Hello everyone!
So, I'm about to start a project for college which will allow me to get an extra a-level/grade which I'm probably going to need to get into uni.
I'm most likely going to be doing something on creative writing, specifically focusing in on the character aspect of things
If you have some free time, please could you answer these questions for me? Thanks
In your opinion, what makes a good protagonist?
What makes a good antagonist?
What makes a good side-character/supporting role?
Do you think they are necessary for key protag/antag development?
Is there any specific personality traits that you would want a protag/antag to have?
Can you list some of your favourite protagonists/antagonists from any novels you've been reading?
What in particular attracted you to these characters?
Do these protags/antags have characters that support them? If so, did you like them?
Hopefully these are okay questions?? Sorry if they come across as confusing ;-;'
So, I'm about to start a project for college which will allow me to get an extra a-level/grade which I'm probably going to need to get into uni.
I'm most likely going to be doing something on creative writing, specifically focusing in on the character aspect of things
If you have some free time, please could you answer these questions for me? Thanks
In your opinion, what makes a good protagonist?
What makes a good antagonist?
What makes a good side-character/supporting role?
Do you think they are necessary for key protag/antag development?
Is there any specific personality traits that you would want a protag/antag to have?
Can you list some of your favourite protagonists/antagonists from any novels you've been reading?
What in particular attracted you to these characters?
Do these protags/antags have characters that support them? If so, did you like them?
Hopefully these are okay questions?? Sorry if they come across as confusing ;-;'
Here to help! (I hope, lmao)
In your opinion, what makes a good protagonist?
Hmm...this is really specific to me, but when they're more logical than emotional, or at least an even mix of the two. I find it frustrating when characters are constantly making bad judgement calls based on feelings. I'm not saying it's unrealistic, but...
What makes a good antagonist?
Compelling motivations. While it doesn't justify their actions, I think it contributes more to the story than just "lol I'm evil".
What makes a good side-character/supporting role? Do you think they are necessary for key protag/antag development?
It seems like the sidekick character often seems to fall into the trope of being overly timid, dim, or unconditionally supportive. I think that having them be autonomous and challenge the protag/antag facilitates their development even more than if they just hang around like yes-men shadows with no personalities. Ideally, every character relationship should do something to develop both parties or further the plot.
Is there any specific personality traits that you would want a protag/antag to have?
Not really. I think any personality trait could be adapted between the two. Actually, it can be interesting to switch them up (like the anti-hero and righteous villain and what have you).
Can you list some of your favourite protagonists/antagonists from any novels you've been reading? What in particular attracted you to these characters?
For my example I'll use Salander from the Millenium trilogy. I like how her personality is so clearly shaped by her past, and how she's aware of this, and aware of her flaws. It makes her a more realistic character. She's wickedly intelligent (possibly A-spec?) and her independent/asocial nature made her a really interesting protag. She required help from other characters at times but was fully capable of helping them in return.
Do these protags/antags have characters that support them? If so, did you like them?
Yep! The other protag, Blomkvist, was an enjoyable character. He generally tried to do The Right Thing even when it jeopardized his safety and was patient with Lisbeth while most other characters dismissed or were hostile to her. When she was framed for murder and went awol he didn't give up on her, and when she returned he didn't get angry or try forcing himself back into her life. Idek what you would call their relationship by the end of the trilogy, but it was really respectful and nice to read about.
...And this contradicts what I said above about unconditionally supportive characters, lmao. The books aren't as straightforward as I made it sound, though.
Hope this was any use at all!
In your opinion, what makes a good protagonist?
Hmm...this is really specific to me, but when they're more logical than emotional, or at least an even mix of the two. I find it frustrating when characters are constantly making bad judgement calls based on feelings. I'm not saying it's unrealistic, but...
What makes a good antagonist?
Compelling motivations. While it doesn't justify their actions, I think it contributes more to the story than just "lol I'm evil".
What makes a good side-character/supporting role? Do you think they are necessary for key protag/antag development?
