50 Book Challenge 2017 Part Two

[southeastdweller]

Welcome to the second thread of the 50 Book Challenge for this year.

The challenge is to read fifty books (or more!) in 2017, though reading fifty isn't mandatory. Any type of book can count, it's not too late to join, and please try to let us all know your thoughts on what you've read.

The previous thread is here.

How're you getting on so far?

"I also couldn't finish The Goldfinch because I found the characters unlikeable."

So? I see this sort of comment in Amazon reviews, as well, and honestly can't understand what it has to do with a good & worthy book vs badly written crap one

Some great books I read were about "unlikeable" characters - Confessions Of A Sociopath was truly fascinating. The Strangest Man about quantum physicist Paul Dirac was also brilliant.

OK I get that maybe you want to feel like BFFs with the characters when reading chick lit but a book like The Goldfinch? And anyway, what was "unlikeable" about the protagonist who lost his mum in a terrorist attack as a child where he also suffered a concussion, and then struggled to make his way in the world? What was so terribly "unlikeable" about the antique furniture guy who helped him out?

Sorry, I don't mean to sound like I'm berating you for your taste in books (and I'm really not one to talk ) but I would like to understand why some people have to see literary characters they would want to be friends with. There are so many incredible books out there that are not about naice people.

Maybe it's not so much about finding the characters unlikeable, as finding them plausible such that you actually care what happens to them. Just thinking for example - We Need To Talk About Kevin - I couldn't find the mother believable at all, zero ability to relate to her - and so I really couldn't care about what happened (that and I thought the 'twist' was bloody obvious from about page 5).
OTOH - Mrs Norris in Mansfield Park is dreadful, but utterly believable as a character, you can see exactly why she ended up as she did.

Loss and loneliness ultimately made the lead in the Goldfinch selfish, exploitative of others and a criminal, so he wasn't very likeable towards the end, though it doesn't make him unsympathetic which is one of the things the book did well.

However, I actually thought many of the characters in it were not plausible enough to have feelings about either way - they all seemed a bit silly, like "stock" background characters, esp "Boris the dodgy Russian", the rich family that took him in and Dumbledore, whoops I mean Hobie.

Loved The Secret History the first time I read it, liked it but a bit less the second time. As an aside, Tana French's The Likeness is a complete rip-off the TSH as well as being entirely implausible (although despite its faults, I enjoyed seeing the set-up transferred to an Irish setting).

Didn't feel engaged by TLF and haven't tried The Goldfinch.

Agree with the distinction sadik makes - characters need to feel believable in a character-driven story just the same way as a dystopian scenario needs to feel plausible in a SF story, surely? In either case it's not that you "care" as in give everyone a hug, send a donation, but that you care enough to want to finish the story.

For example I cared enough about the boy at the beginning of the Goldfinch with his mother in the museum to see it through to the end, despite some very frustrating stuff in the middle, but the other stuff was enough of a spanner in the works to stop me outright loving the book as a whole.

Can you all just stop it!!! You're making me want to read The Goldfinch again and I have 963 on my TBR pile!

I don't mind my principle characters being arses but I do what to have some motivation behind their behaviour. Having someone portrayed as some sort of Bond style criminal with nothing to explain their behaviour makes it hard for me to relate.

Similarly I don't want character who are so pearly white that I also can't engage. I like police procedurals and have read my fair share of thrillers but I discovered after a few Patricia Cornwell for example that I want my lead to be A bit flawed. I like a tortured soul. Preferably without jutting cheekbones, a lithe body and piercing blue eyes.

Give my a slightly puffy, crumpled old geezer with burst capillaries on his nose any day.

And I want no presumptions about why I relate to the latter either! My cheekbones are bang on

"characters need to feel believable in a character-driven story just the same way as a dystopian scenario needs to feel plausible in a SF story, surely?"

Of course. That is not the same thing as "characters aren't likeable", though.

Having said that, I have lived long enough to see that everyone can do anything so not much that literary characters do appears "unrealistic". Except when apocalypse happens and characters are going about living their lives, talking about fishing season and who will marry whom, as certain death approaches for everyone. (I'm looking at you, the morons in On The Beach)

Agreed, I just take it to mean when someone doesn't 'like' a character they mean they don't care about them or what happens to them. Some characters are not nice people but have a charisma or fascination to them that draws you in, something you like about them. And some are just dickheads

I struggle with "unlikeable" characters Cote not because I need to be BFF but I need to give a fuck what happens to them.

It largely depends:

There But For The - didn't give a monkeys, but also found it poorly written. LOATHEd.

Sons And Lovers HATED Paul, LOVED the book, beautifully written

I for one with Goldfinch - the way it was broken into sections... they felt like 4 different books stylistically, that weren't connected and that end section about LESSONS LEARNED - can just fuck the fuck off.

Every I love it when someone other than me, for a change gets the rage about a book.

Not sure I understand what "to care what happens to them" means, either. Surely you get into a story or not? If the story is well-crafted and interests you, does it matter whether the character you 'like' the characters or can identify with them in some way?

