by Anne R. Allen
The British TV series Morse, based on the mystery novels by Colin Dexter, won the “Best British Mystery Series of All Time” title in a Radio Times poll. A recent Facebook post about the win made me think about the admonition authors hear that novels must have likeable characters.
Inspector Morse is not “likeable” in any real-world sense of the word. He’s morose, arrogant, perpetually angry, and treats his sidekick, Sergeant Lewis, with contempt. But obviously, readers and viewers love him. I’m a fan myself.
So what exactly do people mean when they demand “likeable characters”? Likeability is one of the main thing reviewers and beta readers talk about. Lots of one-star reviews simply say, “I didn’t like any of these characters.”
But the enduring popularity of Morse shows that mystery readers don’t want sleuths to be likeable in the sense of “pleasant to be around.” Maybe this is because the genre was defined early on by Conan Doyle. Sherlock Holmes is not the sort of person you’d want for your BFF. Ditto Hercule Poirot, Sam Spade, Nero Wolf, or Adam Dalgliesh. But they are beloved mystery heroes, all.
However, if you put those guys in a Romance novel, the heroine wouldn’t give them a second look. In Women’s Fiction, they’d be the dreaded abusers the heroines want to escape.
So the idea of “likeable characters” really depends on the expectations of the genre you’re writing.
The Aristotelian Tragic Flaw
We know “heroic” and “perfect” aren’t the same thing. Memorable fictional characters have a lot of blind spots. As Aristotle said, all heroes must have a “tragic flaw” or Hamartia.
The fictional hero needs to learn something (even if it’s only who-dun-it) or change during the process of the story, or there’s no character arc.
Not only are nice guys boring on the page, but nobody can grow and change when they’re already perfect.
But acceptable flaws depend on what kind of book you’re talking about.
The Definition of Likeable Characters Depends on Genre
1) Chick Lit, Comic Mysteries, and Satire
The “learn and change” thing doesn’t work for the comic protagonist, who needs to maintain quirky flaws in order to sustain the comedy through a series. Lucy Ricardo seemed to have learned her lesson at the end of each episode of I Love Lucy, but the next week, she’d be back getting into the same kind of trouble.
And wouldn’t everybody have been disappointed if she hadn’t?
Janet Evanovich’s Stephanie Plum is the same. Ditto Agatha Raisin. And my Camilla. If Camilla suddenly became tough and realistic, developed better taste in men, or wore sensible shoes, the humor would be gone.
I have to admit I created Camilla because I was having trouble writing characters that didn’t seem autobiographical. So I decided to write about somebody who was 180 degrees from myself.
I’m a dumpy old hippie who lives in stretchy pants and Crocs and not only doesn’t use the right fork, but will probably end up using my fingers.
So I created a heroine who’s a flakey fashionista with impeccable manners who’s always trusting the wrong people. I wrote the first Camilla book at the beginning of the chick lit craze in the 1990s, and while she fits perfectly into the chick lit heroine mold, she sometimes upsets the readers of classic romance.
That’s because in chick lit, satire, and comic mysteries, the protagonist can be something of a hot mess. Bridget Jones could only appear as an expendable sidekick in a classic romance. Ditto Stephanie Plum. Donald Westlake’s chronically unlucky John Dortmunder would make a shrink cry. As for Carl Hiaasen’s characters, I don’t think you’d want to be in the same room with any of them.
And that’s why they make us laugh. But if you’re looking for a hot romantic hero/heroine, you probably have a completely different definition of “likeable characters.”
2) Romance and Women’s Fiction
In classic romance and other aspirational literature — including some types of Women’s Fiction, like big family sagas — the heroine needs to be a stand-in for the reader’s idealized self. You don’t want a Mary Sue, who is a stand-in for the author’s idealized self, but the romance heroine needs to be somebody the reader can aspire to be.
She can have unmanageable hair and be a bit clumsy, or even fail miserably a few times.
But she can’t have severe character flaws. (For more on the aspirational aspect of romance novels, see this great post by Jami Gold.)
I get reviews that complain that Camilla is “a brand whore” or that “she doesn’t make the right choices,” and that she “has terrible taste in men.” Which is, of course strictly intentional. Those things are why she’s funny. As book blogger Julie Valerie said, “Camilla is equal parts smart, resourceful, tragic, and freaking HYSTERICAL”
That’s why I asked my publisher to put “A Comedy” on all later editions of my books, so the readers looking for the more idealized classic rom-com heroine wouldn’t buy them and be disappointed.
3) Domestic Thrillers and Nordic Noir
Male protagonists of Noir mysteries and classic thrillers have traditionally been allowed to have more severe flaws than females. (Unless the females are the fatale type that lure heroes to their destruction.)
