Is it possible to enjoy a novel when you don't have anything in common with the characters?

[Anne]

I've read several criticisms of Lord of the Flies in which readers say they don't like it because they feel they have nothing in common with the characters. But surely one of the joys of reading a novel is to see things from a point of view not your own?

[Sparrowlicious]

Why would you have to have something in common with at least one character in a book to enjoy it?
Btw, as someone who wrote some stories myself - none of my characters has anything in common with me. And that's fun because it's a challenge to write them. I can't imagine that as a reader you would have to identify with at least one of them to like a story.

[Jon]

Hi Anne, I agree: reading about dissimilar folks, like travel, is broadening.

Sparrowlicious, it looks like we three agree that this is not essential.

And yet.

I think on a deeper level we DO have things in common with the characters in this book and any good book. One doesn't need to be overweight and asthmatic like Piggy ("Sucks to your ass-mar!") to know how it feels to be embarrassed for physical characteristics. You don't need to be a twelve-year-old English boy like Ralph to know to thrill of being on your own in an exciting place, far from parents. For that matter, you don't need to be a (fictitious) king like Lear to know the pain of rejection by your children. And so on.

Cool query, Anne.

[A.J.]

It's rare that I find a character so unlikeable (Crime and Punishment is one book I have started and stopped 3 times because I just can't stand the main character) that I can't go on...but I think good writing touches on some universal human themes that transcend characters/settings.

[Jon]

A.J. wrote: "It's rare that I find a character so unlikeable (Crime and Punishment is one book I have started and stopped 3 times because I just can't stand the main character) that I can't go on...but I think ..."

Don Draper of Mad Men is probably considered unlikeable by many. The show's creator, Matthew Weiner, was asked if that was a problem. No, he said, because he is lovable, if not likable. Meaning, as I understood it, the audience can develop compassion for him upon discovering the root causes of his bad behavior (alcoholism, horrid childhood) and therefore care about him.

Concerning Crime And Punishment, it might be much the same. I've heard it said that Dostoevsky ultimately leads the reader to feel compassion for the killer ... as the old saying goes, "hate the sin, love the sinner"

[Melina]

Of course it's possible I however do fine it enjoyable when I can connect with a characters actions and sayings. When you connect with a character you find it more enjoyable maybe, but you can still like a book with characters who differ from yourself.

[Christine]

I think it depends on why you read...people read books for different reasons, I've found.

For myself? I like to fall in a different pov, see the world from another perspective. And books are the best way of doing that.

But, that said, there are times I want a book with characters that resonate for me on an emotional level or I can identify with. It depends on my mood and needs at the time. And it varies.

As for unlikable characters? This varies too. I found the novel Atonement close to impossible to read and struggled with Outlander for the same reason, I did not like the protagonist, who grated on my nerves and wasn't interesting to me. She was a nice enough character but not compelling (I found her whiny).

It's not that I have to "like" the character per se. I have to find the character compelling or interesting on some level. An example is Shakespeare's MacBeth - fascinating character but not likable. Another example is Breaking Bad's Walt Whiteman - who is unlikable, but compelling and interesting. If a character is interesting or hits one of buttons...I'll be engrossed, despite how horrible they are. Nice characters or "likable characters" can be incredibly dull in literature or film or tv.

So for me, it's not about likability, it's - are they compelling?

[Nicki]

I agree Christine, part of reading is slipping into someone else's story.

Most of my favorite books are told first person because those really get me into their heads.

What is NOT easy for me to do is read a book where the character's actions and words so contradict who they've been revealed to be.

[Jon]

Christine wrote: "I think it depends on why you read...people read books for different reasons, I've found.

For myself? I like to fall in a different pov, see the world from another perspective. And books are the b..."

Hi Christine. While I could never simply say I "like" a murderer, I do feel tremendous compassion for Macbeth -- a killer with a conscience.

