Characters

What quality/qualities do you like the most in fictional characters?

Personally, I like to see characters that make mistakes but are wise enough to admit they made mistakes. I also like them to be strong enough to persevere against all odds.

I like characters that don't whine. It's probably the thing that annoys me most, to have characters who have nothing else to do but marvel at all the unfair things life is doing to them (Holden Caulfield, or Faust). I want them to stick to their principles and carry their heads high, no matter what, and a touch of optimism doesn'T hurt either. That doesn't mean my favourite character don't have their emotionals downs, too - look at Lizzie Bennet or Elinor Dashwood, for that matter.

Also, I like characters that have a good sense of humour, are mysterious, or possess any of the qualities that I am personally striving for, i.e. a kind, forgiving heart or a charming manner.

I like characters who grow and change to become better people over the course of the novel. In my opinion, no character development is just boring and pointless. Characters who change for the better are a message to us all. (eg, Mr. Rochester from Jane Eyre).

I like anti-heroes who have one foot in good and the other in evil, so to speak. They're usually complex characters and I sympathize with them. I particularly like those who end up choosing good. (eg, Erik from Phantom of the Opera)

I like sarcastic characters. I have a high respect for people who can make sarcastic comments about the worse parts of life. (eg, Gemma Doyle from A Great and Terrible Beauty)

I like characters who are intelligent and mature and think for themselves. I respect such people in real life. (eg, Elizabeth Bennet from Pride and Prejudice)

This is slightly related, but do you prefer when the author explicitly describes the characters physicalities or when it's left up to you?
I personally like to make it up myself.

I love characters that are strong-willed and independent. They don't give up their principles no matter what. A good example would be Lizzy Bennet of Pride and Prejudice.

I also like characters who have some kind of real, strong, noticeable flaw. It makes them more realistic. I especially liek it when these characters eventually overcome this flaw and go on to become very good people. One really strong example would be Edward Fairfax Rochester from Jane Eyre.

I like for characters to be described, not in great detail, but so that we can sort of see them, while the overall appearance is still left to the imagination. Also, I prefer discription to be added gradually instead of all at once.

I like characters who are strong-willed, independent, and sarcastic. Characters who do have flaws that are annoying, but they balance out their flaws with good qualities. If a character is selfish, that's fine with me, as long as they will stand up for those they love or for the underdogs, or maybe they have compassion. I think those things can coexist with selfishness.

Patricia, from Star-Crossed, is a character whom I love, because--as I've pointed out numerous times--she changes a whole lot in the first book. The book is split into three parts and the first part and a half, she was very selfish and prideful. She just wanted to get to the island to get what her father left her. However, when she got there and learned the truth, she returned and her pride and selfishness slowly faded as she realized that she was now just like everyone else on the ship--poor, homeless, and alone.

So what did Patricia do? She grew up. And I mean, she grew up quite a lot. So even though I was annoyed with her for the first half of the book, sticking with her hadn't been a mistake.

Or Kitty, from The Golem's Eye. She was a little troublemaker in the second book, but she changed. And not only Kitty, Bartimaeus and Nathaniel changed as well. The third book really showed Nathaniel's change--he was very selfless in the end, as opposed to how he was in the previous two books--selfish and prideful.

For me, descriptions are very annoying. When I was younger, I didn't let my imagination do the work. I thought "Authors are supposed to tell me how the characters look, what the setting looks like, etc." Now I don't like the authors telling me how the characters look, I automatically get an image in my head and the author has a few chapters to ruin that image for me or modify it. If they don't, and choose to do it later on, I'll picture them however I want! If they do describe the character's physicalities, I don't like it all at one time. I tend to tell the reader what eye color a character has in one chapter, then in another I might describe the hair... I like it done like that.

Goldfish wrote:

I don't like it all at one time. I tend to tell the reader what eye color a character has in one chapter, then in another I might describe the hair... I like it done like that.

I agree. I feel like the story is stopped when an author dumps all the description of a character all at once. It's an information dump. I also like it described slowy, tidbits here and there as the story progresses. Not only do I feel that it keeps the story from stalling but it allows the reader to slowly build up the character in their own mind.

I like characters that I can relate to. I like characters that don't bend to the flow but stay true, while modifying and developing to improve themselves. I HATE perfect characters, because it leaves NO room at all for improvement, and also characters that stay the same way and never admit they are wrong.

