| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| CorellonsDevout |
Posted - 03 Jan 2013 : 07:05:01
The thread about heroes, along with discussions about 5e had me thinking. A lot of people like characters they can relate to or identify with, which certainly makes sense. We like characters who can kick butt, but we also like those who are just ordinary people. I agree with this, but I also don't feel the need to identify with a character in order to want to read more. Of course none of us are going to completely identify with a fantasy character--and one of the things I think that makes fantasy characters so much richer than other genres is that an author has to make them believable in unbelievable situations. I like uber characters, but it can get annoying when they seem to excel at everything they do. Still, a lot of my favorite characters are the cool, suave, powerful--be it magical or warrior awesomeness, but I also do like the somewhat dorky, scholarly, shy types.
Nevertheless, I probably am one of the few here who enjoys gods as characters. I can't relate to them, but I don't need to. The story still engages me and I still have my favorites. But, I also like the "ordinary folk" who are just living their lives. In the Ed Greenwood Presents Waterdeep novels, you had your powerful warrior characters like Kalen, but you also had Sophia and Tennora. All of them were great in their own way.
To use the classic fighting dragon example, IRL we don't fight physical dragons, so we cannot relate to that, but maybe they could be symbolic to us as our inner struggles, fighting our own dragons? We can't necessarily identify with the lives of elves, drow, or dwarves, but we have characters of those races that we like. I'm kind of going all over the place with this, but my point is, what about a character, be it someone like Erevis Cale or or Tennora, a girl living on her own and trying to get through school but failing at magic (RW tests?), makes us like them? |
| 12 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| CorellonsDevout |
Posted - 05 Jan 2013 : 06:09:07
I agree. I do not need to relate to a character so long as they interest me. Sometimes I like reading about characters who are like me, but most of the time I prefer those who are more interesting. I said I like godlike characters, but this doesn't mean I want them to steal the show, and if every novel was that way, I'd get bored. I think thee has to be a balance. I like characters who are more than average but still have struggles. It does get annoying when nothing seems to touch them, at least physically. Turmoil adds depth, be it emotional or "how to save the world". |
| Euranna |
Posted - 05 Jan 2013 : 03:05:05
I prefer characters to have a strong personality. But I want them to be more than the average person if I am going to spend hours delving into their world. They do not all have to be exceptional at something, godlike, or even super villains (I do enjoy a strong villain as well as a hero). But more than my neighbor or myself. I do not have to relate to them, but I need for them to engage and intrigue me. I have tried to read a couple of novels lately that the first part of the novel got my attention, but the next 25% was very vanilla and I could not finish them..the characters were flat and one dimensional (at least for part of the novel).
|
| Chosen of Asmodeus |
Posted - 04 Jan 2013 : 11:02:53
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I honestly don't think I've ever 'identified' with a character from a novel. I enjoy reading them, but I usually have almost nothing in common with any of them (from any genre).
There are a few TV characters I identify with, but thats different. I think TV characters are more realistic (sometimes... not always).
But yeah, I get your point. I never enjoyed reading about the 'Superman' types - I liked the Batman types. Guys that relied on a normal* human skill set and their own wits.
*mostly
See, I've always had the opposite reaction. I think with Superman types, my suspension of disbelief goes further. With Batman types I tend to roll my eyes as a normal human would no doubt have died years ago doing it.
Which isn't to say I don't recognize that the Superman types can be done poorly- happens quite easily. And Batman types can be done well and be an enjoyable read.
As for the question itself, believably is a big thing for me. I need to believe this character can exist within the context of the universe they exist in.
I need to have a certain degree of respect for the character- I can't stand dumb muscle types. Intelligence and competence are musts. But it can't be overbearing. If it feels like the writer is spewing wish-fulfillment self-gratification onto the page, then I'm going to toss it in the fire place and go wash my hands. There needs to be a balance to it; the character has to be demonstrably good at what they do but also needs to be challenged.
I also prefer characters who don't hold to some completely unreasonable moral stance, whatever that stance may be. While I want characters to face moral quandaries, I like it when their morals are illegitimately challenged and often compromised in the face of reality and necessity.
I also like characters with decisive personalities. If there is one thing I cannot, cannot stand, it's characters who struggle with the simplest emotional problems. The classic example of the hero not being able to man up and tell his love interest how he feels annoys me to no end- this one is probably the only one I'd call a real issue of relating to the character. I understand people struggle with this in real life, but when I have feelings for a woman, I tell her.
On the flip side, I absolutely can't stand the archetype of the female love interest who waits for the man to wise up and say how he feels first. I actually find it somewhat sexist that the burden's put on the man and not the woman to step up in this situation.
Though really those last two are just a product of frustration with people who are completely unwilling to swallow their pride and talk their problems out like reasonable, mature adults. I think- and this may be wishful thinking- that the prevalence of this type of relationship in fiction as a means to create conflict and drama is part of the reason why people in real life have such a hard time talking to each other these days; life imitates art. |
| Quale |
Posted - 04 Jan 2013 : 08:13:02
I relate with most leading characters at the beginning, it's like role-playing, eventually the relation decreases, every time their actions are different from what I'd do. |
| BlackAce |
Posted - 03 Jan 2013 : 19:15:37
Reminds me of a quote from a letter Arthur Donahue wrote to his parents during WWII. Arthur was an American pilot who volunteered to join the RAF in 1939. He fought in the Battle of Britain, the Fall of Singapore and flew a lot of fighter sweeps over occupied France.