[Anne]

Thanks - lots of really interesting comments here. Also reminded me why children should be encouraged to read novels - they're not some sort of high-minded cultural luxury, but ESSENTIAL in helping people to develop empathy and imagination, see things from points of view other than their own and realise there's so much more to the world than their own immediate situation and surroundings.

[Anja]

Why should we have something common with character's. For sometimes characters are so far from me as in Yukio Mishima novels, but he open's such questions about human existence, life, meaning of it..in Japanese culture in light of Buddhism,but such answers are so fine and maybe good and vice as voice from antiquity..as it is personality from novel Idiot..I have started several time to read this book, but I could not..Today I am deeply understand this message..of Dostoevsky..For me it was very hard to read something from Miller but it was challenge..For sometimes in some books I found out deja vu..but always something new..Personally I am professional reader, so I must read it some of books which are so far from me..and my personal world..But it is possible to discover even in some totally alien novel something as message..event it is Dan Brown:)

[Alexandra]

Of course. We can aspire to be like them, or learn from their faults/mistakes. Also, we can learn what we like/dislike in real people which helps us know what we look for in people.

[Christine]

Agreed. I've found that I can feel sympathy/even empathy for a well constructed anti-hero. MacBeth is an excellent example. Even Richard the III.

Currently, the Song of Ice and Fire series by George RR Martin (aka Game of Thrones via tv) has a great number of characters who do horrible things, but I find them sympathetic and interesting - because of how well Martin has written them.

[Christine]

Anja wrote: "Why should we have something common with character's. For sometimes characters are so far from me as in Yukio Mishima novels, but he open's such questions about human existence, life, meaning of it..."

But it is possible to discover even in some totally alien novel something as message..event it is Dan Brown:)

Or EL James for that matter...;-)

I agree, the whole point of reading and writing is communication after all. Communicating a pov. Taking the reader inside a world, mind, or view not their own.

[Carol]

I think as much as we wish we did not; the point of Lord of the Flies is that we all have the capacity for violence when the situation leads us there.

[Andrew]

I'm not really sure it matters if you relate to them or not. If the character is written well and is believable in whatever him/her/it is doing then I doubt it matters.

When I am watching Breaking Bad I don't really relate to a meth-peddling drug dealer turned homicidal killer but it doesn't stop me finding the character of Walter white interesting and engrossing.

So, no I don't really think it's important.

[Jon]

Carol wrote: "I think as much as we wish we did not; the point of Lord of the Flies is that we all have the capacity for violence when the situation leads us there."

Right on Carol. Fiction is real life intensified, so while the situations most of us face differ from those faced by fallen figures like Macbeth or the boys of Lord Of The Flies, it is a difference of degree rather than kind for the most part.

We may not be driven to a murderous rage by jealousy, like Othello, but we may go out of our heads in other ways. We may not kill for ambition like Macbeth, but many of us have acted badly due to ambition. And so on.

[Miriam]

I read this story as a child and found it sad the way they reverted to barbaric little monsters instead of turning progressively into noble savages.

In truth, I don't think I have much in common with the majority of fiction characters I read about...but after reading 100+ SF and Fantasy stories I believe I did begin to cultivate a sense of adventure and maybe some courage.

[Nessa]

Can any of us say that we are absolutely nothing like the characters we read about in books? I mean, sure, on the surface I may not be an English boy who finds joy in being able to hunt a pig, but I understand the excitement of the chase.
And, honestly, is the author just telling the base story? Or is s/he really speaking out about issues that everyone faces, in every era and region?

[Michele]

Personally I read more to find out what happens next. I am a storyline driven reader. I don't mind terribly if a character is unfamiliar or unsympathetic as long as the story carries me along.

What puts me off is if the character starts behaving inconsistently for no fathomable reason other than that it fits the storyline for them to do so.

That riles me.

Truly well drawn characters are a bonus I enjoy, but can live without.

