they’re doing).
Some actions I feel are difficult to align with a long term HEA. For example: cheating. I feel that once a cheater, always a cheater so it would be difficult for me to believe that person would be faithful in the long run.
by Kimber January 22nd, 2007 at 8:59 amLaura, I think “emotional justice” says it well. You want good to triumph, love to conquer all, and the hero and heroine to exhibit heroic qualities and the demonstrated capacity to love each other.
by Charlene Teglia January 22nd, 2007 at 9:39 amNJ, I’ve stuck with books where I understood the character’s motivation, but if I didn’t like them, I didn’t love the book and it never became a keeper for me.
by Charlene Teglia January 22nd, 2007 at 9:40 amVery good points, Kimber An. Courage, loyalty, trust, respect. Those are all pretty important character traits, and a character can still be human and imperfect while possessing them.
by Charlene Teglia January 22nd, 2007 at 9:41 amI find it hard to stick with totally unsympathetic characters however, I don’t find a character unsympathetic simply because I don’t agree with their choices or moral code or whatever. For example, think of Hawk, the enforcer, leg-breaker, gun-for-hire in the outstanding Spenser series by Robert B. Parker. There are a lot of things he’ll do for money, but he has his own strictly-adhered-to code of honor and he doesn’t veer from it, regardless of the amount of money offered. By all accounts, he’s an anti-hero and I should loathe his actions, but I don’t. His sense of humanity might vastly differ from mine, but he embodies strong elements of heroism in other ways.
Now, a character who jumps from one side of his or her personal ethics line without justification or logic will only turn me off.
by Mary Stella January 22nd, 2007 at 9:47 amMary Stella, Hawk is a great example! Another one I can think of is Edward, from the Anita Blake Vampire Hunter series. He’s the kind of guy you’d never want to meet in real life but I can’t help liking him whenever I read about him. He follows his own internal sense of justice and exhibits qualities that make me admire him.
by Charlene Teglia January 22nd, 2007 at 9:52 amI think the key word you used is consistency. Let’s face it, a lot of romance heroines have had me banging my head against the desk, but if they are consistently TSTL I’ll buy into it. It’s the few that have been painted as hawks for 2/3 of the book, and suddenly turn into doves for no apparent reason that lose me.
by Robyn January 22nd, 2007 at 10:10 amRobyn, that’s it. If a character does a sudden about-face, I want a really good reason for it! Although even then it kind of leaves you feeling like you’re reading a different story than you expected. “Ooookay, now the character is about this…” A big change has to be logical and make sense in retrospect, I think. Like once it happens, you can look back and see it coming.
by Charlene Teglia January 22nd, 2007 at 10:17 amOh, this is yummy.
For me, personal values have little to do with whether I like a character or not, since bad guys can be so great. In fact, I had one hero that people had very strong reactions to, because, as my editor stated, “her was pretty much a bastard for half of the book.” However, readers who really read the book and understood why he acted as he did often loved him more for it — so those kinds of growth curves with characters can be risky if readers want black/white, good/bad characters, but morally grey characters are so much more interesting than the straight-line ones.
The best example, and the one my husband and I come back to again and again is Win in Harlan Coben’s Myron Bolitar books. Win is terrible — he’s violent, he’s a misogynist, and he’s definitely not a likable guy — and yet I like him anyway. He’s fascinating because Coben has created a character with a very consistent and believable personal code of his own — it doesn’t have to me mine, most of us relate more to Myron, the good guy, but then as you read the books, you start to see the relationship between them and how often Win saves Myron’s backside. And even more interesting as their relationship ripens over books, and you can see that Myron, the good guy, is not always so likable because he’s happy to have amoral Win doing the dirty work… that is one of the best relationships in contemporary fiction, I think.
Win is a character you don’t want on your bad side, but wouldn’t every one love to have him as a best friend?