Re: 'unlikeable characters'. I don't want a character to be my BFF. Life would be pretty boring if you only ever read about one type of character. But characters do have to appeal in some way. Whether they are complex and intriguing, genuine, fantastically evil etc - too many ways to mention; therefore has to be something that makes me want to carrying on being invested and interested in their story.

Interesting discussion about unlikeable characters! Agree that to an extent it depends on the genre - someone up thread said it's more important with chicklit to like the heroine and I agree with this. I read quite a lot of psychological thrillers and it's less important there to like the characters - but you do need to understand them. An example I read recently is Lie With Me by Sabine Durrant - the narrator is not a nice person at all but the story telling is so good you still want to know what happens to him and others in the end.

It depends where the story is. If the story is in the characters they have to be of interest in some way.

For e.g Hamlet - I don't care about the characters in the sense that it doesn't bother me they all end up dead in the finish (sorry spoiler), but I care about their thoughts and motivations because that's where the story is and it is interesting. Hamlet is interesting even when he's sitting around unsure what to do with himself. I don't especially like him but he is compelling.

For further e.g The middle section of the Goldfinch was one of the least interesting things I've ever read because next to nothing was going on story wise, it was completely reliant on your interest in those two characters and how they interacted with each other and their surroundings and they were boring and I just didn't care.

cote The characters is On The Beach pissed you off enough that you ceased to be interested in a story with stakes as high as the end of the world

I agree with Passmethecrisps when it comes to male characters - I want them just a tad older and knackered. This is why I like Wallander and Inspector Morse and why I despise books where the male characters fall into bed with loads of women suspiciously easily as in All That Man Is by David Szalay - despite the excellent writing.

Agree about the 'unlikeable characters' - if the book is all about what happens to someone and how they feel about it, then I have to care what happens to them and wonder how they'll feel about it. If I genuinely don't give a shit, it's very hard in a non-action focussed book to stick with it.

I've just finished an old 're-read' cosy murder mystery,

4. Sparkling Cyanide - Agatha Christie - one of the 'stand alone' books rather than a returning character one. These can be a bit hit and miss, but this is a good plot one. A glamorous woman dies of poisioning in a posh resturant, this is put down to suicide, her husband is not convinced but her sister (who inherits the fortune) has found evidence of the dead woman had been having an affair, and the OM had dumped her. Nice easy, cosy read.

That is another thing - pointless shagging. I go to work most days (last week and a half not counted) and I generally come home without having shagged anyone or even actually thought about shagging someone.

I don't know why so many books and films for that matter think that we need a love interest to keep us going. It is just a symptom of a dull story.

Agree on the pointless shagging - don't know why so many authors seem to think a story needs it.

Wowzer, I hadn't anticipated just how fast this thread moves! I've skimmed through and will go back and read properly after this post.

While some of you are closing in on the double digits, I've finished my first book of the year

1. The Essex Serpent - Sarah Perry
An odd beast, this one...the serpent as well as the book. I did enjoy it, as I like long books with slightly poetic lilting language that just carries you along. The characters were varied and well drawn out, and it touched on so many topics that made me think. I am currently involved (at a fair distance - nowhere near the circle of power) in advising on housing policy and the disconnect between the policy-makers and the people bearing the brunt is shocking.
The recurring theme of characters trying to break stereotypes and still be accepted by society appealed to me.

Having said that, I found the letters...em, incredulous. The stuff they put down on paper! And in such detail! Especially considering they met each other pretty much every other day. Some of them made me blush and I am no prude!

I had the thought that, after the Victorian age, the current age probably has the most written correspondence. I email work, I text friends, I update Facebook. I have WhatsApp groups for every section of my life. I even text my husband to remind him to get milk! A historical piece about our times would believably be epistolary.

I love a good unlikeable character. I like realistic, conflicted protagonists who do unlikeable things. What gives me the rage is fucking smug characters who you are obviously supposed to like/sympathise with/aspire to be like but you just want to punch them in the face.

If I ever say "I couldn't read it because I didn't find the characters likeable", that's what I mean.

Arlington Park was another one that I gave to the charity shop unread after struggling through the first few chapters.

7. The God Instinct - Jesse Bering

This was an interesting exploration of the mechanisms in place in our minds to predispose us into believing in a supernatural entity. The basic premise is that it is our ability to have a 'theory of mind' which allows us to develop the illusion that a God exists. We are wired to try to imagine what other people are thinking and to try and explain their behaviour through that mechanism.
I found the studies with young children and the examples of how even staunch atheists can get caught in the illusion based on how they answer certain questions particularly interesting. A fascinating read for people interested in psychology and how this particular belief works and how it may have evolved.

I don't suppose anyone can recommend a book about Leibniz?

Please tell me I was not the only one thinking chocolate biscuits.....

The God Instinct sounds fascinating boldly - will add to list . . .

Keith - you can recommend me a book on biscuits too if you like

I struggled a bit with The Goldfinch. The first third was great, The middle was boring and I wasn't keen on the end. I should read it again really. The main character was pretty unpleasant but I felt a bit of sympathy for him.

I agree about the pointless shagging too.