Defining our Characters--Within the Expectations of the Genre

ElaineA · Feb 12, 2013

I'm having a struggle with "defining" my MMC/LI within my WiP. The struggle has resulted in a lack of solid grounding for why he acts as he does and why he changes. He's turned out a bit wishy-washy, motivation-wise, I think because I've tried to force him into the protagonist role against his will. The problem is that he is unequivocally the antagonist to the FMC/Protagonist until the latter stages of the story, when, because it's a Romance, there is a

HEA between them. Thus, his opposition to her must end.

Before I set out to rewrite and fix the problem, I should probably know the answer to this question: How strict are the Defined Roles within the genre?

I suppose one could pull this off in a more literary setting. Lots of characters are tough to pin down in those books. But writing within a genre comes with certain "Rules and Expectations" that our readers know and understand. If you want to actually sell a book, rather than just write one, can the lines be blurry? Can my MMC act as both antagonist and protagonist within the course of the story? Can you even have a

HEA with an antagonist or does that, by definition, turn the character into a protagonist?

I think of the Sookie Stackhouse novels. (Spoilers ahead)

By his nature Bill is "bad", but he is clearly a heroic character, fighting his nature to try to make the right decision in most situations. Eric, on the other hand, is all shades of gray. He's an antagonist, almost always making decisions for his own gain, but we love him anyway. And sometimes he seems to do the selfless thing, but it's rare. Does he occupy two roles or is he just a lovable antagonist?

I've read through a couple of old threads on here that mention this issue, but they never really get around to the question I'm asking. I'd really be interested in hearing any thoughts on this idea of Roles, Rules and Expectations.

S. L. Saboviec · Feb 12, 2013

I'm new to the romance genre, so take my advice with a grain of salt. Have you finished writing the book yet or are you trying to do rewrites in the middle? If you've not finished it, I think you should write it all the way to the end without worrying about the rules of the genre. In the process, you may discover something about your characters you previously didn't know, which will help you with the revisions.

ap123 · Feb 12, 2013

I would say yes, it can be done. Antagonist doesn't automatically mean villain. And even then, it's been done in romance (though I'm not one who has or could pull that off).

Let him be stronger, less wishy washy--being committed to x (job, family, lawn mower) will make him sexier, imo.

MumblingSage · Feb 12, 2013

In just about ever medieval romance I've ever read the hero comes as an invader of the heroine's home, and ostensibly the 'bad guy' until her love makes him a peaceful warrior and a benevolent lord after all.
So that's the trope for one sub-genre (and I admit, I eat it up. Just waiting for the fantasy story where she invades his castle...). You just have to make sure the reader can sympathize with the character in the 'antagonist' role. We may not want him to win, but we have to want him to be happy (and with his love interest!)

Hildegarde · Feb 12, 2013

I'm not clear on what you are trying to change.

It is perfectly acceptable to have the two protags be antagonists at the beginning. That's the basis for lots of good conflict!

If it's just his motivation you are looking for, then yes - he has to have a reason to act the way he does. If they are going to get together in the end, there has to be some resolution to that conflict.

Using the Eric example, there is no reason an Eric type character can't be the hero in a romance with all his shades of gray. You don't have to have your characters morph into perfect people at the end. You do need to show his heroic qualities as well as his flaws if you're going to turn him into a romance hero, though. In other words, we need to believe he is worth loving and that your other protag would find a reason to do so despite their differences.

ElaineA · Feb 12, 2013

Samantha Lane said:
Have you finished writing the book yet or are you trying to do rewrites in the middle?

Done. Which is why I'm a bit muddled about this. I thought his motivation was pretty clear but a trusted early reader felt otherwise and I realized she was right.

MumblingSage said:
You just have to make sure the reader can sympathize with the character in the 'antagonist' role. We may not want him to win, but we have to want him to be happy (and with his love interest!)

Yep, I agree with this 100%, which is why I ended up with him as too ambivalent a character. I wanted everyone to LOVE HIM.

I was afraid, I think, to expose his dark side too publicly.

Hildegarde said:
It is perfectly acceptable to have the two protags be antagonists at the beginning. That's the basis for lots of good conflict!

