[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 1.59 MB, 1229x819, 1266434327701.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
486742 No.486742 [Reply] [Original]

/lit/ this is my first time post at this board, and I come with a question.

What, in your view, makes a likable protagonist?

Who is your favourite protagonist and why?

This is for a book I am considering writing at the moment, so any help is much appreciated.

Picture, pretty much unrelated.

>> No.486753

Byronic heroes.

>> No.486750
File: 167 KB, 423x525, falstaff.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
486750

Falstaff.

>> No.486759

Although I am more of a believer in that the protagonists "likeability" is shaped by the author, I guess that some values that I like to see in a protagonist include: personal connection, flaws, talents, ambitions and personality. Lots of personality.

My favourite protagonist at the moment is probably either Pygmy from Chuck Palahniuks 'Pygmy' or the protagonist in Albert Camus' 'The Stranger'.

I'm more of a non-fiction buff though, so those may be horrible responses.

>> No.486790

>>486759
I see. I'm writing a fiction novel. Kind of a steam punk setting. Thanks for the help.

>> No.486794

>>486790
For a steam-punk novel I could see a heavy focus on the flaws and personality parts.

>> No.486801
File: 55 KB, 320x240, lenny.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
486801

retards make likeable characters. they have an aura of innocence.

>> No.486804

People who don't give a fuck, do what they love because they love doing it. Make art as beautiful as it can be, and breaking all the rules.

Howard Roarke from Ayn Rand's "The Fountainhead."

>> No.486807
File: 113 KB, 700x559, the-prodigal-son.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
486807

>>486794
Yeah, I was thinking that. I should probably explain that the main character has aspects of himself that are actually incarnate. So for example, his logical side and intelligence is a brass robot. That looks similar to the pic.

>> No.486830

>>486742
Imperfections, frailties, flaws.

>> No.486832

>What, in your view, makes a likable protagonist?
Humility. People hate someone who is unduly confident in himself.

>> No.486840

someone who kills without remorse

>> No.486852

>>486804
Yeah, but was Roarke really likeable or believable? If he were a real person (and I have never met anyone even remotely like him) I would never want to hang out with him.

Have YOU ever met anyone like Howard Roarke?

>> No.486857

I would agree with flaws to an extent. Too many flaws make it hard to empathise with them.

>> No.486856 [DELETED] 

>steampunk
get this cancerous trendy bullshit the fuck out of here

>> No.486859

Well OP what I always say is...

>steampunk

get this cancerous trendy bullshit the fuck out of here

>> No.486879

>>486859
Explain

>> No.486886

I think most protagonists are built on a single character trait that is extremely visible, but then you slowly build on that.

I mean, let's say we have a character who's a Jerk.

Alright, why is he a jerk?

1. Never takes responsibilities.

Why?

2. He doesn't like being relied upon.

Why?

3. He doesn't think he can live up to the expectations.

Why?

4. He let someone he loved down when they needed him the most, and it cost them their life/friendship/(insert meaningful possession).

...And so on. When you've finally established all these reasons, you can build on it by selecting these reasonings and taking their most prominent feature.

In One, we can see that he's apathetic. Two shows that he's also lazy. Three gives him a fear (in this case, of responsibility, which leads back to One), and Four gives him a bit of a past.

Basically this is my reasoning behind a good protagonist. If he's fleshed out, if he had a lot of thought put into him, and if he comes out as human as the rest of the characters, with his own case of fears and limits, but who makes up for it with his good qualities, he's a good protagonist.

Sorry for the quality of my grammar, I'm a little tired.

>> No.486888

>>486759
>>The Stranger
>>Personality
I think you need to read that book again.

>> No.486894

>>486750
Very yes.

Also: Richard III. He was clearly the protagonist of Richard III. He's just good in an ass-backwards way, and everyone's reading it wrong. <3

>> No.486898

Well OP, this certainly isn't the catch-all end-all of advice, and it may not work with the plot you have in mind, but something that really endears a character to me is when he or she is put into a tough situation and they really struggle to do the right thing. Then, when they actually act, they get it at least partly wrong. It shows me that they're fundamentally a good person, but they, like me, can make mistakes.

