This post is inspired by a discussion we’ve been having recently, and also by two excellent books I just read. In the discussion, some people seemed to evaluate characters according to whether they liked them or not. That’s quite human, and I’d guess we readers do it all the time. I’ve done it myself. I’ve said, a few times, about books or films, “I didn’t like it because I didn’t like any of the characters”. But do you really have to like a protagonist for a story to work for you?

This past month, I read two excellent teen fantasies that call this thesis into question. They are “Corbenic” by Catherine Fisher, and “The Demon’s Lexicon” by Sarah Rees Brennan. And, quite honestly, it is difficult to like the two young men at the heart of these stories. But, in the end, it is very easy to love them – perhaps Nick, of “The Demon’s Lexicon”, in particular. Because there is a difference between liking a fictional character and liking a person in real life, and there is an even greater difference between merely liking a character and loving them.

In case anyone hasn’t read the “Lexicon”, a brief introduction to our main character may be necessary. Nick Ryves, the protagonist, is a surly young man of 16 or 17. Nick has a hair-trigger temper; he seems to be angry a lot of the time, and, when he is angry, he genuinely wants to destroy whomever or whatever is enraging him. Since he is physically powerful and quick and possesses any number of exceedingly sharp swords and knives, his temper might easily become a deadly problem. It doesn’t take long for the reader (this reader, anyway) to decide that there is something seriously wrong with Nick.

But, at the same time, we learn that Nick has good reason to be frustrated with his life. He and his brother are on the run, and his brother, only four years older, is responsible for him, and has been for years. Their father is dead, and their mother insane, and, perhaps worst of all, they are being hunted by evil magicians. As the book opens, the two boys experience – and fight off – a magical attack. So we know that, if Nick were not as skilled and deadly as he is, he might not be alive. We also discover that there is a strong bond between the boy and his older brother and that Nick is extraordinarily brave, loyal and honest. In fact, he cannot dissemble at all; he’s not capable of pretending to feelings he doesn’t have. That sort of honesty may seem almost inhuman, but it’s surely admirable, as well.

But the virtue Nick has that drew me in – that made me worry for him and hope that his problems (which, naturally, get steadily worse) had some sort of solution is very simple. He loves his brother. As a result, I ended up loving Nick, even though I’m not sure I’d ever want to be around a real-life version of him. Reading about these two young men facing a dangerous world alone was thrilling. And I only get thrilled by a story if I can care about the characters.

Cal, the protagonist of Catherine Fisher’s “Corbenic”, at first seems even less likeable than Nick. Where Nick is simply angry, Cal is angry, insecure and ambitious. Like Nick, Cal ends up with an exceedingly sharp sword; unlike Nick, he has no idea what to do with it, or even why he has it. Cal is in flight, running away from the mentally ill, alcoholic mother he has been looking after since he was six years old, and from the slum where she lived with him. He wants respect, wealth and comfort; he wants to live in a posh house, like his uncle, and to have nice things. Then no one will sneer at him or think him less than he is – so Cal tells himself. He wants to break completely and cleanly from his past, and everything – and everyone – that reminds him of his former life. Needless to say, this is not as easy as Cal thinks it will be.

On his way to his uncle’s, Cal gets off at the wrong station, a place called Corbenic. It is late, and raining hard, and there is no one around, and no signs telling him where to go. As he searches for shelter, or at least a telephone, he comes across two men fishing in a lake. One is a paraplegic, unable to walk. They give him directions to a hotel – or is it a castle? When Cal finds it, he is welcomed, and finds himself at a feast, seated in an ornate chair – or is it a throne? – next to Bron, the owner. This is the handicapped man he had earlier seen fishing, and who had given him direction. As the feast ends, several young people enter the hall in a sort of procession: a boy with a bleeding lance, two others with candles, and a girl with a cup. This procession – or vision – is a test, a test Cal fails. The next morning, he finds himself alone in a ruin, not in a hotel full of guests and wait staff. But there is a sword driven into his pillow, just above his head. And the sword, beautiful and deadly, is real. Cal hangs onto it, even though he doesn’t know what to do with it, because it is proof of his sanity. It’s his schizophrenic mother, not Cal, who has visions and hears voices. Cal isn’t like her. It terrifies and appalls him when he hears her voice, on the phone, talking about Corbenic. But the sword is real.