But from a conversation I had at a recent book club meeting it was obvious that most of the other readers felt a sympathetic character they could recognise and share commonalities with was not only desirable but essential.

A number of them disliked or didn't finish the book we'd been given for that exact reason. They couldn't empathise with any of the characters.

[Jon]

Vanessa wrote: "Can any of us say that we are absolutely nothing like the characters we read about in books? I mean, sure, on the surface I may not be an English boy who finds joy in being able to hunt a pig, but ..."

I echo your sentiments, Vanessa.

Like all great literature, this book accesses universal emotions, though the situation is extreme, as fictional situations often are. After all, jealousy is more or less universal, although few kill for it like Othello; and many of us overreach due to ambition, though few kill like Macbeth. By the same token, I often wonder at readers who quickly dismiss The Catcher in the Rye because they have never been wealthy American preppies in New York in the late `40's!

[Brendan]

It really is like looking into another world. When I read this at school, a working class boy from a council housing estate, you'd have expected my classmates and me to rebel against reading it - but we didn't. We understood implicitly the core idea of what can happen when children are freed from parental control. We loved the idea of being stranded on an island, with the freedom to explore, set up camp, to go hunting. All this seen through the eyes of very privileged, public school, middle class boys. Did we like or relate to any of the characters? Not particularly; but we did understand what motivated them, we understood the dilemmas they faced and we understood that things can go badly wrong. We didn't think that we'd end up as savages, killing each other as they did - but then again we wouldn't would we? Truly, a great piece of literature.

[Jon]

Brendan wrote: "It really is like looking into another world. When I read this at school, a working class boy from a council housing estate, you'd have expected my classmates and me to rebel against reading it - b..."

To be sure, Brendan, the story began with every boy's fantasy -- to be left alone, away from the groan-up's, on a tropical island! Peter Pan, anyone?

Part of Golding's brilliance is his ability to show the descent into savagery in an nuanced, detailed, incremental way.

[Leela]

Absolutely. In this way we learn and better ourselves.

[BgirlBookworm]

Yes. It opens up a whole new way to look at things…and allows us to grow as we learn something new.

[Nathaly]

Of course it possible. Someone the the best books are when the characters doing have much in common with the reader

[Tabitha]

Perhaps we think we don't have anything in common with the characters in Lord of Flies but who knows? Maybe if you were put in similar circumstances at that age you'd also revert back to a so-called savage. Extreme conditions beget extreme measures.

[Jon]

Tabitha wrote: "Perhaps we think we don't have anything in common with the characters in Lord of Flies but who knows? Maybe if you were put in similar circumstances at that age you'd also revert back to a so-call..."

Well said Tabitha. Just as humor is often based on exaggeration—a bag of flour falls on a man walking under a window, big deal; a piano falls on the man, ha ha! (at least, that was once a comic staple)—so is drama often based on ordinary emotions intensified by extreme circumstances. Ordinary ambition: kid cheats on a test. Extraordinary intensification of ambition by Weird Sisters and a manipulative missus: Macbeth kills a king. And we in the audience thus think about our own emotions, which are rarely tested by extreme circumstances.

[Tabitha]

Such a brilliant book. So chilling. So Darwinian as well.

[Simon]

Horror is such a great movie genre, we can't bear to watch it, we have to watch it. My repellent feelings about the boys in this story did not stop me ploughing on

[Don]

To read is to escape and to learn about new people and places. Liking them is unimportant. Just as liking the authors themselves, who may be bastards in real life, must be overlooked if the art is good enough.

[Hayley]

This was actually something my own novel suffered from - a character that's unlikable. Several readers (and reviewers) just 'couldn't relate' to her. The thing is, there are so many levels on which a person can relate to another, and situation in life is only the most obvious, but surely everyone can relate to being an underdog, or being a bully, or making mistakes, or feeling as if you're losing control etc... No?

[Toby]

I wouldn't say I agreed that this was nessissary for Lord of the Flies, but I had a similar experience with Tender is the Night, where I couldn't stand the characters and hence the book.