It seems like the sidekick character often seems to fall into the trope of being overly timid, dim, or unconditionally supportive. I think that having them be autonomous and challenge the protag/antag facilitates their development even more than if they just hang around like yes-men shadows with no personalities. Ideally, every character relationship should do something to develop both parties or further the plot.
Is there any specific personality traits that you would want a protag/antag to have?
Not really. I think any personality trait could be adapted between the two. Actually, it can be interesting to switch them up (like the anti-hero and righteous villain and what have you).
Can you list some of your favourite protagonists/antagonists from any novels you've been reading? What in particular attracted you to these characters?
For my example I'll use Salander from the Millenium trilogy. I like how her personality is so clearly shaped by her past, and how she's aware of this, and aware of her flaws. It makes her a more realistic character. She's wickedly intelligent (possibly A-spec?) and her independent/asocial nature made her a really interesting protag. She required help from other characters at times but was fully capable of helping them in return.
Do these protags/antags have characters that support them? If so, did you like them?
Yep! The other protag, Blomkvist, was an enjoyable character. He generally tried to do The Right Thing even when it jeopardized his safety and was patient with Lisbeth while most other characters dismissed or were hostile to her. When she was framed for murder and went awol he didn't give up on her, and when she returned he didn't get angry or try forcing himself back into her life. Idek what you would call their relationship by the end of the trilogy, but it was really respectful and nice to read about.
...And this contradicts what I said above about unconditionally supportive characters, lmao. The books aren't as straightforward as I made it sound, though.
Hope this was any use at all!
Glad to help! (or just rant about my dumb ideas for a while)
In your opinion, what makes a good protagonist?
In essence, the best protagonist is the one with a charming personallity, and with whom, at least to some degree, the reader/audience can identify with and see them as something more than a nessesary plot device. The key to this is often an appropiate balance between flaws and streghts, booth in the practical and emotional aspects of the character. This is easier to do in antiheroes than heros, but deserves a lot of attention; a flawless protagonist protagonist can be awfully dull, and one with a lot of flaws and little virtues can be just as dull as well.
Speaking of dullnes, there's also something I consider important: When writting a story, one has to make sure that the secondary characters or deuteragonists dont outshine the protagonist. If when whe see the story we find ourselves liking best all the characters arround the protagonist than the protagonist himself, it means we've failed to make an interesting protagonist at all. I've seen this happen in many works (the most recent example i can recall is JJBA Part 5: Vento Aureo). The best solution in these cases is, rather than tone down the secondary characters, polish or change the direction where the protagonist is headed. Find something that really makes them memorable asides from being the center.
In a far mor personal note, I prefer when i can understand the actions of the protagonist. In many cases i've ended up disliking a main character is because their actions, whether succesful or not, where meaningless and laked reason. No matter if your protagonist is the emotional or logician type, if his actions have no meaning or the meaning for them is always convinietly told after the action succedes, it seems to me like a messy thing the autor pulled out their sleeve than anything else.
What makes a good antagonist?
I'm a sucker for duality, and thus I believe that such a climatic relationship as there is between a protagonist and antagonist, requires a good dosage of duality to work. However, this duality can come in many shapes, and not just the "Oh main chara is good and wears all blue and is so calm, so antagonist is bad and wears all red and it's a maniac".
Duality is a must, and it can go from a small detail to their whole persona, but the point it's that this diference is pivotal, and reaches the two characters to two different ends of a situation. This two different ends can be anything, from a duality of saving earth vs. destroying earth, to destroying the earth with fire vs. destroying the earth with ice. Two characters could even have the same or simmilar personalities and be antagonists, as long as their visions/tasks oppose and collide with the other's.
With that said, I'd be good to point out that the antagonist isn't freed of giving explainations of his actions either. Without a motivation or reason, the antagonist will feel too as only a nessesary plot device.
What makes a good side-character/supporting role? Do you think they are necessary for key protag/antag development?