I like 'see' the characters in a story and imagine what they look like to me. I was surprised when I first saw the film The Stand after reading the book loads of times. The casting of the main characters, Stu, Nick, Larry and Glen escpecially were how I imagined they really were! My Frannie was different and my Tom Cullen was different too.

Daft I know but as I read I 'watch' these characters act out the book/story!

caring carer wrote:

I like 'see' the characters in a story and imagine what they look like to me. I was surprised when I first saw the film The Stand after reading the book loads of times. The casting of the main characters, Stu, Nick, Larry and Glen escpecially were how I imagined they really were! My Frannie was different and my Tom Cullen was different too.

Daft I know but as I read I 'watch' these characters act out the book/story!

Whoa, you gave me a scare there with the name Cullen. I find myself doing that too and it's so cool when the tv or movie adaptations match exactly to what I had imagined the characters to be. Harry Potter matched perfectly though the movies still sucked.

denizenofevil wrote:

caring carer wrote:

I like 'see' the characters in a story and imagine what they look like to me. I was surprised when I first saw the film The Stand after reading the book loads of times. The casting of the main characters, Stu, Nick, Larry and Glen escpecially were how I imagined they really were! My Frannie was different and my Tom Cullen was different too.

Daft I know but as I read I 'watch' these characters act out the book/story!

Whoa, you gave me a scare there with the name Cullen. I find myself doing that too and it's so cool when the tv or movie adaptations match exactly to what I had imagined the characters to be. Harry Potter matched perfectly though the movies still sucked.

Oops! Sorry! I did think about it when I wrote it! Sorry to scare you! Have a hug to make it better!

It's really cool when the characters match what your previous conceptions were, but it's even more fantastic when they, after you get over the "What! that's not ______!" are actually a better representation. Ex: Liv Tyler in LOTR.

I like characters that are spunky, strong, independent and easy-to-relate-with. Even when they experience a lot, they don't lose their charm and wit. I dislike characters that are stupid; the ones who can't figure it out until the very end of the book.

It annoys me when a character cries too much. It makes them sound weak and helpless. A character must have flaws, too. Perfect characters are boring.

What do you DISlike in characters?

I dislike static characters, who never change for the better, and stay their normal horrible selves from start to finish.

I dislike characters who never seem to be shaken by anything, inside AND out, and who always remain calm no matter what (unless they have a good excuse, like being very old and having "seen it all" for instance.)

I dislike characters who don't ever have to try, and who get everything they want right away. Things don't come that easy in real life.

characters that whine
characters that are pointless to the plot line
characters that are flat
characters that cant do anything for themselves
characters that can't think for themselves

Magda wrote:

What do you DISlike in characters?

I dislike static characters, who never change for the better, and stay their normal horrible selves from start to finish.

I dislike characters who never seem to be shaken by anything, inside AND out, and who always remain calm no matter what (unless they have a good excuse, like being very old and having "seen it all" for instance.)

I dislike characters who don't ever have to try, and who get everything they want right away. Things don't come that easy in real life.

Everything you've listed and everything BeautyBlitz has listed.

The last one you've listed really gets on my nerves the most, though. I hate characters who:

let themselves get pushed around
can't defend themselves (which isn't the same as above, mind you)
characters who love everything (Isn't that a weird one? Lol.)
characters who hate everything (though they're more tolerable than the above, unless they're whiny about it)
characters who are perfect
characters who want one thing and will do anything to get it, even if it hurts someone else
characters who are selfish
characters who yearn for popularity and are usually very stupid and desperate in getting it
shallow characters

characters that do whatever they want and use their troubled past as an excuse.
characters that play the role of the perpetual victim.
characters that can't EVER be reasoned with, they're irrational for the simple sake of being irrational and no one can ever talk any sense into them.

I also hate it when authors put in a character then don't know what to do with him/her so they simply kill them off.

I just thought of another one: black and white characters. Characters who can do no wrong (Roxane of Cyrano de Bergerac comes to mind) or villains who are purely evil for no reason except to be evil. I like my characters to have shades of grey. That's probably one of the reasons I tend to fall for the anti-hero.

For a "good guy" character, I like someone who, while generally striving to do good, has his/her own agenda they are also trying to push. A character that is wholly altruistic is very, very boring.

For a "villain", I want someone who, in their mind, has a reason to do the evil that they do. A simplistic "desire to conquer the world" just doesn't do it for me. It is also essential that the villain is fascinating; for me, the favorite parts of many books is seeing what the villain is going to do next.

Above all, no character, hero or villain, should be predictable.