Yay, that confirmation is reassuring.

You do need to show his heroic qualities as well as his flaws if you're going to turn him into a romance hero, though. In other words, we need to believe he is worth loving and that your other protag would find a reason to do so despite their differences.

I've lacked the nerve to let him be more of himself, which is a devil on the lookout for souls to buy. I say that's what he is, but I don't show him doing this, except to the FMC. I think I've buried his flaws under the romance such that the arc of his final decision to do the right thing gets flattened out. It's more of a line he travels rather than a learning curve. Which, if I've read these posts right, is why his motivation isn't apparent.

Thanks so much to everyone who responded! :Clap:

It makes me much more confident in the revision path I want to take.

sunandshadow · Feb 12, 2013

I'm confused about labeling any LI the protagonist. The protagonist is usually the MC, the viewpoint character whose love interest the love interest is. There's no problem having a love interest be an antagonist, that's quite common. And it's also common for an antagonist to do a heel-face-turn somewhere between the middle and climax of a book and join the MC's side to combat some other problem. That doesn't make them now the protagonist because they shouldn't steal the viewpoint role from the MC; though I guess they could be a secondary protagonist.

OR, you can have an antihero protagonist from the beginning, who looks like a villain. There must be some other antagonist for them to fight against, though. If the protagonist is the love interest, that means you are telling the story from the point of view of someone who is not the protagonist; probably they are a sidekick, either someone else's sidekick or an abandoned sidekick acting as a lone wolf, but between the middle and climax of the book they switch to being the sidekick of the protagonist/LI.

ebbrown · Feb 12, 2013

I have to echo the other posters who pointed out that antagonist doesn't always equate with villan. I find it interesting to read about characters like Eric from the Sookie Stackhouse novels, they have so much depth and mystery that it keeps me dying to know what they do next. As for making a HAE with a character such as this, it is completely fascinating. By the time the ending arrives, the reader has followed the character through all the issues and flaws, and the reader is probably rooting for him to get a HAE anyway. I personally love seeing the flawed antagonist get a little slice of happiness.

Beachgirl · Feb 12, 2013

ElaineA said:
I was afraid, I think, to expose his dark side too publicly.

Yay, that confirmation is reassuring.

I've lacked the nerve to let him be more of himself, which is a devil on the lookout for souls to buy. I say that's what he is, but I don't show him doing this, except to the FMC.

I love a little bad boy (or a lot) with my hero, so I'd say don't hold back and let him be who he is, as long as you can still make us love him (or at least want to rip his clothes off and have our way with him, either way).

VanessaNorth · Feb 12, 2013

Okay, I'm gettin' on my romance soapbox here.

if the hero and heroine want to be together from the very beginning, you have a shitty romance. Period. (and, I know from 'sperience, cause i'm guilty of this a time or two)

Your hero and heroine shouldn't want to be together. For god only cares what reason, one loves dogs, the other is allergic. Who gives a ....

They have an unavoidable, seemingly unsurmountable conflict.

THIS IS GENRE ROMANCE.

Give them hell. Make somebody give something REALLY IMPORTANT up for the other, and you have your HEA.

There.

/soapbox

ElaineA · Feb 12, 2013

Thank you, Vanessa. Soapbox speech duly noted and filed with important papers that are occasionally exhumed when I need a reminder of what matters. :e2headban

VanessaNorth · Feb 13, 2013

LOL, It's my little romance rant. I pull it out and shake it around every once in awhile.

MumblingSage · Feb 13, 2013

VanessaNorth said:
Okay, I'm gettin' on my romance soapbox here.

if the hero and heroine want to be together from the very beginning, you have a shitty romance. Period. (and, I know from 'sperience, cause i'm guilty of this a time or two)

Your hero and heroine shouldn't want to be together. For god only cares what reason, one loves dogs, the other is allergic. Who gives a ....

They have an unavoidable, seemingly unsurmountable conflict.

THIS IS GENRE ROMANCE.

Give them hell. Make somebody give something REALLY IMPORTANT up for the other, and you have your HEA.

There.

/soapbox

Sorry, can you get back up and say it again, slower?