What makes a good suporting role is how they complement with the character their support, booth in practicity and personality. This gives the supporting role booth a place and meaning, preventing them from being percived (and being, more than once) as annoying or needless. Matching desings also help a lot, in my opinion.
Is there any specific personality traits that you would want a protag/antag to have?
It really deppends most of the story than of the characters themselves. Altought i guess, a widely common trait for protagonist/antagonist is bravery versus cowardice. Once again, duality has a HUGE role in how a protagonist and an antagonist psyches are designed, as they complement the other as opposites in most works, and it makes it easer to a reader/audiece to identify one from the other.
Can you list some of your favourite protagonists/antagonists from any novels you've been reading?
What in particular attracted you to these characters?
Gacel Syrah from Tuareg: Probably one of the best characters I've seen. He's an old fashoned warrior with the old fashioned warrior traits, that remember usof the Cid or King Arthur. Yet again, Gacel finds himself one step forward, when we see he has an assortment of flaws that not only work well with the history, but don't contradice Gacel's virtues either.
Holden Caulfield from The Catcher In The Rye
wasn't sure to count Holden in this, as my judgement isn't truly impartial, but I just cant ignore holden as a protagonist. I find him an admirable character as a really realistic writting of a person that, due social ineptitude, loses concept of a "grey" conduct, ranging his own demeanor and others in solely good or bad.
I had another character on the tip of my tongue, but i've been sitting 10 min in front of the screen and i can't seem to get it back, i'll edit later if i remember them :'D
Do these protags/antags have characters that support them? If so, did you like them?
In your opinion, what makes a good protagonist?
In essence, the best protagonist is the one with a charming personallity, and with whom, at least to some degree, the reader/audience can identify with and see them as something more than a nessesary plot device. The key to this is often an appropiate balance between flaws and streghts, booth in the practical and emotional aspects of the character. This is easier to do in antiheroes than heros, but deserves a lot of attention; a flawless protagonist protagonist can be awfully dull, and one with a lot of flaws and little virtues can be just as dull as well.
Speaking of dullnes, there's also something I consider important: When writting a story, one has to make sure that the secondary characters or deuteragonists dont outshine the protagonist. If when whe see the story we find ourselves liking best all the characters arround the protagonist than the protagonist himself, it means we've failed to make an interesting protagonist at all. I've seen this happen in many works (the most recent example i can recall is JJBA Part 5: Vento Aureo). The best solution in these cases is, rather than tone down the secondary characters, polish or change the direction where the protagonist is headed. Find something that really makes them memorable asides from being the center.
In a far mor personal note, I prefer when i can understand the actions of the protagonist. In many cases i've ended up disliking a main character is because their actions, whether succesful or not, where meaningless and laked reason. No matter if your protagonist is the emotional or logician type, if his actions have no meaning or the meaning for them is always convinietly told after the action succedes, it seems to me like a messy thing the autor pulled out their sleeve than anything else.
What makes a good antagonist?
I'm a sucker for duality, and thus I believe that such a climatic relationship as there is between a protagonist and antagonist, requires a good dosage of duality to work. However, this duality can come in many shapes, and not just the "Oh main chara is good and wears all blue and is so calm, so antagonist is bad and wears all red and it's a maniac".
Duality is a must, and it can go from a small detail to their whole persona, but the point it's that this diference is pivotal, and reaches the two characters to two different ends of a situation. This two different ends can be anything, from a duality of saving earth vs. destroying earth, to destroying the earth with fire vs. destroying the earth with ice. Two characters could even have the same or simmilar personalities and be antagonists, as long as their visions/tasks oppose and collide with the other's.
With that said, I'd be good to point out that the antagonist isn't freed of giving explainations of his actions either. Without a motivation or reason, the antagonist will feel too as only a nessesary plot device.
What makes a good side-character/supporting role? Do you think they are necessary for key protag/antag development?
What makes a good suporting role is how they complement with the character their support, booth in practicity and personality. This gives the supporting role booth a place and meaning, preventing them from being percived (and being, more than once) as annoying or needless. Matching desings also help a lot, in my opinion.
