Politically Incorrect Characters?

[SciFrac]

I'll admit in public that I love South Park. It still makes me laugh, and one of the reasons is that they are "equal-opportunity" offenders. One of my WIPs has a main character who is like this. He say offensive thing and is pretty selfish, which is one of his flaws, but I want him to be sympathetic a well.

What's your threshold for offensive humor? Killing obviously doesn't offend too many people these days, but you say things about kids, women, the elderly, an obese or metally disabled person (or someone who is both) and well... that can still ruffle some feathers. So I'm trying to define the line.

What do you think? What is excusable, permissible, or even enjoyable?

 

[Abernovo]

Perhaps it's not just what you do, but how you do it. Personally I do find killing offensive, but if it's in war, or defence of another, it puts it into a different light.

Show that the character's got a good heart, which makes up for some of the insensitive (insensitive is more forgiveable than deliberately offensive) things he says and does. I'm reading something at present where a main character is selfish and needs a good kick up the behind, but he's sympathetic, because you get insight into his backstory, and it's made obvious that he's not malicious, just a bit of a pillock sometimes.

 

[Hex]

I'm not a huge fan of killing either -- and I do tend to find it offensive and difficult.

I tend to find most things offensive if the group being attacked is generally weak or attacked in society -- for example, older people, overweight people or people with intellectual impairments. It feels like bullying, and is both unimaginative and unpleasant.

I feel more strongly about it when it seems to be the author's attitude rather than a character's. Apparently in a lot of short fiction submitted to magazines, someone overweight is automatically stupid/ bad. I find that intensely depressing.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Do the Frankie Boyle test... take the most offensive comedian who has managed to stay mainstream, and ask yourself would they get away with it? Whilst also understanding that if you go with an offensive character, you will turn some people off. That's the risk you have to decide whether or not to take.

@ Mouse, I did wonder if Aber was referring to your MC, too. But he's not deliberately offensive, he's just self centred to the point of confusion, bless him.

 

[Mouse]

Is that my pillock, Aber?

I love writing characters who'll say whatever the hell is in their heads, but you have to balance it. My MC is a prat. He's selfish, offensive (though not purposely), cowardly... But hopefully I've shown people that he's not a bad person so that they still like him.

If you're going to do offensive, you have to make the character likeable.

 

[Abernovo]

Erm, er, it might be, Mouse. Hey, you've just been referenced in a literary discussion.

I'll add something after reading Hex's comment. If the offensive remarks are truly prejudicial, bigotry, or bullying behaviour, then it is completely over the line in my opinion. Then you have a character who's deliberately unlikeable. Balance is important. So is the journey, the story arc, whereby the character may come to realise that they've hurt someone that they care about by their words and actions.

 

[Mouse]

Erm, er, it might be, Mouse. Hey, you've just been referenced in a literary discussion.

I'll print it out and frame it.

I'll add to what I said in that I agree with Aber. If it's someone who's supposed to be a bad person and they're offensive and you don't need the reader to like them, then that's ok... Sort of. I mean, I'd hate a massively homophobic or misogynistic character that had no redeeming qualities, were purposely homophobic or misogynistic and were supposed to be a good guy. If they were like that and were supposed to be a bad guy, I'd be ok but I'd want them to die a horrible death.

 

[allmywires]

Most of my friends are so-called equal-opportunity offenders and I find them hilarious

Since I'm not great at characterisation I can't really pull off the loveable a*sehole (as Mouse does so well...) but I'd like to, and they're often my favourite characters when I'm reading. Can't stand a bloody goody-two-shoes. They're the ones that need a good kicking.

I would add though that I think Frankie Boyle is disgusting because he's not doing it in good humour - imho - it comes across as he actually believes it. There's quite a lot I'd forgive in a character if they're made likeable. As always, it comes down to execution. Good writers can get away with almost anything.

 

[Ursa major]

Define likeable.

TBBT's Sheldon Cooper often says things that are offensive. Some of them are even meant to be so (although I've got the impression that his deliberately offensive remarks tend to be a lot milder); most of (?) the non-PC ones tend also to be mild and are usually seen to come from his ignorance. The bulk of sheldon's offensiveness simply () emerges from Sheldon's belief in his innate superiority.

Is Sheldon likeable? More importantly, perhaps: would the show be even half as funny if this (monster of a?) character wasn't at or near the centre of it?

 

[Mouse]

Is Sheldon likeable?

No. I absolutely detest Sheldon. Most vile, irritating character ever. He's not even funny and the whole show seems to be centred around him. Can't stick it.

 

[allmywires]

Is Sheldon likeable? More importantly, perhaps: would the show be even half as funny if this (monster of a?) character wasn't at or near the centre of it?

IMHO, Sheldon's funny for the first few episodes, and gets reeealllly tedious really quickly. Some people (notably those who 'don't get science' and think 'nerds are weird') find it hilarious though.

 

[Ursa major]

Whether or not Sheldon himself is funny or not, his behaviour is often the driver of a particular episode's plot, to the extent that one could say that TBBT is a situation comedy where the situation is 'coexisting with Sheldon', just as Steptoe & Son's situation is the father and son coexisting** (as it is, to some extent, in Frasier.)






