- Joined
- Mar 10, 2013
- Messages
- 1,853
- Reaction score
- 348
This thread is interesting to me. I'm writing some very damaged/marginalized characters right now. So long as the characters have some kind of relatable traits, readers will be ok with some pretty horrific behavior (Just look at the popularity of the show "Breaking Bad").
The reader may also be looking for redemption in an otherwise despicable character. Of course, the character needs to die shortly after receiving redemption.
Unlikeable characters doing terrible things aren't enough to hold the interest of the reader for long.
I don't think a character has to die after being redeemed. It's a commonly used trope, and there's certainly nothing wrong with it, but it isn't a requirement.
I wrote a character who was damaged and made some truly horrible decisions, which drove the story. In fact, the initial feedback I received was that he was too unlikable and I should give him relatable traits in the first scene to make him more likable. I held firm and used subsequent scenes to reveal different aspects of his life and personality. By the catalyst, my writing group understood why my character was the way he was. By his horrible decision, they empathized with him and had quite the discussion on whether or not they would make the same decision in his place.
Anyway, skipping to the end, this character did not die after being redeemed. His penance was to spend the rest of his life trying to undo the damage his decisions caused. It was, according to my writing group, a satisfying ending within the context of the story I told.
I agree, however, that unlikable characters shouldn't do terrible things for the sake of doing terrible things. It's boring because there is no story there. There is just action for action's sake.