Is there any specific personality traits that you would want a protag/antag to have?
It really deppends most of the story than of the characters themselves. Altought i guess, a widely common trait for protagonist/antagonist is bravery versus cowardice. Once again, duality has a HUGE role in how a protagonist and an antagonist psyches are designed, as they complement the other as opposites in most works, and it makes it easer to a reader/audiece to identify one from the other.
Can you list some of your favourite protagonists/antagonists from any novels you've been reading?
What in particular attracted you to these characters?
Gacel Syrah from Tuareg: Probably one of the best characters I've seen. He's an old fashoned warrior with the old fashioned warrior traits, that remember usof the Cid or King Arthur. Yet again, Gacel finds himself one step forward, when we see he has an assortment of flaws that not only work well with the history, but don't contradice Gacel's virtues either.
Holden Caulfield from The Catcher In The Rye
wasn't sure to count Holden in this, as my judgement isn't truly impartial, but I just cant ignore holden as a protagonist. I find him an admirable character as a really realistic writting of a person that, due social ineptitude, loses concept of a "grey" conduct, ranging his own demeanor and others in solely good or bad.I had another character on the tip of my tongue, but i've been sitting 10 min in front of the screen and i can't seem to get it back, i'll edit later if i remember them :'D
Do these protags/antags have characters that support them? If so, did you like them?
This is a bit late, but I was intrigued by your questions and I hope the answers are still helpful!
What makes a good protagonist?
For me, it's relatable flaws, combined with a sense of forward motion. I don't care about how awesome a protagonist is, I care about whether I can get into their head--if they have hesitations, uncertainties, and fears that make sense to me. But they can't be frozen and tossed around by the plot, either, they have to take action. Even if it's bad or unproductive action, they have to try and take control of their own destiny.
What makes a good antagonist?
Believeable motives! Also, some kind of personal connection to the protagonist. If they're a distant figure who did Bad Things, even if those things affected the antagonist directly (say, an invasion of their homeland), it's no different than it being a force of nature that the character is fighting, and in those cases you really need strong secondary antagonists to carry the story. Even if it's hidden for part of the story, or only develops once the protagonist becomes a credible threat to them, I want to see a connection between the antagonist and the protagonist.
What makes a good side-character/supporting role?
More personal connections! To the protagonist, the plot, etc. A side-character can't just be there because the protagonist needs supporting characters, they have to have their own motives and objectives that makes them work in tandem (or, just as critically, sometimes disagree).
Do you think they are necessary for key protag/antag development?
Most of the time. I've seen some good stories where the development was entirely through the protagonist/antagonist conflict, but that kind of story has to be very tightly-focused on them and their relationship. I don't think plot alone is a good way of developing a protagonist, we have to see them interacting and forming bonds, so yeah, I think they're necessary for development.
Can you list some of your favourite protagonists/antagonists from any novels you've been reading?
Protagonists: Miles Vorkosigan (Lois McMaster Bujold), Vlad Taltos (Steven Brust), Adele Mundy (David Drake), Ciaphas Cain (Sandy Mitchell).
Antagonists: Anaander Minaai (Ann Leckie), Lung Tien Lien (Naomi Novik), Dondo dy Jironel (Lois McMaster Bujold).
What in particular attracted you to these characters?
The protagonists: with the possible exception of Adele Mundy, they all have really intense forward motion! They all keep moving forward, acting both in reaction to and upon the plot, making tons of mistakes that complicate things further but getting out through constant forward motion (and a dose of good luck). Adele Mundy is the partial exception, but she's one of a protagonist duo in her series and her partner has the same traits. They all also have immense flaws that I can see myself in (Adele is my fave of her duo because she's got all the flaws I relate to the most).
The antagonists: Really strong motivations, such that you can see where they're coming from even if you don't agree. They're all people who think they're justified in their actions, and clearly have reason to think that coming from their own cultural/situational frameworks. And they all do have strong personal connections with the protagonist that amp up their animosity and make it even more impossible for them and their respective protagonists to resolve things peacefully, even though you can see their POV.