** - They are each other's monsters.

 

[allmywires]

True, but one of my personal super-hatreds of BBT is Penny and Leonard's pseudo-parent schtick with Sheldon. I'll turn off immediately. It really raises my hackles and I'm not sure why. And Amy. Good god, don't get me started on Amy.

....on topic, I would say Sheldon is more of the annoyingly dislikeable character rather than a morally repugnant one, which is a different kettle of fish. I've never seen it, but I imagine it's like the show Dexter. He's a serial killer...yet you sympathise with him? Breaking Bad as well - is the fact he's providing for his family after his death worth what he does in order to facilitate it?

 

[Karn Maeshalanadae]

Whether or not Sheldon himself is funny or not, his behaviour is often the driver of a particular episode's plot, to the extent that one could say that TBBT is a situation comedy where the situation is 'coexisting with Sheldon', just as Steptoe & Son's situation is the father and son coexisting** (as it is, to some extent, in Frasier.)






** - They are each other's monsters.

I was just about to mention Frasier. The difference with Frasier to TBBT, though, is that they put in enough crazy situations that were different enough to each other to keep it interesting through most of it. Not only that, but, while Frasier and Niles tended to have a snobby attitude towards the common man, that very attitude and pride of theirs would backfire upon them, something that really doesn't seem to happen with Sheldon very much-or at least, not enough for him to ever grow compassion or a conscience about anything. Not to mention the fact that Sheldon is asexual, and as a result, TBBT can't really play a lot of the cards that Frasier did to set up situations that I had found really quite ridiculous and fairly enjoyable.


But back to the main topic...


First off, I do find that PC can be taken a mite too far. I mean, at one point, Australia was considering to make Santa "less jolly" because of, well, you would know. Beyond that...everything in moderation. Also remember that humanizing has to swing both ways. Just as you can't get away with a Mary Sue hero anymore, you can't get away with a totally evil, completely heartless character either. Antagonists need to have their redeeming qualities, just as protagonists need to have their flaws. Can you have characters that say and do offensive things? Sure. Just don't overdo it, and maybe at one point have them realize what they're doing and slowly let them build a conscience.

 

[Ursa major]

I dislike the pseudo parent stuff as well, AMW: a one-off joke, one that's now well past its sell-by-date, being used to produce deus ex machina outcomes.


I've never read a Dexter book, but did watch the first two seasons (when they were on ITV). One does tend to sympathise with him: he can't help the way he is (probably, and he thinks this is true), and so he directs his skills towards some of public good. I'm not sure I'd be as sympathetic if it were to be set in the UK: many of those that Dexter tops might be executed in the States, whereas they wouldn't/couldn't be here.

 

[Ursa major]

I agree that Frasier is far more sophisticated, Karn, with far more going on: many different situations (in the family and at the radio station); clever word play; some stylish cringe** making.






** - I tend to think of the UK "sitcom" The Office as Frasier - or, at a push, Fawlty Towers - without any of the things that makes those shows funny. (I haven't seen the US version of the office: I suspect it has had jokes added to make it watchable.)

 

[Karn Maeshalanadae]

It has, Ursa, but it's absolutely horrendous. I've seen very few UK shows, Doctor Who being about the only one I've seen more than one episode of. That and Benny Hill, but he's a different matter entirely. Merlin sounds good but I never did catch it when he had cable television and now we don't get any decent channels.


I tried watching the UK version of Whose Line, but for me it just wasn't as funny, and I like to think that I'm more in tune with British humor than many Americans would be. I just suppose the silly antics of our version of the show had spoiled me.

 

[allmywires]

I'm not sure I'd be as sympathetic if it were to be set in the UK: many of those that Dexter tops might be executed in the States, whereas they wouldn't/couldn't be here.

That's really interesting, actually - so it could be seen as he's killing people who are dead men walking (since they would be executed for their crimes) but in the UK, where they wouldn't be put to death, it would be different? Interesting because of course they'd be committing the same crimes, just under different judicial systems.

 

[Karn Maeshalanadae]

That's really interesting, actually - so it could be seen as he's killing people who are dead men walking (since they would be executed for their crimes) but in the UK, where they wouldn't be put to death, it would be different? Interesting because of course they'd be committing the same crimes, just under different judicial systems.

And that, my friend, would raise the same controversial arguments that Death with Dignity rose, but that's an entirely different matter and one I won't delve further into.

 

[hopewrites]

everything I could have added to this discussion has already been pretty well canvased so I'll just throw in my two-cents worth that it's better to have your characters be true to themselves than pander to every PC guideline out there, and as an author, presentation of the characters is all up to you. If you want to spotlight some of your characters major human flaws (all humans have flaws, dont let any of them tell you different) because it gives them some where to grow, or dumps them in precarious situations that end up driving the plot, then do so. If you are just out to notch your binding with offended people, then I'd suggest doing it under a pseudonym so the shrapnel of peoples offense doesnt void the warranty on your life. Because the only people I know who enjoy being offended, also enjoy being ignorant and violent. Everyone else I know tends to avoid those things that offend them most.