flemmings | (no subject)

Via

umadoshi, a post on unlikable heroines. YA is a separate field, I think. It has not just female protags but teenagers, who tend to have unlikable behaviours anyway. There are, for better or worse, genre expectations that almost require there to be a love interest, which then raises the 'what could he possibly see in her?' question. Compare and contrast, if you like, the expectations in a kids' book like Harriet the Spy- Harriet is immensely likable but OMG what a pain she is, or Hilary McKay's Casson family, with the batty but sympathetoc older sisters. (The commenter who drew a distinction between likable and sympathetic was on to something, I think.) Or the British Marlows of Antonia Forester, that's all about teenagers and growing up and school and the first steps to relationships, but whose characters are likable and unlikable simultaneously- you know, like real people. (Another country: they do things differently there.)

I may be in a minority in not cutting the guys more slack. An obnoxious hero is obnoxious, and it's usually the one with the manly behaviours and the lack of empathy for other human beings. Not always- Harry got on my nerves something dreadful, and Ron was worse, just for being wet and a weed in the first instance, and a teenage boy in the second; but I was also reacting to the feeling that I was supposed to like and identify with them. I liked Hermione, though she'd have driven me batty in RL; but she thought about people other than herself.

I also wonder at what Writer of Wrongs considers 'likable' behaviours. 'Basically, I'm conditioned to make myself small and quiet. When I give my Starbucks order, I say "please" and "thank you" and "excuse me". In restaurants, I ask permissionto order, like I'm afraid if I get too demanding or show too much desire for something, I won't be liked. And I hate that I do that.' You do? You want to command an overworked and under-paid barrista to make your latte grande and be quick about it? You don't want to say 'Can we order now?' to tell an overworked and underpaid wait-staff that you now know what you want? That's called common courtesy where I come from; it's the people who snap orders at perceived underlings who are considered unlikable. Which they are: people one cannot like.

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

Oddly, I wasn't a teen interested in romance, at least with live people, and neither were the girls, much to my surprise. So I find the YA parts of that tedious.

As for that last set of behaviors, I think there's a difference between friendly, easy going, and polite, and cringing, apologetic, self deprecating. I find one's pleasant, common courtesy, the other one's irritating as all hell.

FINALLY SOMEONE ELSE WHO HATED HARRY AND RON FOR THE SAME REASONS. <333333333

It's just I can't say I've ever seen a customer be cringing, apologetic, and self deprecating. There's a kind of overdone politeness that contains a rebuke to the other person's arrogance or lack of manners, but that's a) more a British thing IME and b) not at all indicative of a desire to please.

Are we really such a minority? I guess we must be; other people go on about how much they like Ron and admire Harry (his author not least.)

I found all three (Harry-Ron-Hermione) to be fairly realistic. You know; they were generally OK kids going through difficult circumstances. More likeable pre-pubertal, then went through an ingrate stage in the middle books, and by the end were young adults. I didn't always like them, but I did like JK a lot for being clear-eyed about the fact that everybody (not just the core 3) is hella awkward/embarrassing/exasperating for a few years in high school, independent of whether you're tasked with saving the wizarding world.

Funnily enough I feel somewhat about Daniel Radcliffe et al the same way I feel about the character. That is, "growing up into a decent, thoughtful, regular human being" is a low bar for admiration, particularly when you're talking about someone who's much younger than you anyway, but it's really easy for a famous child actor to turn into a complete basket case.

As for the "likeable behaviours" question, when people say things like that it's not because they actually care about their impact on others, which presumably determines whether other people appreciate their presence. If they were thinking of others, they would act with common courtesy and think nothing more of it, as you've identified. Worrying whether you're "likeable" or not is self-conscious and self-centred; it's a shadow-play against a self-generated set of standards one projects onto the outside world. Frankly, I think it's absolutely correct not to like having these thought patterns, though the fix isn't to become louder and less polite to the workstaff: it's to stop having these thought patterns.

I agree up to a point. Likableness is a phantom quality, the pursuit of which can lead you into wound-up neurosis if you're inclined that way. But I think there's some value in asking the question, or perhaps its paraphrase 'am I unlikable?' Because there are unlikable behaviours and attitudes and people who exhibit them never seem to that they may be making other people loathe them.