By way of contrast to the other (slightly pessimistic ) thread already in place, what characters can you never get bored watching? What sort of character do you most identify with? What sort of character do you just love to create? I have two personal favourites. I love to watch Sociopaths, people who tend to operate on different morals and compulsions to the rest of society (Best Example: Benedict Cumberbatch's Sherlock Holmes). However, I will also never get bored of watching a complete Psychopath, especially if they're mostly doing what they do just to have some fun! (Best Example: James Nesbitt as Edward Hyde) Also, I tend to identify with the latter character.
I love people who are so smart they can get away with being exactly who they want to be: Abi from NCIS, Penelope Garcia from Criminal Minds, Miss Marple, usually anything Peter MacNicol plays, Charlie from Numb3rs, Most of the Dr Whos. Did you ever watch the ITV series about a Chief Constable called The Chief both the first one played by Tim Piggot Smith and the second one played by Martin Shaw. Judge John Deed etc In books Jo March from Little Women and Margery Whitaker Mist Over Pendle are probably my favourite examples. EDIT: In writing I have surprised myself right now I am writing for the first person perspective of a 29 year old gay man. MY previous work was a seventeen year old boy. I love writing as the character and find it more enjoyable when they are as different to me as possible. I like to give all my characters great strength and great flaws, with the exception of the odd remote evil one required to move the plot along
YES. Just, YES. I love the psychopaths as well. I don't know why, but I've always loved stories with characters that are insane or spiraling downward into insanity. Such a different, yet cool insight into the mind of someone so different. Maybe that's weird, but I love it. I love the Harry Potter characters, and characters like them. Unconventional heroes, all of them strong and able to stand up for themselves, all with quirks and faults and yet you're still able to find good in them, even if you were led to believe they were evil (see: Snape).
I love characters that feel real, and I really love it when they are people I myself would not like: like Stephen Deadelus in the works of James Joyce, you watch him grow up through Portrait of the Artist and what comes out is not perfect, and does not act like it. I love that character, but he's got a big ego, and not always a nice person.
I like young characters who are brave, but don't know that they're in way over their heads. And I like old characters who are doomed and know it, but carry on anyway.
I like particuarly strategic/philisophic characters, just 'cause I like working through what they think about and how their motives are affected by their values, whether they be benign, or well, Light Yagami values. Stoic characters are cool too, when they have a reasonable backstory. Luna Lovegood-esque characters are pure win.
I concur. That's why I love the Eleventh Doctor so much. He's all about putting on ridiculous attires and emphasising to the disbelieving companions that "xyz is cool!"
Anyone with a realistic, complex character, good dialogue, reasonable motivations and massive breasts.
The Underdogs. There is something awesome about watching the Underdog character have to struggle and eventually overcome something. I just love watching them finally succeed. lol The characters who seem to be incredibly powerful when they are pushed to their limits. This does seem to be the potential for alot of Dues Ex Machinas... but I still love these characters. One character I love who has this is Drizzt Do'Urden. Alone he is an incredibly formidable foe. However when he taps into his Hunter side he is just beastly. Then there is Aang from Avatar: Last Airbender. Sometimes you forget that he has the potential for such power. Most of the time he is just this goofy little kid who would love nothing better then to go Penguin Sledding. All the while if you push him beyond what he can endure(emotionally, physically) he will rip you apart. Then I guess there is Ichigo from the anime/manga Bleach. I suppose in a sense he could also fall intot he Underdog. At the start he is a clumsy fighter and where I left off he still has no grasp of spiritual energy and how to use it except for one of his attacks. But I just love seeing characters like him going up against incredibly powerful foes and then suddenly he is able to gain a even footing(again, this is probably the closer to what could be counted as a Dues Ex Machina... but I still love it.) The characters who are willing to go up against a foe much stronger then them. Sometimes with a cocky attitude thinking 'Yeah I can do that..." but I love the idea of a character going against odds and realizing that by the end of the confrontation he or she will be dead. But they try anyways. They say screw it I am going for it anyways. Also... uh any character similar to the Doctor from Doctor Who. Seriously who doesn't love characters like that? I have only seen 2005-present series(have yet to watch the older series) but I love how so far how he can be so goofy/insane and carefree almost and then can turn deadly serious in a second. Also... Fezzes are cool! RIP Fez. I also enjoy Villians who are trying to do the right thing(or so they believe) but doing it in a horrible way. This is mainly why I enjoyed Code Geass: Lelouch of the Rebellion. For the most part the three villians in the anime are trying to create a world of peace(well I think that was the King Charles goal) But they all did it in different ways. One holding the world hostage, one trying to bring about Ragnorok(sp) and one becoming evil so he can destroy it. They all believe that what they are doing will in the end help man kind and create a more peaceful world.
