What makes characters likable?

[stormiel]

What makes characters likable? What are the most memorable characters to you (TV or book)? How do you strike a balance between likable and believable?

[myrthman]

Laura Holt and Remington Steele. Not sure why, but I grew to love them while my wife and I watched the series on DVD (finished it Saturday).

[rjj7]

Does there have to be a balance between likeable and believable? I wouldn't say offhand that there's any correlation between the two aspects, other than that possibly more believable characters are more likeable because it is easier to empathize with them.

Good humor is probably the #1 factor that makes a character likeable. You can make a likeable character without making him good humored, but it will be more difficult. You can make a good humored character unlikeable, but it will almost have to be intentional. Good humor will make everything else easier if you're trying to make a likeable character. Bonus points if he can be genuinely and intelligently funny while he's at it.

[Kessie]

I just read this article, 20 tips for writing loveable romance novel characters: www.thecreativepenn.com/2012/07/01/writing-romance-heroes/

It boils down to pet the dog, pet the dog, and you guessed it, pet the dog.

A beta reader just informed me that she found my protagonist unlikeable. Fortunately, she stated what things caused her to dislike him--I overwrote his conflicts with his rival (who turns out to be much nicer than the hero). So I need to comb through and make the hero kinder and less of a snarkfest jerk.

[rjj7]

Interesting list, Kessie, though my initial thought was that it seemed to be written from a woman's perspective for a book that is targeted largely towards women.

To give a a slightly different take on heroes in romance stories, Rafael Sabatini wrote historical romances in the early 1900's (from a man's perspective), and he almost always wrote a very dominant personality for his hero, emphasizing resourcefulness and natural command ability. This was in large part because all of his 'romances' double as adventure stories, but I am now wondering what readers actually want. The article seemed to be creating a very nice-guy image for romance heroes, but is that truly more appealing than an alpha personality who can remain unruffled in the face of danger, whose verbal fencing skills are unmatched**, and whose capable mind is able to turn the tables in the final dire situation? [honest question; not a rant, I promise ]

This obviously isn't a black-and-white issue. On the one hand, the article does mention resourcefulness as being important, and on the other, Sabatini certainly didn't write jerks in the role of hero. But I guess it's a question of emphasis, and what aspects of a hero one wishes to push to the fore. And being a guy, I guess I may just be looking at different things when I'm thinking of "top 10 reasons to admire the hero of a story".


I suppose it might also have something to do with changing cultures. In Sabatini's time and in the time periods in which his stories take place, a certain level of courtesy was required, so one wouldn't remark so much on a man being a gentleman. Nowadays, not so much, so those qualities might be in higher demand. So perhaps I'm giving a bit of the answer to my own question.


**[off-topic, but Sabatini was able to use the English language in incredibly subtle ways. I consider myself to have an excellent vocabulary and well above average reading comprehension, but I still occasionally have to reread something in his books because I feel sure that he just delivered a cutting insult, but I couldn't make out exactly what and where it was... Not bad considering English was his sixth language]

[metalikhan]

Interesting list, yeah. But IMO, it only targets women who like romances. Too many of those qualities piled up on one hero make him unbelievable, so much of a nice guy that he becomes formulaic, an uninteresting cookie cut-out. As such, the conflict(s) he and the heroine have too often seem shallow. The main reason I don't like romances is that the stakes usually seem no higher than two characters wanting their own petty way in a relationship. Bleah! Gak!

I don't set out to create likeable in my characters as much a complex believability because likeability is so subjective. I have to like the characters enough to stay with them for the duration of writing the story. But whether a reader finds the same qualities likeable — maybe yes, maybe no. I do want readers to find the characters empathetic and believable.

I do agree that a sense of humor helps make any character more likeable, but I'm a bit particular about that. I don't like put-down humor — I never thought Rickles-esque humor funny. Wordplays, irony, slapstick — those are more likely to get a laugh from me.

Memorable characters that I liked: Sam Vimes, Mustrum Ridcully, Nanny Og, Granny Weatherwax, & DEATH from the Discworld books; Number Ten Ox from Bridge of Birds; Masterharper Robiton from McCaffrey's Pern series; Brisco County Jr. and Lord Bowling (as well as the neurotic and funny villain Pete Hutton) from the Adventures of Brisco County Jr.; the entire character dynamic of the tv series Andromeda; Jack Crabbe from Little Big Man; Odd Thomas from the Dean Koontz series...

[firestorm78583]

I have a theory. Not a well fleshed out theory, but a theory nonetheless.

Main characters should have a gimmick. The gimmick is one of the things about a character that makes the reader interested in seeing where you, the writer, take it and how the character adapts to it. This can be something as simple as a personality quirk, like insecurity, or more pronounced as in the following examples;

Mr. Spock - Half Human/Half Vulcan, unemotional
Geordi LaForge - Special Visor
Odd Thomas - The ability to see ghosts

I realize that is not the only thing that you ned to make a character likable, but it is the hook to get the reader interested.

As far as likability I had always heard that readers gravitate to characters that have traits that the reader either has or wants. The Internet is papered with quizes asking "Which (insert title of book, etc.) are you?". A lot of times the answer we get isn't the character we most resemble, it is the character we most want to be. I'm sure if I took a STNG quiz I would come closer to resembling Barclay than Data.

Just my two cents.

[myrthman]

Adding more to my list: Adrian Monk, Oliver Twist, Darth Vader, Han Solo, Long John Silver, Obiwan Kenobi, Inspector Gadget, Inspector Clousseaux, the Incredible Family (Pixar). I'm not sure what the common thread is; I just know I always wanted more about these characters.