Do these protags/antags have characters that support them? If so, did you like them?
Most of them do, to some extent or another! (All of them but one are from trilogies/series, so the supporting characters sometimes move around and switch out....) But come to think of it, Miles and Ciaphas both have the ability to basically build groups of interesting people around them, and Adele's co-protagonist does too, so she ends up with his posse. The antagonists I like are all people who have/acquire a big political powerbase, instead of cultivating individuals, but Anaander and Dondo both end up creating enemies/problems for themselves who join the protagonist's side!
What makes a good protagonist?
For me, it's relatable flaws, combined with a sense of forward motion. I don't care about how awesome a protagonist is, I care about whether I can get into their head--if they have hesitations, uncertainties, and fears that make sense to me. But they can't be frozen and tossed around by the plot, either, they have to take action. Even if it's bad or unproductive action, they have to try and take control of their own destiny.
What makes a good antagonist?
Believeable motives! Also, some kind of personal connection to the protagonist. If they're a distant figure who did Bad Things, even if those things affected the antagonist directly (say, an invasion of their homeland), it's no different than it being a force of nature that the character is fighting, and in those cases you really need strong secondary antagonists to carry the story. Even if it's hidden for part of the story, or only develops once the protagonist becomes a credible threat to them, I want to see a connection between the antagonist and the protagonist.
What makes a good side-character/supporting role?
More personal connections! To the protagonist, the plot, etc. A side-character can't just be there because the protagonist needs supporting characters, they have to have their own motives and objectives that makes them work in tandem (or, just as critically, sometimes disagree).
Do you think they are necessary for key protag/antag development?
Most of the time. I've seen some good stories where the development was entirely through the protagonist/antagonist conflict, but that kind of story has to be very tightly-focused on them and their relationship. I don't think plot alone is a good way of developing a protagonist, we have to see them interacting and forming bonds, so yeah, I think they're necessary for development.
Can you list some of your favourite protagonists/antagonists from any novels you've been reading?
Protagonists: Miles Vorkosigan (Lois McMaster Bujold), Vlad Taltos (Steven Brust), Adele Mundy (David Drake), Ciaphas Cain (Sandy Mitchell).
Antagonists: Anaander Minaai (Ann Leckie), Lung Tien Lien (Naomi Novik), Dondo dy Jironel (Lois McMaster Bujold).
What in particular attracted you to these characters?
The protagonists: with the possible exception of Adele Mundy, they all have really intense forward motion! They all keep moving forward, acting both in reaction to and upon the plot, making tons of mistakes that complicate things further but getting out through constant forward motion (and a dose of good luck). Adele Mundy is the partial exception, but she's one of a protagonist duo in her series and her partner has the same traits. They all also have immense flaws that I can see myself in (Adele is my fave of her duo because she's got all the flaws I relate to the most).
The antagonists: Really strong motivations, such that you can see where they're coming from even if you don't agree. They're all people who think they're justified in their actions, and clearly have reason to think that coming from their own cultural/situational frameworks. And they all do have strong personal connections with the protagonist that amp up their animosity and make it even more impossible for them and their respective protagonists to resolve things peacefully, even though you can see their POV.
Do these protags/antags have characters that support them? If so, did you like them?
Most of them do, to some extent or another! (All of them but one are from trilogies/series, so the supporting characters sometimes move around and switch out....) But come to think of it, Miles and Ciaphas both have the ability to basically build groups of interesting people around them, and Adele's co-protagonist does too, so she ends up with his posse. The antagonists I like are all people who have/acquire a big political powerbase, instead of cultivating individuals, but Anaander and Dondo both end up creating enemies/problems for themselves who join the protagonist's side!
You are on: Forums » Smalltalk » Questionnaire!
Moderators: Mina, Keke, Cass, Auberon, Claine, Ilmarinen, Ben, Darth_Angelus