It’s a well-worn trope that the male hero of a thriller or noir mystery has a colorful substance abuse problem or anger management issues. But such severe flaws are no-nos for women in most genres. Women can kick posteriors and maybe even curse, but only if they’re fundamentally good and have everybody’s best interests at heart.
But in Nordic Noir and contemporary Domestic Thrillers the rules have changed.
The severely flawed female character has made a big splash in those genres. Lisbeth Salander in the The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is antagonistic and violent, maybe even sociopathic. The Girl on the Train is a raging alcoholic, and everybody in Gone, Girl is perfectly awful.
These are not exactly likeable characters, but readers can’t get enough of them.
But if you try to put women like that into classic Romance or genre Women’s Fiction, you’re in big trouble.
4) Classic Mysteries
As I said, classic fictional detectives were not sweet and cuddly. The arrogant, narcissistic Sherlock Holmes set the standard. Hercule Poirot was comically vain, Phillip Marlowe and Sam Spade were drunks, and Jane Marple was a pushy, nosy old fussbudget. And those qualities added to their popularity.
Today, the traditional police detective always needs a quirky flaw. And some contemporary fictional policemen can be downright nasty.
But the police detective, if she’s female, generally needs to be nicer. Look at the difference between Benson in Law and Order SUV, and Stabler in the new Law and Order Organized Crime. She’s empathetic and kind. He’s revenge-driven and surly.
That goes for the traditional private eye mystery as well.
But the rules change for subgenres. I love comic mysteries. I’m a huge fan of Lisa Lutz’s hilarious Spellman mystery series. Izzy Spellman is a hoot. I also love MC Beaton’s Agatha Raisin. And I have a special fondness for Melodie Campbell’s mobster “goddaughter” Gina Gallo. All those characters belong to the comic “hot mess” category.
On the other end of the spectrum is Anne Cleves’ Vera. In her classic British mysteries, the female detective is almost as surly and arrogant as Inspector Morse, although she is a bit squishier when we get to know her.
So if you’re writing a mystery, it’s important to decide what subgenre you’re writing, and who your audience is.
5) Science Fiction
I think SciFi heroes and heroines mostly need to be smart to be called likeable characters. But they probably shouldn’t be nice.
I hoped for success with Jodie Whittaker’s incarnation of Dr. Who. But viewers dropped off substantially. And I was one of them. Mostly the problems came from mediocre writing and uncreative plotting. But Whittaker’s Dr. Who wasn’t edgy enough. I think her very niceness made her unlikeable for SciFi fans.
Personally, I missed the underlying menace of Peter Capaldi, the recklessness of David Tennant, and the childish irresponsibility of Matt Smith. Their versions of the Doctor were all remarkably likeable characters.
6) Fantasy and Urban Fantasy
I think George R. R. Martin changed everything in epic fantasy. No more fun little Hobbits. Is anybody in Game of Thrones remotely likeable? If they are, they get dead really fast.
I can’t picture Martin’s characters in other genres. Maybe in some Nordic Noir, but even there, they’d be pretty over the top. But as awful as you can make fantasy characters these days, they still have to be interesting. In post-Martin high fantasy, a “likeable character” doesn’t need to be remotely redeemable, but it helps to have a dragon or two.
It also helps to have somebody more evil as a foil to your main character. In Anne Rice’s Interview with the Vampire, we see the vampire Louis as much more likeable when we meet the villain, LeStat. But even a classic like Interview with the Vampire gets dissed by reviewers who are looking for “likeable characters.” A recent one-star called Louis, “an unlikeable pushover.”
The truth is we can’t please everybody.
7) Literary Fiction
Of course, you can get away with much more complex and less likeable characters in literary fiction. Heathcliff and Cathy may have an enduring love story, but they’re both dreadful people. James Joyce’s Leopold Bloom is not a well-adjusted guy. And the narrator of The Great Gatsby, Nick Carraway, is infuriating in his cold detachment. I challenge you to find anybody truly likeable in Infinite Jest (if you can make it through all those pages.)
But all’s fair in literary fiction, which is supposed to challenge norms and boundaries.
So are you creating “likeable characters”? Beta readers who read voraciously in your genre may be the best people to help you find out before you send your book out into the marketplace.
by Anne R. Allen (@annerallen) July 17, 2022
What about you, scriveners? I haven’t covered all genres here, just the ones I read. How do you feel about likeable characters in other genres? Do you try to make your characters likeable? Have readers ever complained they don’t like your characters? Have you stopped reading a book because you didn’t like anybody in it? I’d love to hear your opinions on likeability in the genres you write and read.