[rjj7]

I wouldn't consider Darth Vader likeable. Awesome character, one of the best ever. I can't imagine anyone not finding him interesting. But not likeable.

[fluke]

I have to like the characters enough to stay with them for the duration of writing the story.

Oh, yes! I have a story I abandoned for precisely this reason. I got so that I couldn't stand the main character. It was an attempt at YA, and for this guy (Steve), I didn't like his angst being turned up to 11. However, I found several of the supporting characters extremely likable. One of those was Terrin. The last straw for me with Steve was when he dumped Terrin to go back to his "raven-haired drama queen" (that's how Terrin described her). With his background and backstory, it was exactly what he would do. And he dumped T after a few very nice dates and he had agreed with his roommate about the old saying "happiness is a red-headed cheerleader." (What? You've never heard that saying, either?)

If I ever return to the story world, I imagine that Terrin will become the focal character and Steve will take a back seat.

[Kessie]

I like heroes with a strength and a weakness, or a vulnerability.

I got into fanfics when I realized that a particular fast-talking wise-acre character had a soft side. Sometimes he had doubts. Sometimes he was afraid. Not for himself--for his weaker friends. I had to explore this in fanfics.

My latest WIP storyline follows the same lines. Characters with phenomenal cosmic powers and the proverbial itty-bitty living space. Sure, they have powers to manipulate time or space, or both together. But what's fun is their relationship conflicts--the love triangle, the sister wanting to date her brother's rival but feels she can't, out of loyalty to her brother. The guy working through his fiancee's murder and carrying quite a bit of baggage about it. The elite assassin having to sleep in a homeless shelter.

Show me the awesome--then show me the soft, vulnerable underbelly.

[stormiel]

Jan 8, 2013 12:34:12 GMT -5 metalikhan said:

Interesting list, yeah. But IMO, it only targets women who like romances. Too many of those qualities piled up on one hero make him unbelievable, so much of a nice guy that he becomes formulaic, an uninteresting cookie cut-out. As such, the conflict(s) he and the heroine have too often seem shallow. The main reason I don't like romances is that the stakes usually seem no higher than two characters wanting their own petty way in a relationship. Bleah! Gak!

I totally agree. There's nothing I cant stand worse than two MCs that are petty. I also dont like the two MCs starting out as enemies. I'm fine with them being on different sides, but they both need to have a heart and not just be selfish. Now I know character arcs play a part and they have to grow, but I cant stick with a character who starts out selfish and petty.

I like "nice guy" characters, but like you said too much and its not believable. I like them to be thrown into tough situations and forced to make tough choices. I like to see their vulnerabilities exposed and their faults overcome. Self sacrifice is something I enjoy seeing in characters too.

Basically I like for the author to take a character who has good qualities to begin with, rip him or her apart and patch them back together. I guess that sounds harsh to do to a character but we are writers this is what we do lol.

[stormiel]

These are some of the characters I like and the reasons why:

1. Jerry Fletcher (Conspiracy Theory) -- Because this guy has totally lost his mind. He's obsessive and driven by fear. The one thing that keeps him going is that he's in love with the woman he's been spying on/protecting who thinks he's a psycho until she figures out he's right. And I love his sense of humor (ironic and slightly on the insane side).

2. Katniss Everdeen (The Hunger Games) -- Because she wants to protect those that she loves. She is very strong but continually gets manipulated into doing what she doesn't want to do but at the end of those situations she usually ends up doing what she believes is right, even if it means risking her life.

3. Cassidy (Flyboys) -- Because there is something mysterious about this character. He is always paying attention, studying the situation. He keeps getting back in the plane to avenge the friends that he lost. He never gets close to anyone but he's always looking out for them.

4. Christy (Christy by Catherine Marshall) -- Because she's innocent. She has a heart to help people but doesn't understand the culture she's walked into, she's an outsider. Her rose colored glasses view gets destroyed piece by piece throughout the book but she rises to the occasion rather than turning to run.

5. Landon (Submerged by Dani Pettry) Because he's not sure of himself. He's completely focused on protecting everyone else, like he's trying to pay for something. He seems to keep things bottled up and he appears to have everything under control. He thinks he's not good enough. (This character wasn't one of the lead characters in the first book so there's a lot that's not told in the first book. The second book doesn't come out until next month )

[myrthman]

I think Darth Vader made my list because I can now see his whole story, from precocious pod pilot with potential, through his fall into forbidden fraternization and fearful fathering, all the way to his remarkably heroic redemption in Return of the Jedi. =)

[lexkx]

There is a difference between likable and believable. A lot of well-liked characters (or stories) aren't all that believable. But the writer convinces the reader that liking that character is more important than any claims to realism. And I say that with affection...

But one of the key ingredients a good character needs is an ability to compel the reader to want more. This can manifest in different ways for different characters, but the reader must itch to know more. This doesn't require a universally well-liked character. Or a believable one. The reader just has to NEED to turn the page. For myself, the best way to do this is to create questions in the reader's mind. Why did she do that? How is he going to "fix" this? When this is done well, the reader doesn't mind if the story breaks off into another subplot or (horror of horrors!) an info dump--as long as the writer keeps that character compelling.

But, to get back to the actual question, I think there is a difference between liking a character and believing a character. Liking a character appeals to the reader's empathy. That sympathy is given and taken between the character and the reader, and that there would be a genuine bond of kinship if the two ever met. Believing a character, though, appeals to the reader's intellect. That the universe either continues to makes sense OR now makes more sense because this character has supported the reader's understanding/views on reality.