As Cal begins work at his uncle’s accounting firm, Corbenic keeps intruding into his day-to-day life. He doesn’t want the sword; he wants to sell it and get money, but then he finds himself using it to defend himself against some muggers – and comes across friends who help defend him, and who insist they are part of the round table, Arthur’s court. The osprey from Corbenic seems to be pursuing him. No one else sees it, but, when it attacks him, the scratches and blood on his face are real. Cal’s three worlds – the new age Arthurian reenacters, his uncle’s rational, work- and- money based life, and the dream of Corbenic – seem to be blending somehow. And, from all three worlds, from family, friends and strangers, the boy keeps getting the same message. “Go back. You must go back.” But where is Cal supposed to go, and how is he to get there? Corbenic is not on any map. British rail insists there is no such station. And, even if he were able to find Corbenic again, what could he do to change things? His mother would still be a crazy alcoholic, and nothing he could ever do or say could make that better. One thing he absolutely refuses to do is to go home again.

This, of course, is a retelling of the story of Percival, and it’s quite brilliant. I’m not sure if I’ve been able to convey, in spite of all the spoilers above, just how brilliant it is. If this book works for you, as it did for me, it will be because you worry for Cal and want him to find his way – whatever that happens to be. And this brings me to what inspired me to write these reviews in the first place.

After reading “Corbenic”, I checked amazon for reviews by readers. I looked at both amazon.com and amazon.co.uk, and I couldn’t help but be interested in the difference of the reactions. On the British site, all the reviews were raves. On the American site, though most of the reviewers praised the book, a couple panned it because these readers found Cal so unlikeable. And I found myself saying, “But that’s the point! Of course Cal is hard to like! There wouldn’t be a story otherwise.” It astonished me that some readers couldn’t empathize with Cal’s terrible fear of becoming insane, like his mother. It amazed me that they couldn’t see how trapped he was by his past, and how much courage it would take for him to truly face and transcend it. Without Cal’s flaws, there wouldn’t be a story. And it’s precisely his flaws, as well as his virtues, that make him a good protagonist. The same is true of Nick in ‘The Demon’s Lexicon”. These young men may be hard to like, but that doesn’t make them less lovable. It was easy for me, at least, to empathize with them, and I was rooting for both of them on every step of their journeys. Like Cal and Nick, a good protagonist will have flaws; his (or her) actions will push story forward, and the reader will want him (or her) to succeed. But do you have to like a character to root for them? Do you have to like a character to empathize with them, and desire their success? I don’t think so.

In fact, it’s possible to damage one’s characters, and one’s story, by smoothing out their rough edges and making them too “likable”. That’s a common writing sin young authors commit, and the resulting characters tend to get called Mary Sues, or Gary Stus. We see it all the time in fanfic, but it can happen in published novels, too. Much better to let one’s characters be who they are, even if they seem unlikeable. Much better to let them act and react in complex, and sometimes even bewildering, ways, as Cal and Nick do. Protagonists need to have journeys, and they need to be characters a reader can root for, and even love. They don’t need to be characters a reader can like. There’s a difference. I hope I manage to remember this as I work on my own story; I’m engaged, right now, in writing a novel about, among other things, a teenage boy with an exceedingly sharp sword. Hey, maybe I’m catching a wave here!

Cal and Nick are terrific protagonists, in my humble opinion. And Brennan’s plotting, and Fisher’s emotional depth and lovely prose, are well worth experiencing. All fantasy fans – read these books! You won’t be sorry.

* Mood: cheerful

p.s. sorry I had to take it down, and that it looks a little worse – this is a slightly lower-quality copy, but I had to change the credits. Thanks for watching!

