I'm currently working on a story in which the main character is basically nasty and selfish. Does anyone have any tips on how to write a story with an anti-hero while still keeping the reader interested in and caring about what happens to him.
Also any suggestion on books with that type of character would also be helpful.
Thanks,
Jason Vaughn
[This message has been edited by JasonVaughn (edited November 28, 2006).]
[This message has been edited by JasonVaughn (edited November 28, 2006).]
Posted by Robert Nowall (Member # 2764) on :
Other than having the character "be himself," I can't think of anything---but that seems stale. Unfortunately, I usually like my main characters and they don't do reprehensible things.
Offhand, I'd recommend Jack Williamson's "The Crucible of Power" for an example of an anti-hero. It's a little old and creaky (1939), but it's definitely a good example.
Posted by Lord Darkstorm (Member # 1610) on :
Honestly, I have yet to write a story with an unlikable character and it work. While I can get a nasty character down in nothing flat, it has yet to be enough to hold real interest for long. I have read one book that used a prior series bad guy as a main character, but by that point in the story line he had already had his motivations and background made known so he wasn't "all bad".
I think the trick is to make the anti-hero someone likable. Someone who seems like a nice person, while hinting at what lies below the surface. Then by the time he goes totally bad, maybe the desire to see his fate might do the trick.
All in all, I've just worked harder on learning to write likable characters.
Posted by wbriggs (Member # 2267) on :
Yes. OSC complained that my chars in one novel were jerks. Solution: show the redeeming features *before* showing what jerks they are.
Another solution: let them be jerks, but interesting (however you make that happen).
Posted by djvdakota (Member # 2002) on :
Read T.C. Boyle. He's a master at making the unlikeable character sympathetic--and by sympathetic, I mean literarily sympathetic. The reader can relate to him.
Posted by autumnmuse (Member # 2136) on :
I haven't yet read this book so I don't know for certain how it is done, but I've heard a lot of good things about "Darkly Dreaming Dexter" where the main character is a murderer. Supposedly he comes across as fairly sympathetic even though he's morally reprehensible.
Now, to clarify: are you saying your hero character, the one who is the central figure in your plot and who drives the story, is a nasty guy? Or that you are writing in the POV of the antagonist, and he is balanced by a good guy on the other side of the fence? Cause there are different methods depending which it is.
If you mean the former, the main thing is to have the audience truly understand your character. It is hard to hate someone who's motives make sense. Why is he doing the things he does that you don't think the reader will like? Is he aware of the fact that these things are 'bad'? Most people may not think of themselves as perfect, but they usually have some justification for what they do. They don't go around rubbing their hands together and cackling about how 'evil' they are. Have you read the Stainless Steel Rat books? Jim DiGriz is the hero, and he blatantly and unashamedly breaks laws left and right. We love him anyway because he always explains his reasons why the law needed to be broken, even if that reason is simply so Jim can get rich. It's witty too, which helps a lot.
If you are writing the POV of your antagonist, that's easier, but has it's own cautions. You can be in the mind of your character and show us what he does that makes him bad, without trying to justify or excuse it at all. In fact, you can show how nasty he is largely because the bad guy will be gloating or happy about doing something that would make an ordinary person cringe in horror. Dean Koontz is pretty good at writing antagonist POV. The main thing here is like strong seasonings in food, a small amount goes a long way. I doubt most readers want to be in that POV for an extended length of time, and certainly not a whole novel. Unless there are balancing factors: for example if your bad guy has a sharp sense of humor and that levity can break into the darkness.
The moral is: anything CAN be done, but has a price. If you write well enough, you can get away with a lot. Just be aware that you have to work harder to gain reader sympathy as the trade off.
Posted by JBSkaggs (Member # 2265) on :
Thomas Harris'Hannibal character is a good study. The man is selfish, cruel, sick, perverted but everybody loves him why?
Becuase he acts out all those things we secretly wanted to do and even when he bites off a man's face he did it with a regal bearing.
JB Skaggs
Posted by oliverhouse (Member # 3432) on :
I don't have any tips, but two selfish heroes I like are Hannibal Lecter (Thomas Harris) and Thomas Covenant (Stephen R. Donaldson). They're selfish in very different ways: Lecter is an elitist sociopath, and Covenant is a self-pitying leper.
Posted by Josh (Member # 4394) on :
"Monument" is wrapped around an entirely anti-hero main character. I found the story very compelling, if a little bleak at times. Definetely worth a read.
Posted by Grand Admiral (Member # 3090) on :
I'm a rather inexperianced writer, so anything I say should probably be taken with a grain of salt; though I think it's far more important to make a character interesting than to make them admirable. I can tell you that personally as a reader I don't really care if a guy (or gal) is the nicest person in the world or not; I read to be entertained; not to find role models. Main characters, especially those in speculative fiction should ideally act as a form of wish fufillment to the reader, and being selfish or down right villanous is one of the more popular of those wishes.
Posted by mikemunsil (Member # 2109) on :
No one is a villain in their own mind. Make sure to show your anti-hero in his own light. The Flashman novels by George McDonald Fraser are good examples of the technique.
Posted by Survivor (Member # 213) on :
I'll just reiterate what everyone here has said, with the amplification that "heroic" doesn't only refer to nice traits like cherishing kittens. It refers mainly to the raw strengths of a character. True anti-heroes are less than the ordinary man in every significant way, they have no outstanding abilities, they inspire pity rather than fear or admiration.
Posted by franc li (Member # 3850) on :
The Secret History puts a fairly bright fellow into a setting where he is an anti-hero. That book makes you care about some fairly reprehensible people. Even my mother thought so.
Posted by dreadlord (Member # 2913) on :
two words: Shakespeare tragedies.
Posted by Jenn (Member # 7798) on :
Sorry if this is too late. Anti-hero deserves lots of thought. Is it a really downright evil and vicious character or someone who's just not heroic enough? I think having a central pov from the perspective of a really nasty piece of work is likely to be either literary (Bret Easton Ellis) or completely popular (in other words nothing that has an effect of some kind, even distancing, is outlaws in literature, but it might be a flop in popular lit). But a hero who's not really heroic or who has serious flaws? That's my kind of hero anyway!