[Ana]

Yes, you can. Otherwise, women could have never enjoy books by certain men authors, in which none of the characters had anything in common with women.

[Michael]

My students sometimes tell me they can't "relate" to a characters or story, and I ask them why they bother to watch television or movies or listen to music. They manage to enjoy those when they have little or nothing in common with the characters.

Sounds like excuse making for not reading to me.

[Hayley]

Michael wrote: "My students sometimes tell me they can't "relate" to a characters or story, and I ask them why they bother to watch television or movies or listen to music. They manage to enjoy those when they hav..."

Michael, I agree with you. I've never stopped reading because I 'couldn't relate' to the characters. I've stopped reading because the book wasn't grabbing my interest, certainly, but never because I didn't like the character(s).

[Monty J]

The operative word is "anything." It's virtually impossible not to have SOMEthing in common with a character. It's a matter of degree. Even if the character isn't human, the very definition of "character" requires an author to assign human traits to a protagonist whether it's a dog, a robot or a tree. By definition, to be a character is to be human-like.

I get quickly bored with characters I've met before, such as Batman or Harry Potter. The last Batman comic I read was in 1955, and I've never gotten past page one in a Harry Potter book. I have small appetite for contrived fantasy, and yet I can watch almost any Star Trek episode because invariably there's something believably important at stake. Riding brooms and casting spells isn't believable to me. Nor are lizard-faced monsters in an earth setting. One monster might be okay, but a string of monsters, as in LORD OF THE RINGS, gets ridiculous. (I walked out of that movie too.)

I hunger for characters that I can learn from, whether or not they look like me, wear pants, etc. What's important is what's at stake for the character(s) and how willing he/she/they are to strive.

[Hayley]

Well written, Monty J. You've put into words how I feel as well.

[aPriL does feral sometimes]

When I was young and idealistic and in high school. I stopped reading books because I had nothing in common with characters, unless it was an assigned text or very charming. When I started to work and discovered evil bosses and co-workers and boyfriends, I got interested in reading books that didn't connect with me before because I realized I needed the different POV to survive and be more clever about people. I reread this book for that reason. Then, when I passed the age of 50 and reread books for pleasure, it struck me that I must have had black and white thinking in my 20's and 30's, because now I could see subtle nuances in characters that the author had written into the book but I had completely missed when I was younger. At least, books that are loved by critics had those nuances that I completely had been blind to when younger. The aging brain might lose cognition, but I guess experiences in life must add depth to understanding what makes people tick, so that reading a book with characters that feel bizarre when you are young makes more sense when you are older.

I know this makes me sound elderly, but, oh, what the hell.

[Colm]

The greatness of books lies in this thread, because each reader bestows ones own values upon each character the relevance of something in common becomes obsolete. I love Franzen yet i am as far away from the world his characters inhabit as possible. You get from what you bring too ☺

[Hulou]

But isn't the point of the novel that all the characters are the same. They all have their issues but when it comes down to it man is savage. That anyone can lead you astrey and you can get caught up in the moment and act like a beast? I don't think you were supposed to really be in love with these characters.

[Eileen]

I did not have time to read ALL the above comments however I'm adding my .02 just the same. Why would anyone think they had anything in common with any FICTIONAL character to begin with? NO, I have absolutely nothing in common with a jet setting super rich girl, woman or man even, but read about them ALL THE TIME. NO, I have nothing in common with vampires, but some of their FICTIONAL stories are some of the best. NO, I have nothing in common with CIA agents who are in perfect shape and have super-human skills but I love those adventure stories. Sure, it is fun to think we have some things in common with the hero of any novel. You know, like we are all blonde, shapely, tall and blue eyed. NOT.

[Hulou]

Eileen wrote: "I did not have time to read ALL the above comments however I'm adding my .02 just the same. Why would anyone think they had anything in common with any FICTIONAL character to begin with? NO, I hav..."