>> No.486900 [DELETED] 

>>486894

>> No.486906

I've got a related question:

I'm writing a story and in it the main character does have his flaws but it's written in first person. How can I emphasise these flaws without making him come across as self-pitying by him going on about how he has this flaw or as too arrogant by being unaware of his flaws?

>> No.486916

>>486906
You know how sometimes you meet a dude who is kind of an asshole but isn't aware of it? Keep him in mind while you're writing and the rest will follow.

>> No.486922
File: 9 KB, 250x275, bloombloom.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
486922

>>486894
They always read him wrong.

>> No.486925

Honor, but realistically portrayed. Someone who has a clear set of values. But not a perfect person.
For those reasons, Sam Vimes.

>> No.486933

The writer should let him be kind of an idiot.

>> No.486937

Take The Idiot for example. That's one of the only protagonists I can think of that isn't ewg

>> No.486947
File: 19 KB, 346x400, orangutan.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
486947

>>486925

I mean that in the nicest possible way.

>> No.486948

>>486947
well... sorry.

>> No.486958

Why do you need to "like" your protagonist?

>> No.486959

Someone who is rude and uncaring at first but uses it as a mask for things he/she's dealt with previously (but isn't made overt)

>> No.486967

I like protagonists who step over all the parasites of the world for their own benefit.

>> No.486969

>>486790
make him kind of unliked guy who really has potential, but reader won't ever see this potential, even in hour of greatest need. It's kind of guy who's lost to his own demons

>> No.486972

>>486967

>stepping on parasites
>benefit

there's no ways around that

>> No.486991

I remember hearing this one quotation on how to make likable characters, I think Hitchcock said it, but I can't find it anywhere online. "If you want the audience to like a character, make him good at his job."

>> No.487010

>>486958
Good question. I guess a book needs to instil a certain amount of empathy for me to find it engaging. A book without likeable characters doesn't satisfy, in pretty much the same way as a story where everyone dies at the end. I'm really not sure why I feel like that though.

>> No.487067
File: 52 KB, 495x314, la confidential.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
487067

>>487010

Please.

In James Ellroy's L.A. series, ALL of the characters are corrupt, most are viciously so. And most are irredeemable.

They are decidedly unlikable and Ellroy wrote them that way on purpose.

But they are GREAT protagonists.

>> No.487085

>>487067
Please, nothing. I went out of my way to convey that mine wasn't a well informed opinion in this instance, much as you went out of your way to ignore that.

>> No.487104

>>487085

>A book without likeable characters doesn't satisfy

I didn't see you going out of your way to qualify that statement.

Perhaps you could point out the qualification to me.

>> No.487128

I always loved Billy Pilgrim. There is something endearing about how pathetic he is.

>> No.487130
File: 32 KB, 159x170, sideline.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
487130

>>487085
>>487104

>> No.487138

>>487104
Certainly.
>for me to find it engaging.
>I'm really not sure why I feel like that though.

>> No.487148

Observers. A person looking in.

>> No.487164
File: 75 KB, 481x600, Hamlet.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
487164

>>487010

>> No.487175

I suggest that you people use "sympathetic character" and "interesting character" for the sake of discussion. A character can be interesting without being sympathetic. Without these words, you end up saying "you can like a character that you don't like". It is confusing.

>> No.487187

Good protagonists have high mortality salience.

>> No.488863

A protagonist is likeable to me if he's worth being liked.

Ask yourself what you value in a person. What do you think makes a man -good-? What do you think constitutes heroic? You can't ask other people, because other people may have a different set of ethics and values (although, this by no means they are -right-).

I agree with the person who said Howard Roark was a good protagonist. The reason why is that Howard Roark embodied the virtues that Rand wanted to represent (and that I agree with), put him in a setting that EMPHASIZED these virtues, and turned him into a hero based on his responses.

So a good protagonist for me involves: virtues (he must be virtuous, he must embody the things that make a person "good", at least by the standards of the author who wishes to portray him that way), he must be put into adversity (in order to emphasize these virtues and bring out the heroic in him), and a last thing involves consistency: this doesn't mean that he can't change, but it does mean that if you want to portray him as bad, or good, or whatever, KNOW that you're portraying him that way and write him as such. If you don't know exactly how you want to portray him, your readers won't either.