Sounds as if I should try harder, then.

Emma

"the ending is lovely with ..."

Frances, don't do that! Aargh!

Jim

Don't do what?

Should I have put a comma after lovely?

F

<Added>

I did really like the ending.

<Added>

And I DID put a comma after lovely.

<Added>

!

It wasn't so much the characters as the unrelenting memories of abuse. I tend to avoid those kinds of stories, and while a lot was left up to the imagination, it was done in a way that was too upsetting.

Speaking of technique alone, the book definitely needed an injection about a third of the way in because it began to drag and drag and...drag...but that's just my taste. I tend to favour pacy stuff. I found Alison and Colette very vivid, but in the end Runes of the Earth landed on my bedside table from a friend, and unable to resist it, Beyond Black got pushed to one side. It was depressing the hell out of me! I've been reticent to pick it back up. Morris was unbearable and I feel afraid of where ithe story is going.

I still think it's written brilliantly, and is admirably original. I just couldn't stomach it (sorry Hilary). Not enough redemption.

JB

Morris WAS unbearable. There is redemption, though.

F

Maybe I'll give it another shot in a while. I have about four books I'm itching to get my teeth into first.

JB

I haven't read Beyond Black - sounds like I'd better not?

I feel I have a fairly superficial attitude to anything I read - I'm either drawn completely into the world of the story and can't put it down or I think, I can't read this and usually don't(!)

Let other pens dwell on guilt and misery?

I suppose it comes down to the pull the character exerts on you - that you want to follow them every step of the way to find out what happens, you don't care or you start to care too much, don't like what is happening to them and switch off?

Interesting when an author gets bored with a favourite chatacter and wants to move on or do something different with the character - but the public won't let them or, when an author too obviously adores his or her creation and you're not so sure?

Sarah

Interesting when an author gets bored with a favourite chatacter and wants to move on or do something different with the character - but the public won't let them

Like Conan Doyle and the Reichenbach Falls where Sherlock Holmes... didn't after all die!

Emma

Professor Moriarty was a very popular character among Conan Doyle's readers. Although written as an arch-villian I think he may be described as a 'likeable' character (certainly an essential one), with all his evil ambitions, for I think very few people would associate Moriarty with reality.

It is rather like the evil, cruel, lustful landlord who plays a fundamental part in the common plot of widowed mother with beautiful innocent daughter owing so much rent and facing destitution. One cannot imagine that situation without the ghastly, mousetache-twirling landlord.

On a more serious note I have a reasonably clear idea of the characters I include but I do not consciously try to make them 'likeable'. I think the important aspect is that even with characters who are not 'likeable' a writer needs to create a 'clear' image of the characters that might reflect the 'meaning and definition' the readers probably apply when considering such aspects of 'liking' 'disliking' and so on.

I remember coming across a quote some time ago... 'I love you - but I don't like you...'

Len

Sarah, I read 'A Climate of Change' by Hilary Mantel and although I found it very well-written, I didn't really warm to the characters (but I didn't dislike them either). I'm like you in that the characters are very important for me, more important than the writing. Wonderful characters can make me forgive mediocre writing but the contrary is harder.

As for characters that 'wear out', I think that often happens with detectives who are in long series.

Len, I can't say that I set out to create likeable characters either but still I have to like my characters. I couldn't possibly spend the time I do thinking about them, worrying about their problems and writing about them if I didn't like them. I'm talking here about my main characters in a long piece like a novel, it can be fun to write obnoxious people for minor characters or for short stories. So in that way I want a reader to like them too. That's not to say that I want perfection in my characters, in fact there is little more off-putting than perfection. I think one of the things I like best in characters is gumption, the ability to fight back against problems thrown at them using their own particular blend of faults and strengths. I tend to have very little tolerance for characters who muse about their trials and tribulations without getting up and doing something about it.

Ashlinn

Yes, Ashlinn, I think we agree on this.

I think a writer should 'like' ALL the characters they create (not sure of the meaning of 'like' in this context) for these characters are generally essential as part of the story and to enable the qualities of other characters to become evident.

I think one of the excitements for a writer is to see how their characters may change as a story progresses.

Len

I'm not sure you should like them in the traditional sense, rather you should feel interested by them as you're writing them. If you're not interested then neither will the reader. The whole idea about feeling like you're inside their heads in some way is important. If you look at Cara Massimina and Mimi's Ghost, by Tim Parks, you get inside the head of a man so greedy and obsessed by status that he's prepared to murder a perfectly decent young girl then go off with her sister. But all the way through you're with him. In no way is he a likeable character, but you can see why he feels as he does, and almost relate to his thought processes. I think if you compare it to JM Coatzee's 'Youth' or last year's booker winner, 'The Sea', you notice how little you are allowed access into the heads of the MCs, therefore you just cannot care about them. Much of what you read is reported by them, rather than you being there with them as it happens. And this is one of the msot important things, isn't it - to 'like' a character you have to be there with them when they go through their ups and downs, rather than having them tell you about it afterwards.

D.

This is interesting and I've wondered about this before. I agree that liking isn't the thing that's important, but caring about them. I remember years ago, when I was a wee young thing, trying to read a recommended Updike (Rabbit, I think) and I just hated the main character, but wasn't interested one jot in him either. Sometimes a character might be loathesome (In BB, it was actually the assistant, I couldn't bear, but I still liked reading about her).
I think that Sarah Waters quote is a little bit patronising actually. I'm a huge fan of her and she has wonderfully complex (and nasty) characters in her book. In Fingersmith the two MCs are both self-serving and not who you'd want for friends at all! But I sure as hell cared about them and turned the pages almost feverishly to find out what happens to them.
But I think it can help. I agree with Ashlinn's example of Precious Ramotswe. (Incidentally, did anyone ever hear a pant-wettingly funny pastiche of this on R4's Dead Ringers?)

<Added>

Frances, thanks, I meant Collette, of course. And I liked Alison too.

I think that Sarah Waters quote is a little bit patronising actually. I'm a huge fan of her and she has wonderfully complex (and nasty) characters in her book. In Fingersmith the two MCs are both self-serving and not who you'd want for friends at all! But I sure as hell cared about them and turned the pages almost feverishly to find out what happens to them.

Absolutely, Caroline. Thinking it over, I can't remember very many 'likeable' (in the sense of, you'd want them as a friend) characters in any of SW's four books. Complex, surprising, needy, longing, determined, passionate - yes. 'Likeable' - no, not really.

Have you read The Night Watch? I found it quite difficult to get into at first, but then the backwards-moving narrative pulled me right in (or under). She does amazing things with structure in this book (and in Affinity).

Frances

Frances
I haven't read it yet, but it's my next one. I went to see her speak at the Royal Festival Hall recently. She was so delightful I almost wished I was gay so I could have a proper crush on her!!!