I don't think that is what any of us mean when we say we wish we had something in common with the characters. When tou're talking about relating to a character you aren't referring to the big picture stuff. As in one of my favorite characters is a necromancer but I relate to her because she looks at things in a positive way.

[Maureen McGowan]

Anne wrote: "I've read several criticisms of Lord of the Flies in which readers say they don't like it because they feel they have nothing in common with the characters. But surely one of the joys of reading a ..."

I think that's the whole point of fiction... Fiction lets you see the world through others' eyes. I certainly don't need to have anything in common with the characters to enjoy a book.

There are studies (wish I had a proper reference) that have shown that people who read fiction are more empathetic.

That said, I think it helps if there are some universal or primal motivations or emotions or desires that anyone can understand/relate to.

[aPriL does feral sometimes]

Hailey wrote: "But isn't the point of the novel that all the characters are the same. They all have their issues but when it comes down to it man is savage. That anyone can lead you astrey and you can get caught ..."

When I was eleven, ALL boys were disgusting.

[aPriL does feral sometimes]

Eileen wrote: "I did not have time to read ALL the above comments however I'm adding my .02 just the same. Why would anyone think they had anything in common with any FICTIONAL character to begin with? NO, I hav..."

You could always erase the description and pencil yours in. It's what I used to do more or less in creative writing in high school. My story assignments always featured me in some way. And I wasn't always nice in my role as a protagonist. I tried to be modest, limit the number of beautiful men to under ten who fell in love with me, or only jump from 30 foot cliffs with the top secret laser in my pocket in my bikini, shifting my gun into my bra. Imagination can make up for a lot of REAL deficiencies. It's why I read some books - for fun and adventure. Make up your own stories where the guy or girl adores your love handles.

[aPriL does feral sometimes]

Hailey wrote: "Eileen wrote: "I did not have time to read ALL the above comments however I'm adding my .02 just the same. Why would anyone think they had anything in common with any FICTIONAL character to begin w..."

Personally, I can't resist the bad vampires. The good ones bore me. Plus, my favorite character when I was a teen was Catwoman. I went as her to Halloween parties. Wonderwoman bored me, as did Batgirl, too. I loved the bad girls. Thankfully, I am tall and it was the era for Lycra girdles. In real life, I was a teacher's pet, a secretary, and didn't drink or stay up late. Sigh.

[Monty J]

Hailey wrote: "But isn't the point of the novel that all the characters are the same. They all have their issues but when it comes down to it man is savage. That anyone can lead you astrey and you can get caught ..."

Perhaps the novel speaks only to a certain social class, the people wealthy enough to fly their spoiled kids around for recreation. Kids from poor families whose parents are always working are much more accomplished at organizing and fending without grownups.

[aPriL does feral sometimes]

Monty J wrote: "Hailey wrote: "But isn't the point of the novel that all the characters are the same. They all have their issues but when it comes down to it man is savage. That anyone can lead you astrey and you ..."

In my blue-collar/welfare neighborhood elementary school, we were angels in the classroom. It was completely Darwinian out in the unmonitored playground. The oldest boys, 5th and 6th grade, took over the upper field. You went up there at recess only if you desired a short, brutal school day, your pockets turned inside out, and your glasses broken.

[Gary]

I think a lot of people can enjoy books without having similarities to any characters. But for me, it is necessary to be able to relate to a character in some way. If I have a book where there is not a single character similar to either me or someone I know, it is hard for me to get into it.

When it comes to Lord of the Flies, this is a book that I was assigned in school twice. The first time was in 7th grade and the second time was in 12th grade. I recall that I enjoyed the book a lot more the first time around. The characters were closer to my age when I was in 7th grade, and this probably made it easier to get into. So there probably is something there. If you are not sympathizing with, or rooting for any particular character, I think it would be much more difficult to get sucked into the story.