 |
| Photo credit: HimmelrichPR on Flickr |
Imperfection.
The most memorable characters to me (and I suspect I’m not
the only one), by and large are the ones with imperfections. The ones who make
mistakes, who battle inner demons as well as evil antagonists, who fight a war
inside themselves that reflects the war going on around them. My favorite
characters are conflicted people doing the best they can with what they’ve been
given, and the choices they make are often a far cry from perfection.
And that’s the way it should be.
When you think about it, imperfect characters are something
many of the most popular books have in common:
The Hunger Games—Katniss
is known for being a strong female lead, but sometimes she’s too strong. In the first book she has
difficulty getting sponsors (which are necessary for survival) to like her
because, frankly, she’s not a particularly likable person. Imperfection. Depth.
Harry Potter—Even
if you haven’t read Harry Potter, you
probably know Harry is far from perfect. He makes plenty of mistakes (some with
dire consequences), he’s often a jerk to his friends and it takes him the
course of seven books to realize that he doesn’t need to fight his battles
alone. Imperfection. Depth.
Imperfect characters resonate with readers because they’re
realistic—just as no one is perfect in real life, no characters should be
perfect on the page. Imperfections, to me, are beautiful—they’re the nuances
that make our characters unique, the flaws that make them real, the conflicts
that make us believe these are real people in real situations.
Imperfections add a powerful layer of depth to our
characters—are you utilizing them?
Think about your favorite characters—were they imperfect? What about
them draw you to them? What other examples of imperfect characters can you
think of?
16 comments:
I've always known this, but it came home to me in a dramatic way when I read aloud one of my MG books to my kids. There were two alternating MC characters, one more heroic, one more deeply conflicted and always making mistakes. The second one was by far their favorite and they kept wanting to read those chapters, the one from his POV.
Great post!
That's really interesting! I imagine a side-by-side comparison like that would really make the point clear. Thanks for sharing that. :)
I cannot stand perfect characters. They're a crashing bore.
Years ago, I read a book by a female author, and her protagonist was a sarcastic, invincible superhero who effortlessly outsmarted everyone and overcame every obstacle without even trying. She was never in any serious danger and talked about how stupid and ineffective her enemies were. When I dropped her a line to review her book and express the problem I had with it (I was polite), she 1) told me the character was based on someone she knew who really was like that, and 2) implied I was just saying that because I was a man and had a problem with strong female characters.
I've never read anything by her since. I love strong characters of any kind. I don't like omnipotent ones.
Agreed. Characters need flaws and quirks so that readers can relate to them. If the main character is boring, the story will be boring, and if the story is boring, why bother?
So true! A great story is nothing without interesting characters.
Hm, that's a shame about the kind of feedback you got from the author. Nevertheless, I agree--perfect characters pose a huge danger of being boring. I'd much rather read about a highly conflicted, non-likable character than a perfect likable one.
I have to agree with you. I love unlikeable characters too when they are well written b/c they have nowhere to go but up. Like the mc from Before i Fall. Loved her.
I haven't read Before I Fall, but it looked intriguing. How was it?
Great post, with great examples. The novel I'm revising is the fifth one I wrote, and it's the first one where I had the guts to give the mc a really unlikable trait. I love her even more now. Hopefully others will, too.
Becca @ The Bookshelf Muse
Thanks, Becca! Giving out characters imperfections (especially our MCs) can be difficult--after all, we want them to be likable and, in many senses, perfect. Once we have the courage to start giving them flaws however, they become much more dynamic and interesting to write (and read).
The imperfections make them so much more interesting. The tricky part is not going too far and making them tedious and annoying. Which I have read and turns me off.
Like everything else, there can certainly be too much of a good thing, that then turns it into a bad thing. Too many imperfections or eccentricities can become a burden if overdone.
I totally agree with you.
In one of my favorite books (The Gone-Away World), the main character is pretty ineffectual. He's pretty friendly and charming, but he hangs around with a bunch of ex-special-ops people (and sometimes kung-fu mimes) who are a lot better at everything... especially the main character's best friend, Gonzo. Gonzo is almost literally a superhero - he's cool, macho, great at all the male stuff, makes friends easily, takes charge of a room the second he walks in... Not so for our poor main character, who is a lot more likeable but a whole lot less effective at pretty much anything he tries.
Without spoiling the book, what I like is the difference between these two characters. If you look at them separately, they're both okay-ish characters with potential to either be a Mary-Sue or an annoying whine-fest character... If you put them together, it accentuates the strengths and flaws of both characters, making them both awesome.
I also agree with some of the commenters that (especially in fan-fiction) the "give your character a flaw, otherwise it'll be a Mary-Sue!" thing gets used as an excuse for the character to be angsty all the time. Which is too much of a good thing.
There can always be too much of a good thing and I agree--giving your characters so much of a flaw that they become angsty and annoying isn't exactly desirable, so you have to be careful.
Having characters contrast like it sounds like they do in The Gone-Away World can be a great technique to really emphasize the good and bad parts of each character. Some characters just work best when they're complementing (or contrasting) one another. Fred & George Weasley, for example, are funny when separated, but hysterical together.
imperfection creates even more depth in Dumbledore's personality in Harry Potter
I hadn't thought of Dumbledore when I wrote this post, but you're right. I think we (as readers) learned more about Dumbledore after book six than we had in the first six books put together. Getting to know the ugly, dark truths about Dumbledore really fleshed him out as a character.
Post a Comment