BOOK OF THE WEEK
The first book in the Camilla Randall comedy-mysteries is only 99c!
GHOSTWRITERS IN THE SKY: Camilla Mystery #1
Murder and mayhem (and a bogus agent) at a California writers’ conference.
After her celebrity ex-husband’s ironic joke about her “kinky sex habits” is misquoted in a tabloid, New York etiquette columnist Camilla Randall’s life unravels in bad late night TV jokes.
Nearly broke and down to her last Hermes scarf, Camilla accepts an invitation to a Z-list Writers’ Conference in the wine-and-cowboy town of Santa Ynez, California, where, unfortunately, a drag queen dominatrix named Marva plies her trade by impersonating Camilla. When a ghostwriter’s plot to blackmail celebrities with faked evidence leads to murder, Camilla must team up with Marva to stop the killer from striking again.
Available in e-book at:
All Amazons GooglePlay Kobo Scribd Nook
Available in paper at:
***
Photo source: Wikipedia. John Thaw as Inspector Morse.
My vampire Andrej, while generally a nice guy, does some unspeakable things. One reviewer thought that made him “unbelievable” to have someone nice do bad things. LOL Like you said, you can’t please everyone. And thank you for your comment on Cathy and Heathcliff. I loved the book, but they are truly horrible people!
I, too love Wuthering Heights, but, as you say, you wouldn’t want to spend a weekend with Cathy and Heathcliff. (Outside of the book, that is.)
DD–Hey, he’s a vampire. He’s supposed to do unspeakable things. It’s in the job description. 🙂 That’s why I say it all depends on genre.
You know who else is horrible? Mr. Rochester. But Jane Eyre loves him in spite of the fact he locked his first wife in the attic. My theory is the Brontes based their heroes on their alcoholic brother Branwell.
Great post, Anne. Thanks!
To introduce a note of “real life,” Trump WH lawyer, Eric Herschmann, (sp?), flinger of f-bombs, was an extremely popular character in a place where almost everyone was basically awful. He told it “like it was” and appealed widely.
Blake Weston in The Big Six Oh! is a middle age woman who cuts through BS like a hot knife thru buttah. Clear-eyed and no nonsense, she brings everyone (including her oh-so-macho husband, an ex-cop w James Bond tendencies) back down to earth. And, of course, she always nails the bad guy perp!
Ruth–I love Blake. She’s tough and funny. As far as Herschmann, I guess that proves it’s all about context.
Thanks, Anne.
I found this line of thought intriguing — that the tropes around building protagonists not only bend from genre to genre, but get tossed on their ears. Fabulous stuff.
CS–It’s true. Can you imagine an Inspector Morse character in a Middle Grade novel? Only as a villain. Genre dictates so much.
I enjoyed reading this article about ‘likeability’ in terms of the different genres, Anne.
I aim to make my characters relatable–not necessarily likeable. And, as a reader, I think a truly ‘likeable’ character may be too bland to hold my interest.
Leanne–It all depends on genre. I’m not sure Inspector Morse is relatable. Sherlock Holmes certainly isn’t. But mystery sleuths are supposed to be smart, and nothing like the reader. But put them in Women’s Fiction and the readers wouldn’t make it past chapter one.
Good morning you dumpy old Croc-wearing hippie. Same to you, Ruth. I don’t really worry if my characters come across as likeable or not. I think relatable is more the thing. Good guys don’t always have to be that good and bad guys don’t have to be all bad, but they have to click with the end-user. Steven King said, “Even serial killers sometimes help little old women across the street.”
Garry–I’ll bet Ruth has never worn Crocs. 🙂 I love the Stephen King quote!
Great suggestions to follow when writing, Anne. I just finished writing a WF novel with a female main character whose husband turned out to be “yucky”, let’s say. But after years of counseling he does a turnaround and learned why he acted the way he did and is happy with his “new self”. Some readers may think she’s making a huge mistake going back with him, but one of her character “flaws” is that she’s very trusting and sees the good side of people and believes they can change. So she decides to try again with him. And he really is a “new man”….. so…hmmmmmm
Patricia–It sounds as if you’ve got the Women’s Fiction plotting just right. It’s all about your readers’ expectations. People are always redeemable in Women’s Fiction.
SO MUCH to think about. Of course I lasered in on the fantasy section, and you did a great job as always. It makes me shiver to think of “post-Martin fantasy”, but I guess them’s the breaks. Since fantasy has such a colossal divergence with the Alleged Real World, a lot of what attracts us to the characters revolves around their flaw (or situation), contrasted against previously-unimagined stakes. As you rightly said, no worries about having evil characters to level-set. But much as with a mystery, the suspense hangs around the threat of the hero’s failure- what will be lost if he or she fails.