There can never be enough weaselly con-man characters in the world. The fact that my favorite dead actor is Peter Lorre and my favorite living actor is Tim Roth has absolutely nothing to do with this, I swear.
Steve Buscemi anyone? I think it's hard to write a character like this as so often they are used to bridge the evil/good divide. Good choice.
Villains with qualities so redeemable or likeable that you end up liking them more than the protagonist. I feel like this is what makes good writing, when the entire piece is neither black nor white but entirely grey. I also am of the same mind as Xeno when I tend to enjoy reading about people who think differently than a 'normal' person does. I said more or less the same thing in the favourite character thread in the book discussion area, citing Humbert Humbert from Lolita. His fascination with nymphets was eerie, but beautiful. And Patrick Bateman from American Psycho was a disgustingly awesome character (so disgusting that I actually had to skip entire passages of the novel, particularly the animal torture and rape scenes; Christian Bale did a fantastic job in the film adaptation btw).
I/m going to say the same thing in this thread I did in the other one, although at least this wasn't posted in Writing issues. It's pointless to like or dislike a character based on a general archetype. It's a shallow way of thinking, not healthy for a writer. If you reject or embrace characters solely based on an archetype, you are limiting yourself.
I love seeing the characters that get it. That you share events in your life with or you hold same beliefs about society or things in general. I've read about two in the past year though
I never get sick of seeing the character that all the other characters think are a bit odd and not all there in the head (like Luna Lovegood in the HP series). I think it's because I can relate! Hahaha
I see your point, but then again if you dont like the beef taco, you're probably not going to like the chicken taco either, and you'll probably stay away from the bacon taco or any other kind of taco completely because you know that you dont like tacos in general. Yes, it is unhealthy to reject everything with which you disagree because your tastes could change and you might miss out on a really fantastic taco, but it is healthy and, I think, very useful to know your likes and dislikes as well and why you feel that way about tacos errr, a certain type of character. After all, just prompting yourself to think about your personal preferences and why you do or dont agree with something could allow you to learn more about your style in general. I think it also could be helpful for people to share their likes and dislikes in literature on a writing forum... Who knows, if everyone on a particular thread should say that they have a deep-seeded hatred for tacos, it might prompt an aspiring author to reconsider their own taco-related literature. Whether they choose to continue with the piece or not isnt the point; it's getting the author to think about something in a different light and with others' opinions. I'm really tired (and obviously quite hungry ), but I hope my point more or less got across?
I find something very charming about the Pinocchio type of character, a once inanimate or artificia being, like a robot that aspires to be more human. I admit that there is something inherently humanly narcissistic about it, but it's still kind of cute. One of my favorite characters is Data from Star Trek TNG who is always puzzled by human behavior but still struggles to find out what makes us tick. It's a very clever way for storytellers to examine what makes us human and opens the door for enlightening philosophy.
I agree Jon. I have a character that says these comments that to his culture is very polite and benign, but to the humans, its very insulting. Like calling someone a hog, for instance.
I agree, I found the other thread very useful it gave me a lot of ideas for my characters, gave me an idea about how someone reading my books may react to my characters. And with some it has given me more confidence. For me these two threads have been very informative. Fact is just like I may tolerate some people in real life, other people you just click with and characters are the same for me. The biggest problem I've had is letting in characters that I have no strong feelings for into the story. They are necessary though.
I perceive one of the real dangers is to categorize any character out of conformity to peer pressure--(everyone thinks X+2Y = a Z, so it must be)!. A lifetime of exposure to many types -(even unknown impressions at the time of occurrence)-will allow the pieces to fall together, if you give it time, and don't jump to conclusions at the first impression/obvious traits. Allow your reader to also form his analysis of your character over time with little revelations, instead of introducing him at the onset with all his labels hanging "in your face". Different people will read each character a little differently, depending on their own personal life's experiences. A faint whiff, for the nostrils prior to visualizing often whets the appetite and alerts the mind to "attention". IMHO
