I don't want my protagonist to suffer

I've discovered that I am very hesitant to have anything go seriously wrong for my protagonist in a short story I'm writing. It's as though I have invested so much of myself in him and I like it when it's going well for him. But if nothing happens it will likely make for dull reading, maybe comforting, but not much action. I think that's a strong tendency for me. I know that I usually feel upset and disappointed when things go wrong for a character I like to read but I sense general audience appeal requires more action than a happy home life.

I never hesitate to "kill my darlings" when it comes to critical editing, but I sure hate to make my decent characters suffer. As though the real world works that way.

 

Think of it as helping them grow. I don't know about you, but my most cherished moments happened because I sacrificed something, did something hard, gambled unsure of the outcome. If I'd stayed at home, none of that would have happened and I'd have lost much I now love in my life.

So things going unpredictable or wrong is nothing bad, as long as it gets your characters to the ending you envision for them.

 

Of course, in this particular story his ending will be, well, his ending, so he won't be gaining much by it.

 

I mean, I don't know if you have to make them suffer. But they at least have to face challenges that they need to overcome, I think.

It's all about the journey, not the— *gunshot*

 

*chuckles at title* Sorry, but your protag has to suffer. Learning is always painful. No way around it. We can lie to and comfort ourselves in our daily lives that we do not need to face horribly painful challenges that test the very core of our beings, but not in fiction.

 

I want to make my protagonist suffer. Gotta show the little bastard who's boss.

 

Mmm... Just in case... The darlings made reference in that aphorism are not darling characters one is advised to kill. It's speaking about the actual writing, the pithy phrases and paragraphs, the little strings of words we love more than we love the rest, enough for our favoritism to show. Those are the darlings.

And you likely know that already. I mention it for the more newly initiated in case they come across it and read it literally.

As for the suffering of characters, I don't think they necessarily have to suffer. They just need to change or progress in a given direction. Suffering is certainly one vehicle for that, but it's not the only one.

 

Having them have difficult times doesn't mean they will suffer. Putting obstacles where the character must decide between two things will make it seems like that character is suffering, but not in a way of physical pain.

 

<Slowly puts the knife away, hopes Mrs. A never learns how close he was to making a terrible mistake in his quest for writing success...>

 

But seriously, it sounds like:

you're planning on killing the poor guy off, so unless it's one of those "killed by blue ice while mowing the lawn" scenarios, he's going to have to suffer, knowing that Joe Black is on the way, that his family and/or friends will be bereft, etc.

 

It worries me somewhat that I never became this attached to any of my protags. More often than not I was rooting for the antags in my stories.

 

Action doesn't necessarily require protagonist to suffer. Read Ciaphas Cain novels, might provide some inspiration. OTOH, if you feel emotion when it comes to protagonist, then it is more likely that readers too will become invested in him, so if protagonists suffers, and you suffer with him, it might be a good thing.

 

Don't worry. You're not alone. I don't invite my MCs to the back garden to serve them tea and scones either. I treat them as actors with a role to play. The script is everything; the parts can be recast.

 

I can relate: Many would probably say I'm too nice to my characters.

But see, it's not about making your characters suffer - that's how edgy teenagers think drama works. It's about giving them challenges to overcome, so that their victories feel meaningful and important. This can mean putting your characters in difficult and painful situations, yes, but I think the difference is what ultimate purpose that serves. That is to say, character development.

If your character suffers a trauma, that's an opportunity for them to heal. If they lack confidence in themselves, it's an opportunity for them to find inner strength. If they are lonely and have trust issues, that means you can have them learn to trust people and make friends.

(Then you give them reason to relapse but have them persevere, proving that they've grown stronger.)

It's not like seeing characters struggle with adversity is in itself enjoyable, rather there is something beautiful in seeing those characters become better people through their struggles. If anything it's because we want things to go well for characters we like that it's so gratifying to see them come out on top in the end.

 

Here's an applicable quote that I've seen paraphrased and misattributed across the internet:

The writer’s job is to get the main character up a tree, and then once they are up there, throw rocks at them.

It's attributed to Vladimir Nabokov, though I've seen websites debunking this; either way it's a standard writing adage.

Another version, which I like better, says: “In the first act get your principal character up a tree; in the second act, throw stones at him; in the third, get him down gracefully.”

As you've said, if your main character doesn't suffer, there's not a story. You cannot have a story without a conflict.

I do, though, like what Fervidor said. It's not about making a character suffer; it's about giving them obstacles to overcome and opportunities to grow.

I really do think you should think of your characters more like your friends. Yes, it suffers when your good friend is dealt a rough hand, but you help them overcome it and enjoy seeing them become a stronger, smarter person for the challenge. That's the same outlook you can take for your characters.

And remember: challenges don't have to mean a sad ending. Remember: “in the third [act], get [your protagonist] down gracefully.”

 

Here's some tips by one of the greatest short story writers ever. Pay attention to #6. He says to make awful things happen to your characters so you can show the reader what they are made of.

 

Contrast. You need dark shadows to appreciate the sun etc etc...

If your protagonist never encounters character-testing challenges, he'll never be able to overcome them and experience the vibrant joy that follows. We've been telling stories since we could communicate in order to illustrate how that happens in the real world.

 

Really? Please rethink this one. Death does not equal character change. There are much better ways to end a short story than killing off your MC.

 

You make a good point, but I disagree that non-final endings are inherently "much better." Sometimes the end has to be the end; sometimes untangling the mess he MC has made would require an unbelievable deus ex machina. Not every story has a happy ending nor should it. Wodehouse pulled it off regularly, but the real strength of his stories was the characters themselves.

 

I'm not talking about happy endings, not at all. The idea that a story ends when the character dies is just a bit cliche or juvenile, IMO. My suggestion is that you read a good amount of short stories. And do check out the link I posted up thread. It's one of the best pieces of short story writing advice I've come across. I think it's pretty hard to argue with good old Vonnegut, and I suggest not trying to but rather learning from it.

 

Thank you BSM. Much nicer way of putting it than I was tempted to do.

 

Unless you're a Marvel character whose name isn't Uncle Ben.

 

I feel this too. And I tend to ignore "rules" about needing to have conflict (inner conflict especially), and bad things happening, and character development/arcs, and redemption etc..etc...all the other formulas that some folks think need to be adhered to. I personally think that makes things very predictable, almost counter intuitively. The ebb and flow of happy times, then drama, then relief, then its not quite over because.... then the actual ending. You know? Hollywood is really bad at it, to the point where you know exactly what's going to happen next. Especially romance movies. The constant use of mis-understanding/miscommunication to drive a plot. "You bastard, you know exactly what you've done...no, don't try to explain, I'm not listening (storms off and finds out later that the woman she saw her new guy with, was his sister) ...blah blah...yawn.

errr....sorry. went off on a tangent. TLDR - write your story exactly how you want to

Then again, don't listen to me, nobody reads my stuff. lol