Will–Great insight that in fantasy (or any epic) everything depends on the stakes. All those epic heroes had terrible faults. Gilgamesh was arrogant and self-righteous, but he had to seek the meaning of life. Odysseus was a liar and a trickster, but he had to get home to save Penelope from all those greedy suitors. And Aeneas was a totally bad boyfriend to Dido–but he had to go found Rome. Big stakes.
In one of my series (cat-and-mouse psychological thrillers) my protagonist swears like a trucker, doesn’t trust anyone, and has that tough-as-nails exterior. Deep down, she’s got a big heart. But she’s clever, daring, and quick with the one-liners, which makes every reader fall in love with her. Can’t say the same for her best friend (foil), who’s so sweet she aches your teeth. Female readers like her because she’s a great BFF. Male readers don’t care about that. They can’t stand her. LOL
I should say “most” not “every” reader. 😉
Sue–Very interesting about how women and men readers react differently to characters. Men probably aren’t used to reading books with sweet characters. But Women’s Fiction is full of them.
Thank you for your reply. I was wondering what your opinion would be. I appreciate your input.
That’s an interesting article. “Likeable” in historical fiction is even harder to pin down. I definitely would not consider Uhtred, the main character in Bernard Cornwell’s best selling Last Kingdom series, someone I would care to spend any time with but fans of both the books and the Netflix series seem to like him. The series has 91% on Rotten Tomatoes. I find it hard to predict how HF fans will react. The Kirkus reviewer of my own ‘The Douglas Bastard’ apparently quite admired Sir William of Liddesdale who not only regularly smacked the young main character around but was a murderer. I expected people to hate him, so I’m going to have to work on that. Or maybe I won’t but he has to die. Dearie me. LOL
JR–Uhtred is an amazing character, isn’t he? I watched the first season and was so compelled by the character I kept watching in spite of the violence. Presenting English history from the POV of a Viking (or Viking sympathizer) is sheer brilliance. I think the time period, as well as the genre dictate what characters can get away with.
Things that make you go hmmm…I think I write my characters in reverse, in that the men can possess the so-called “toxic masculinity” and be semi-wimpy at the same time, while the women possess the so-called “toxic-feminity” and be empathetic at the same time. Makes for some very interesting story arcs.
As for not reading a book if the characters are unlikable, for me it still boils down to writing. It doesn’t matter how nice or loathsome a particular character is, if the writing is blah/boring/makes me want to skip huge chunks to see if something good happens, I’m not going to finish that book.
GB–We all have our own tastes, of course. Writing “wimpy” men and bullying women can be a fresh twist on old tropes. A boring, clichéd book in any genre isn’t going to get a lot of readers. I’m reading a historical mystery right now that I’m going to give one more chapter to offer one original thought, then it’s getting deleted from my Kindle. I’m with you there.
Good to know science fiction characters don’t have to be nice. I inadvertently created a main character who was not the most likeable for my series. (He got better though.)
From what I’ve heard, Ruth has feet like a Hobbit so she can’t fit into Crocs.
Garry–Not a lot of Hobbits in Mid-Town Manhattan. 🙂 Ruth is a slim, fashionable New Yorker. We are coastal opposites.
Needless to say, I read the entire series. He was definitely a fascinating character, just not one I’d choose for say having over for lunch. lol
JR–Not to mention how he’d smell. I thought the TV series did a good job of showing characters looking grimy and unkempt, unlike many historical epics.
I recently read a couple of mystery/police procedurals (one of the genres I read quite a bit of) with one of the least likeable main characters I ever ran into in that genre. He pressured his underlings to buy him meals and never repaid them, never complimented anyone and took the credit for his underlings’ work. He made Morse look likeable (I liked Morse in spite of his failings ????♀️). I won’t be finishing the rather long series.
JR–I quit on a popular series for the same reason. Some flaws are not tolerable. Being like everybody’s worst boss ever is one.
Same! I loved Wuthering Heights, but didn’t like Heathcliff and Cathy at all! They’re interesting–and do interesting, terrible, horrible things–but the reason I finished the book was the secondary love story no one talked about but I adored. (Not mentioning names because spoilers.)
And neither one of those characters were especially likeable, but by the end they had learned and grown from their experiences. Had me inspired for days. 😀
Great post! But one tiny correction: Inspector Morse was an ITV show, it has never been on the BBC.
DV–Many thanks for the correction! I always assume a show I like is from the Beeb, but sometimes it isn’t! Will fix.
I love this kind of analysis, Anne. <3
Thanks, Christine!