'I may not live long, Ma, but I sure do intend to live wide.'
He was KIA in 1942.
|
| Markustay |
Posted - 03 Jan 2013 : 18:13:30
I "got Misty" over Alusair - it made me hate reading Elminster Must Die. I think it took me more then a month to finish that damned book. 
What a bum-deal she got. So full of life, and she was handed a bucket of crap. A crown she never wanted, and a spinster to boot. {sigh}
The most tears I ever shed? There was an article/story in a local magazine many, MANY years ago - I was very young so I don't remember the whole thing, but it was very similar to the thing that made me shed the second most tears ever.
That was the story Ed told in an old Dragon magazine article about a girl he used to play with. In fact, I'm getting misty right now...
DAMN.
In retrospect, both of those were very much about the same thing - a light snuffed out way too early. They say the "candle that burns the brightest burns the quickest"... perhaps that is true. |
| Dalor Darden |
Posted - 03 Jan 2013 : 16:17:53
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Good Point.
My favorite character in the Erevis Cale novels was Jakk. One of the very few FR characters I ever cared enough about to actually cry over. Thats some insanely good writing right there.
And he wasn't even all that important... or was he?
First character I ever shed tears for was Sturm Brightblade...last character I ever shed tears for (even though I saw it coming) was Flint Fireforge...I haven't actually cried over a character in a novel since...though I've got choked up a few times.
I relate more to characters that are the most normal. Powerful wizards and divinely gifted super-hero characters are just too hard to relate to. I can see the depths of humanity in them, but it is hard to pity someone capable of actually making a wish come true!
Because I was something of a foolish grand-stander when I was in highschool...I actually have a soft spot for bullies in novels; because I very nearly became one myself and recognize that there are issues involved in the pscyhe of such people that cause them to be that way as a result of hurt...
So characters like Cyric (before he became a god) actually stand out to me as deserving of my pity at least. I'm an admitted softy for Manshoon as well, though he goes too far with evil at times really.
Lander (from the Novel the Parched Sea) was also a favorite of mine; even though he was somewhat bereft of depth as written...I kinda added in all the details myself, so I actually identified with him. I was sad when he died.
If there was a character I favored the absolute most (currently favored that is, my favor swings as wildly as Tempus' battle favor!) it would be the god Shaundakul. He is kinda my "Patron of Forgotten Realms Exploration" as I wander through the world.
There is also much more I could say about him...but I'm saving that for my "Ride" book that is in its millionth re-write. I'll say only that I see him as a possible former Patron of the Eraka of The Ride...possibly a long forgotten Aspect of their first God... |
| Dennis |
Posted - 03 Jan 2013 : 14:58:04
None. I'm simply unique. |
| BlackAce |
Posted - 03 Jan 2013 : 14:46:57
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Good Point.
My favorite character in the Erevis Cale novels was Jakk.
*Nods* Jakk Fleet made that first trilogy. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 03 Jan 2013 : 14:43:25
Good Point.
My favorite character in the Erevis Cale novels was Jakk. One of the very few FR characters I ever cared enough about to actually cry over. Thats some insanely good writing right there.
And he wasn't even all that important... or was he? |
| BlackAce |
Posted - 03 Jan 2013 : 14:31:34
Mary Sue Syndrome. Characters need to have both qualities and flaws to be believable. Now, I love the Honorverse series despite the fact most of the narrative ends up being political and technological exposition and Honor herself has been walking embodiment of Mary Sue Syndrome since Field of Dishonor. Why then? Cause most of the other characters ARE 3 dimensional. I don't read for the Honors I read for the Javier Guiscards and Alastair McKeons.
It's the same with FR novels. It's not the Mary Sues that interest me, it's the drunken Wulfgars, the conflicted Cale's, the Blackstaff playing the long game and suffering the consequences, the dedicated Liriels, the ruthless but redeemable Elaith Craulnobers and the hopelessly unfaithful Azouns. I also hate anti-heroes designed purely on the principal of creating an Anti-Mary Sue; Phryea makes me want to stab people.
It's the co stars that make the Realms popular and rather dumbly, it was the co stars who were pushed off stage by the legion of RSEs or simply erased by the time jump. No wonder 4th era FR bombed.
Edit: In fact, thinking about it some more, I've realized something. City of Ravens, The Nether Scroll and Elfsong are my three favourite FR novels. None of them feature RSEs, the plots of Gods or Mary Sue protagonists. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 03 Jan 2013 : 13:39:48
I honestly don't think I've ever 'identified' with a character from a novel. I enjoy reading them, but I usually have almost nothing in common with any of them (from any genre).
There are a few TV characters I identify with, but thats different. I think TV characters are more realistic (sometimes... not always).
But yeah, I get your point. I never enjoyed reading about the 'Superman' types - I liked the Batman types. Guys that relied on a normal* human skill set and their own wits.
*mostly |
|
|