Why should I want two characters to get together if they can't stand the sight of each other?

Perhaps this is me coming from the fanfiction side of things (which has its own hordes of hungry readers), but what I want out of a romance is two people burning for each other, but kept apart by circumstance and their own personal issues. After resolving those issues and overcoming circumstances, they joyfully unite, and the reader is joyful with them.

But--except as an occasional flavor like the arranged marriage trope--I don't pay to see characters get strangled by the red string and/or dancing the masochism tango*. I get no vicarious enjoyment from that.

*both TV Tropes featuring couples that one can't help feeling shouldn't really be together because of their extreme incompatibility or mutual misery. However, I would be very pleased to see certain couples being creative with red string and masochism, if the dynamic is good and proper warnings are applied.

ElaineA · Feb 13, 2013

VanessaNorth said:
They have an unavoidable, seemingly unsurmountable conflict.

Give them hell. Make somebody give something REALLY IMPORTANT up for the other, and you have your HEA.

I probably took a little liberty with the interpretation of this but I'm certain external conflict can do the job of the insurmountable conflict just as easily as straight up personal conflict between the MCs. My characters have chemistry in abundance, which is what gets the FMC into trouble in the first place.

MumblingSage said:
...what I want out of a romance is two people burning for each other, but kept apart by circumstance and their own personal issues. After resolving those issues and overcoming circumstances, they joyfully unite, and the reader is joyful with them.

I think this is probably what the large percentage of Romance readers like to see, not just fanfic readers. But I've seen some good authors pull off the "They seem to hate each other" romance. The key is "seem". There can't be a romance without some hint that their feelings are engaged, intense and can evolve. Otherwise it's just a book about the Bickersons and their bick. Yuck.

This is why I asked the question in the first place. Not because my MCs don't like each other, but Antagonist as Hero means he has to be exposed as being against the FMCs interests for a significant portion of the story. I'm not a published author so it feels risky if I'm working against the expected norm and hope find success doing so.

electroweakstar · Feb 13, 2013

The question isn't whether they would hate each other. The question is WHY. Personal failings? Inability to trust? Hair color/cologne that reminds them of someone who was a douche? Make that clear and it's not such a bad thing!

Working against each other in their goals can actually be kind of exciting. A good example is the Fever series; Barrons is NOT MacKayla's friend for a very long time but boy do they crackle. Since you already know that the endgame for your Cs will not pit them against each other, I think this can work out really well.

VanessaNorth · Feb 13, 2013

MumblingSage said:
Sorry, can you get back up and say it again, slower?

Why should I want two characters to get together if they can't stand the sight of each other?

Perhaps this is me coming from the fanfiction side of things (which has its own hordes of hungry readers), but what I want out of a romance is two people burning for each other, but kept apart by circumstance and their own personal issues. After resolving those issues and overcoming circumstances, they joyfully unite, and the reader is joyful with them.

But--except as an occasional flavor like the arranged marriage trope--I don't pay to see characters get strangled by the red string and/or dancing the masochism tango*. I get no vicarious enjoyment from that.

*both TV Tropes featuring couples that one can't help feeling shouldn't really be together because of their extreme incompatibility or mutual misery. However, I would be very pleased to see certain couples being creative with red string and masochism, if the dynamic is good and proper warnings are applied.

You misread me. I didn't say they should hate each other. I said they shouldn't WANT to be together.

They should have strong and PERSONAL reasons why being together is a Bad Idea. Otherwise, it's just the mechanics of getting together and getting off and calling it love.

they need to have a personal investment AGAINST the romance in order to make the romance something more than you would see in the wedding announcements page of your local paper. your local paper SELLS those announcements because they aren't news. If they were news, they'd print 'em front page.

sunandshadow · Feb 13, 2013

I personally like to split the difference between characters that want each other badly and characters that want to resist getting together. Specifically, I like the MC to fall hard for the LI, but then the MC is afraid that their love won't be requited and the LI won't be that into them. Initially the LI doesn't notice the MC, so the MC has to make some attempts to get the LI's notice. Then when the LI does notice, the LI doesn't think he is lovable so he's suspicious that anyone acting overly nice toward him probably has an ulterior motive. The MC is still afraid and doesn't want to be too forthright about their attractions. Usually the first sex scene happens here, but it's still an open question whether the two will take the risk of communicating and trusting to actually build a relationship. The LI is realizing how strongly he is falling for the MC, and not pleased by how vulnerable this makes him. The MC may also be doubting whether the LI is actually a good person. Meanwhile the external conflict is what pushes them to not just wait around in this ambivalent relationship forever, instead they need to pick sides and either truly team up or separate.

