I have nothing against 'likable'. The MC in A Gathering Light was likable, and marginally pretty, although she was self-depreciating enough not to think so. While the letters from the drowned girl reallly made me squirm. The author said she was inspired to write the novel based on the original case and set of love letters which made her cry. Tbh, after reading the extracts she put in the novel, I'd have wanted to drown such a pathetic, whiney fiance.

<Added>

I supose it depends on who's pov you're telling it from. If the woman character really is beautiful, would she believe it of herself, no matter how many times someone tells her that? I don't think so. Everyone sees faults in themselves, even the most beautiful of models. Only the completely self centrered people believe themselves to be beautiful, or highly intelligent, etc. Most strive for such things, constrantly learning, or going in for plastic surgery.
If you have too perfect a character it smacks of authorial intrusion.

have you seen "Dexter" Gaius?

Sorry, no, but I'll keep an eye out for it (if my wife is out...).

I wonder if there's a difference too between a female and a male unsympathetic character?

Definitely. Even for me, writing one, I am aware that she uses her power very differently than her male predecessor.

Her predecessor's story would definitely make a better action movie, but a less (IMHO) compelling story.

If the woman character really is beautiful, would she believe it of herself

She is aware of the way others treat her. Whether that is by virtue of her position or her physical attributes is a moot point. She is still very definitely isolated by people who are jealous / envious in some way.

We tolerate Greg House - we love him - precisely because he IS vulnerable. Just as with Temperance Brennan. (Though I can't believe I've just compared such sublime TV with such utter - albeit enjoyable - tosh).

Personally, I can't ever imagine engaging with a character who was without emotional weak spots. They are what make us all interesting - make us human.

Rosy

Totally agree with the others. I don't see why there needs to be a distinction between being faithful to your character and generous to your readers - they're not mutually exclusive things. Likeability is a bit of a red herring - much more important that a character is understandable, if not entirely sympathetic. Emma makes a good point by asking what goes on beneath the armour; you probably do need to dig a little deeper here. At the moment, your character sounds a bit too much like a female as written quite transparently by a male (apologies if that is unduly harsh - I do think it may be more difficult for men to write women convincingly than vice versa!)

Can you compare her to any similar characters we might recognize? Have you considered how other authors have tackled the problem? I'm thinking eg of 'Atonement', which features two prickly, attractive and highly intelligent girls who neverthless somehow manage to avoid alienating the reader altogether...

female as written quite transparently by a male

I can assure you that I and my ink are both opaque.

he's a liar, a meglomaniac and a murderer, but he's so fun.

I wonder if part of it is that these compelling/likeable baddies - Hyacinth Bucket, for another example - are also our representatives in doing what we'd secretly love to, but can't/don't/know that wouldn't really make us happy - behaving badly, in other words, but the inhibitions-cast-off sort of badly. In which case the unloveable things they do must be things which at some level we can go along with. If it's someone as awful as Humbert Humbert it has to be truly brilliant writing to seduce us in, but it still holds elsewhere. Even in Romance there's a long tradition of the odious but sexy baddy who turns out to be the hero (Heyer has a lovely time sending up that particular cliché in some of her later books).

Emma

Hyacinth Bucket

Ah... methinks my writing group would be amused to know my MC was compared to that particular evil character. There are limits to how dark my imagination can be.

the unloveable things they do must be things which at some level we can go along with

Which is ever so easily achieved once your readers are in the mindset of your MC...

Like Sally said about Mein Kampf, you need to start from somewhere close enough to the reader's sphere of experience and self-image to hook them, but far enough away that they are ready to run with you as you push progressively towards where you want to get to...

Can't remember who it was recommended "the Collector", but there was quite one hell of a preamble before he actually _did_ anything.

The thing is, that started from an already very common startpoint. I'm starting from an alien (as in strange) society so I think I need to build on the "homely" aspects of my MC's life with just hints at the other side until her extreme positioning is both abundantly clear and abundantly justifiable.

Er... I think.

This is what I was looking for!
Thanks, everyone, for your contributions. My MC has just shown me another dimension that she had been hiding from me.

<Added>

http://www.amypadgett.com/2006/09/creating-sympathetic-characters.html
link vanished for some reason...

The world is a beautiful place and I love everybody.

(Or at least... just got some feedback after making a very small adjustment [as in single scene plus a few words of dialog in a handful of places] and think my MC is now uncut diamond [as in well rounded, but still a girl's best friend {the girl in question is a bit of a sub plot, methinks <ah, the joys of parenthesis and sub parenthesis>}].)

The irony of it all is that now my MC doesn't put people off, I can allow her to do some far more extreme actions as they are no longer gratuitously unpleasant, but justifiably unusual...

Why don't more people write? Those who don't are missing out on soooo much!

Good news!

It can be surprising how little you have to change to make a huge difference to how readers take it. A word here, a second thought there...

Emma

One thing that both House and Bones have are people who are very likable around them. Some of them love House and Bones = and that changes our picture of the two. Bones, I do find likable. She's socially inept but basically kind. House - well, I'd like him as a diagnostician but I wouldn't work for him.

Humbert is a rather different sort. He tells himself, and us, that Lolita really wants this - one of the most affecting endings in literature is when Humbert tracks down the adult Lolita and we, and he, sees how he has ruined her life.

But your damaged heroine: she's second in line to the throne. Perhaps her nanny and her cousin could understand and love her. Perhaps her motivation could be an overwhelming sense of duty with a cool, reasoned approach that she will marry a very restricted sort of person, who will marry her because of her position. Perhaps she could overhear some males talking about her at her first ball and realize she's a career move to these people - not a person. Or perhaps she could fall in love in with someone unsuitable, the gardener's son,whom she grew up with and who actually does love her but they break it off at an early age. Later, she sees him happily married, his children playing in the garden.

Thanks Vixen,

House - well, I'd like him as a diagnostician but I wouldn't work for him

It does occasionally feel that some of the research budget for the detailed medical case histories could be well spent on a brief refresher about employment law...

The direction I have taken is very much in line with what you say about the people who love those characters helping to make the characters themselves appealing. (Though it surprised me as much that my story would have such a dimension as that I could write it convincingly.)

My husband and i were discussing this whilst watching Ugly Betty.

One of the editors in the show (it's about a fashion mag), Willy, is dynamic, strong, intelligent and beautiful - and an absolute bitch. Yet, as the audience we love to hate her and therefore she becomes likeable. The writers achieve this, i feel, through lots of humour but, more importantly the occasional - and i mean very occasional (blink and you'd miss it) soft chink in her character. Eg she might reveal her vulnerability for a nanosecond when not succeeding with a lover she actually wants for more than sex. Or she will very briefly but genuinely praise an assitant whom she normally treats like a doormat.

It can be done but it requires great skill, i feel, if you are going to stay true to the overriding personality of the character.

Willy, is dynamic, strong, intelligent and beautiful - and an absolute bitch.

This is almost like Vixen's point in reverse, methinks. It takes me back to student days when I believe almost every single shared house had a group of friends united against one other house mate who was universally accepted as evil. The odd thing being, that if that universally accepted evil were to move out, the others would bicker and fight until somebody else became the accepted vent for the others' collective inadequacies.

She is made appealing by the people who hate her.

She becomes, in fact, the answer to one of Emma's three questions and as such we love her because she drives the "likeable" characters to do interesting things.

Or not, maybe...