Have a listen and let me know what you think!
(I already know we need to do a bit more with sound editing.)

Livejournal is a lot easier. You just ask someone if you can friend them, and then you click on your friends list. You don’t have to jump through all these hoops. (Though I get the strong feeling I must be doing something wrong here.)

I do like librarything, though. It’s going to take me awhile to add more books – so far I only have two up – and it will take still longer for me to figure out how to get them to show up here, or on my other blog.  But the site itself is easy to use, and I love the idea of getting advance copies of books to review – so I think I may sign up to do that.

I think I’ve now at least attempted some part of all the lessons. My favorite thing so far is flickr; it’s very easy to use and a lot of fun. Of course, I do just like blogging, as well, but I guess that’s obvious!

Still, if you include the band blog and the library teenspace blog, I now have six blogs to keep up with. I mean six blogs I should check and/or write something in. It’s overwhelming. And I really only write consistently in my personal blog. But I’ll try to keep this one up, as well, because , if I can get the feeds to work better, it would be a good way of keeping in touch with my colleagues.

So – see you on the web!

As far as the library wikis John linked to are concerned, I had two thoughts:

First, a couple of them didn’t seem at all different from the list of recommended websites we already provide. There were a lot of links with good information, but, as far as I could tell, no interactivity.

Which brings me to my second point: in order to really use some of these wikis, you have to join, and I’m just not a joiner. Yet another name and password to remember; yet another site to keep track of – yes, they are useful and fun, but at what point does it get overwhelming?

When you take these points together, you see that there’s tension between openness and authority. If you let absolutely everybody join and contribute, there is no guarantee that the info in the wiki is accurate. If you don’t let people join and contribute, why call the site you’re building a wiki?

Because of the lack of authority and quality control, my kids (the seniors in my group a couple of years back; they are now sophomores in college) were opposed to setting up a library wiki for our teen group. They thought a myspace or facebook page would be more useful. I haven’t yet asked the younger kids in the group what they think, but I have been told the kids are forbidden to use wikis for homework.

So I see them as being very good for collaborative creativity, possibly very good for social networking, and a mixed bag for actual information. I’ll have to look at a few more and think some more about this. They are kind of fun, though!

Now off to look at Deirdre’s post, and see if I can link to some blogs-

Here are a couple of the lovely giraffes Deirdre and I saw last weekend. Just checking to see if I can send to the blog (and proving I do have a flickr account, after all. )

I’ve been tagged by two people for the 6 random things meme. Help! The rules, as I understand them (and I’m sure Teresa and Deirdre will correct me if I’m wrong) are to jot down 6 random things about yourself and then tag 6 people to do the same, including the person who tagged you. I don’t think I understand that last rule, though? Doesn’t it mean that Deirdre and Teresa would end up doing the meme over and over again – once for every person they tagged? Does that count as a random thing?

1. Best present I ever gave anyone, IMHO: I had someone from the State come and put up two bluebird houses on my parent’s property for father’s day one year. We have had bluebirds, tree swallows, or both nesting in the boxes from that year forward.

2. I wanted to be an astronaut when I was a little girl. I don’t know quite what dissuaded me from this dream, but Apollo 13 might have had something to do with it?

3. I am terribly shy about singing on stage, but it’s something I always wanted to do. (And now I can say I’ve done it!) OTOH, I’m very comfortable singing in a choir or chorus, and love that even more.

4. If I could turn into an animal, I think it might be a bird, because I’d love to be able to fly.

5. I used to feel awfully guilty about leaving our dog when I had to go to school. One day, when we were kids, my brother and sister and I rode our bikes to Church. We hadn’t chained up the dog, who followed us in and marched right up the aisle! (He was a beagle. Very cute, but how embarrassing!)