VanessaNorth · Feb 13, 2013

sunandshadow said:
I personally like to split the difference between characters that want each other badly and characters that want to resist getting together. Specifically, I like the MC to fall hard for the LI, but then the MC is afraid that their love won't be requited and the LI won't be that into them.

Initially the LI doesn't notice the MC, so the MC has to make some attempts to get the LI's notice. Then when the LI does notice, the LI doesn't think he is lovable so he's suspicious that anyone acting overly nice toward him probably has an ulterior motive.

The MC is still afraid and doesn't want to be too forthright about their attractions. Usually the first sex scene happens here, but it's still an open question whether the two will take the risk of communicating and trusting to actually build a relationship.

The LI is realizing how strongly he is falling for the MC, and not pleased by how vulnerable this makes him. The MC may also be doubting whether the LI is actually a good person.

Meanwhile the external conflict is what pushes them to not just wait around in this ambivalent relationship forever, instead they need to pick sides and either truly team up or separate.

Okay, I had to pick this apart into sections...

Yes, you have it right--there are personal concerns, fears, goals, etc. keeping them apart, not JUST external conflict.

External conflict is fine, and every story should have some as a catalyst for overcoming other stuff.

But a book which is entirely external conflict negates agency. Agency is essential to having a character-driven story. Without agency, the external conflict is just bad stuff happening to people. WITH agency, you have your characters making choices which might suck for them personally because they have this other goal. it's always a choice, and a choice should never be easy. If they choose X they have to give up Y. Either X or Y is the HEA. Eventually, they have to CHOOSE the romance, or it's just a thing that happened to them.

MumblingSage · Feb 13, 2013

VanessaNorth said:
You misread me. I didn't say they should hate each other. I said they shouldn't WANT to be together.

They should have strong and PERSONAL reasons why being together is a Bad Idea. Otherwise, it's just the mechanics of getting together and getting off and calling it love.

they need to have a personal investment AGAINST the romance in order to make the romance something more than you would see in the wedding announcements page of your local paper. your local paper SELLS those announcements because they aren't news. If they were news, they'd print 'em front page.

I'm thinking perhaps we are defining 'want' differently. If you mean it's a conflict between "I want to marry him and live happily ever after but also I want to drive his business into the ground and be the sole reigning cupcake shop in this town", then that's a personal investment against the romance but the want is still there.

There's got to be want, or else there's no reason for the reader to hope for a relationship between the two characters. If I see someone stuck in a relationship she doesn't want (even if it's with someone with many attractive qualities, who others might perhaps desire) my first thought is, "Gee, I hope she gets out and finds someone she does care for!" not "Gee, I hope she grows to like him better!" I've been in relationships I didn't really want. They aren't much fun to be in, much less read about. (Bickersville indeed).

Defining our Characters--Within the Expectations of the Genre

ElaineA

All about that action, boss.

S. L. Saboviec

practical experience, FTW

ap123

Twitching

MumblingSage

Inarticulate Herb

Hildegarde

A newb in the fog

ElaineA

All about that action, boss.

sunandshadow

Impractical Fantasy Animal

ebbrown

Easily Amused

Beachgirl

Not easily managed

VanessaNorth

Purple hair, not prose.

ElaineA

All about that action, boss.

VanessaNorth

Purple hair, not prose.

MumblingSage

Inarticulate Herb

ElaineA

All about that action, boss.

electroweakstar

Just keep swimming...

VanessaNorth

Purple hair, not prose.

sunandshadow

Impractical Fantasy Animal

VanessaNorth

Purple hair, not prose.

MumblingSage

Inarticulate Herb