To me, that kind of character construction has nothing to do with trying to make a “likable” character, Coben has taken it deeper, and starts poking around in the uncomfortable place of why we find someone likable or not, and what can even be unlikable about someone “likable” like Myron…
Anyway… great topic.
by Samantha Hunter January 22nd, 2007 at 10:29 amOh, Eric in Charlaine Harris’s Southern Vampire Series also provides that kind of edgy, sorta bad character who’s nonetheless so compelling and a hero of his own kind. But there’s a structure in place that allows them to function believably, and that’s all you need. Well, that’s all I need, anyway.
Sam
by Samantha Hunter January 22nd, 2007 at 10:32 amSamantha, I haven’t read that series (Southern Vampires) but it’s on my to read list! Eric sounds very interesting.
I can think of some really powerful characters who exhibit traits you wouldn’t buy in a romance hero. Bothari in the Vorkosigan series (Lois McMaster Bujold) is a great one. He’s insane, he’s a killer and a sadist and a rapist, and yet he is capable of redemption. I really hated it when he was killed in the series.
by Charlene Teglia January 22nd, 2007 at 10:39 amI’m with Shi in regard to whether the story is pulling me in or not. For example, I typically write very strong heroines who still have issues to overcome. They’re not typically down in the dumps, but fighters. However, if I’m reading a romance where the heroine is noodle spined and depressed I’ll still continue the book if the story grabs me.
Unsympathetic can be believable (especially if you knew any of my family members!) A character I consider likeable can still be a smark-aleck. I can read a story with those kind of characters if the plot works and draws me in. Clear motivations? Meh. I can take it or leave it. Key for me is this: If it’s boring or doesn’t snag my attention, I’m going to put it down no matter what kind of characters dominate the scenes.
TJ
by TJ Michaels January 22nd, 2007 at 12:32 pmTJ, I’m giggling at noodle-spined and depressed!:lol:
by Charlene Teglia January 22nd, 2007 at 12:50 pmCharlene, I don’t know that one but will look it up. The thing I think is *really* cool is that Win and Eric really are heroes of a type — and in Eric’s case, definitely a romantic hero. I just happen to love characters like that, I guess.
Sam
by Samantha Hunter January 22nd, 2007 at 2:15 pmSamantha, Bothari appears in Shards of Honor, Barrayar, and The Warrior’s Apprentice by Lois McMaster Bujold. Terrific reading! And the series only gets better as it goes on.
by Charlene Teglia January 22nd, 2007 at 9:00 pmIf the author’s voice is strong, amusing and otherwise distracting…IOW the story is so dang good, I can be fine reading about a heroine that’s not necessarily someone I understand.
by Patrice Michelle January 23rd, 2007 at 1:29 amGreat topic.
I am able to leave my own values at the door when I suspend my disbelief for a story.
With one exception.
After decades of working with abused and neglected children — sympathetic portrails of abusers and abandoners of any stripe kill a story for me. Not an abuser or abandoner rationalizing and seeing him/herself as the victim — that’s part of the pathology — but the author portraying the character as sympathetic. I threw a book — a trade paperback — across the room when the heroine, realizing she needs to start her life over, drives off and leaves her 3-year-old daughter at an interstate rest area. (I forget the anthology, but the story was “You Go Where It Takes You.”)
BUT, with that one exception, if the author makes the character’s actions, values and motivations real within the context of the story, I can roll with just about anything. Even a mind set or value system diametrically opposed to my own.
by KeVin Killiany January 23rd, 2007 at 7:57 amPatrice, I’ve thoroughly enjoyed a few stories like that!
by Charlene Teglia January 23rd, 2007 at 8:57 amKevin, that would be a total dealbreaker for me, too. I’m a mom. I can’t even read anything that touches on that sort of thing.
by Charlene Teglia January 23rd, 2007 at 8:58 am:mad:Preach it, Kevin! The protagonists had better be good to babies or they are so outta my window!:mad:
by Kimber An January 23rd, 2007 at 9:13 am