6. And the thing I mentioned in another meme – I took my goldfish to the vet. That fish died, eventually, but he gave me another who’s now the subject of an experiment – the doc helped me set up one of his “clean tanks” in a home setting. That’s had its ups and downs! But Charlie Weasley goldfish is still with me after 3 1/2 years and counting, which is the best I’ve ever done with a goldfish. )

Tagging Teresa, Deirdre, Sigune, Anne Arthur, Miriam, Froggyfield and R.J. Anderson, but only if you are happy to do it and haven’t already. I’ll put the tags in properly, Teresa and Deirdre, if/when you show me how! (Is that random thing 7?)

Happy Epiphany, everyone!

B  John’s extremely difficult homework assignment:

Ten favorite books – eek! Like Deirdre, I actually don’t think I can do this. If I had to stop at three, or perhaps five, it might be easier. But I’ll give it a try.

1. The Lord of the Rings, by Tolkien. No contest. Probably the most beloved and formative book of my life;  I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve read it. It has its flaws – Tolkien was certainly a man of his time – but it has great generosity of spirit, nonetheless, and it’s certainly a work of genius.

2. The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, by Lewis. Dad read us this one when we were six, and I still feel compelled to reread it at Christmastime. Magical, and it will always be my favorite of the chronicles.

3. But I’m more likely to reread The Children of Green Knowe, by L.M. Boston. Gorgeous, gorgeous writing and deeply imaginative. I have a short essay about this book and how it influenced me on my other blog.

4. a Wrinkle in Time by Madeleine L’Engle. I read this one when I was ten, after having heard the first chapter read by my fourth grade teacher. Meg was the first character in a book I ever identified with strongly and consciously – she’s a great character!- and  Wrinkle was also the first book I read that gave me nightmares, but which I loved, anyway, even though I mostly didn’t (and don’t ) like scary books.

5. Great Expectations, by Dickens. I loved Oliver Twist as well, but Great Expectations was my favorite Dickens novel through my teen years, and I think it still is. I loved the characters and the clarity of the plot. Pip’s a very believable boy, and Miss Havisham is unforgettable! As for poor Magwitch, who wouldn’t love him?

6. The Inheritors, by William Golding. I’ve often asked myself: why do I love this book? It’s a tragedy, and a pretty gruesome one, if you think about it. But it’s also very compassionate, very intelligent, and beautifully written. It concerns a small band of Neanderthals who encounter modern humans, and I fell in love with it at 15 and still admire it greatly. It’s even better than Lord of the Flies – but also sadder.

7. The World We  Live In. A time -life book from the 1960s; no idea of the author, but I wish I still owned it. It’s basically the history of life on earth, from the birth of our galaxy to the rise of mammals. Lots of great information and illustrations; my favorite browsing book as a kid. I wish there were something like it now, but we tend to compartmentalize information these days.

8. King Solomon’s Ring by Konrad Lorenz. I just love animal books, and this is the one that came to mind – it’s a classic about the Austrian behavioral scientist and his life with animals. His description of imprinting a band of ducklings is probably the best known of the stories here- and very funny!

9. Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte. I agree with Deirdre on this one. Mr. Rochester may be problematic by modern standards; the plot may be pure melodrama, but Jane is thoroughly human, and a character who displays great integrity and courage. I love her.

10 My Life and Hard Times by James Thurber. Very short, very dry, and always has me laughing helplessly, especially at “the Night the Bed fell on father”.

And now I just realized all I left out! No Sayers – but I love her! – and none of the other Inklings. No O’Connor; no Padraic Colum or Madeleine Polland; no Lloyd Alexander and no Ursula LeGuin. How could I leave out LeGuin?!

I bet this list would look different if you did it on a different day. But I think there would be one thing about it that was consistent. I bet most people notice (I certainly did) that their favorite books are those they fell in love with in late childhood or early to late adolescence. Is that the point of this exercise, I wonder?

well, that didn’t work. How do people do this? Help!

Guided by Norma Chang, the teens select their ingredients

I just uploaded it from my hard drive, instead.

Anyway, library pics to follow, when I have time.