- This topic has 6 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Ā TOPIC OF THE WEEK
What was the most boring main character you’ve read about? And what made them so boring?
I am going to honest here. For me, the most boring main character that I’ve ever read about was Chris Redston from Dreamlander by K.M. Weiland.
I really love K.M. Weiland, but this main character… just wasn’t it. What I think made him so boring was that he had no motivation for why he wanted to achieve the story goal.
The story’s goal was to save a kingdom that was in his dreams from the bad guy. But since it was just in a dream world why did it even matter? If he died in the dream world he would just stop dreaming, not actually die. And when he wasn’t sleeping and trying to save the useless kingdom, all he did was hide in his hotel room, eat take-out food, and watch television.
And whenever he did do something moderately important, (which was rare), the only reason why he did it was that someone else told him to. Not because he wanted to himself.
I could rant forever with my frustrations with this book, but I want to hear from you.
What was the most boring main character you’ve read about? And what made them so boring?
- Rank: Bumbling Henchman
- Total Posts: 3
I can only choose one?
Hmmm… Let me think…
Probably Jason from The Heroes of Olympus Series.
He just had no personality. There wasn’t anything special about him and he got along with everybody.
Plus he was way too overpowered so the author kept having to knock him out! He probably got knocked out more times in one book than all the other characters in the entire series!
100% Eragon from the Inheritance cycle. Mainly because he is just your typical Chosen One who doesn’t really have a personality.
Aaaand if I could choose one more I would say Thomas from the Maze Runner series. *gets terrifying flashbacks* ugh, he was really boring. His character was done a lot better in the movies though. š
I have yet to read the Inheritance Cycle, and I must say, this doesn’t make me any more excited to do so.
@purenostalgia
Oh, yes… Jason. All I remember about him was that he was very forgettable.
Probably the weakest protagonist Riordan has ever written.
@erinramm XD Yes, pore Eragon; I kinda started to like him after the first four books…oh, wait. XD He does have some strong points, I’m sure, I just can’t think of them at the moment. I enjoyed that series, but there were definitely parts where it almost began to get boring.
And from my own world-builder point of view, it could have used some added depth. Though he did tap into some interesting things; I wasn’t interested in a few of his ideas.
Despite this all, I found the series very interesting, and I’m sure I’ll read it sometime again in the future. Have you read Paolini’s The Fork, The Witch, and The Worm?
@kathleenramm I’m not really sure which main character would be the most boring for me; I don’t come across them that often, and when I do, I’ll probably forget them…I just really can’t think of any right now.@leon-fleming haha yeah. I enjoyed the Inheritance Cycle, too, especially the first book. I’ve read the first one about two or three times now, but the flaws of the last three books make them rather difficult to re-read.
It’s been a while since I’ve read it, so I don’t really remember all that Paolini did with the world-building, but now I’m curious. What were some things that could have used more depth in world-building terms?
I actually haven’t gotten around to readingĀ The Fork, The Witch, and The Worm.Ā Is it worth a read?
@erinramm XD Yep.
Well, I haven’t read them in a while, so I’ll just go off what I remember. He focused too much on the non-essential, extra features of his world building. That is, the “society”, “culture”, the “daily life” of his fictional people groups. Now, there is definitively an element of production that needs to be completed concerning these topics of fantasy world-building. But he did what so many modern authors are doing today: he filled in an interesting yet unnecessary and excessive amount of details in about his peoples and so forth. This was unnecessary and honestly took away from that feature in fantasy which is not like the modern world. The very idea behind calling the fantasy genreĀ fantasy is for the point of expressing the meaning of the word in relation to the genre. It is the genre “of imaginative fiction involving magic and adventure, especially in a setting other than the real world.” I quote the dictionary. Another definition of the wordĀ fantasy is “an idea with no basis in reality”. Thus, my point is almost entirely made: to write fantasy is decidedly NOT to write things modeled after the modern world. I can see that Paolini definitively took time to work on his world-building, but it seems like he just modeled a few core elements of his world after actual things, ideas, etc of this modern age. Governments, kingdoms, etc and the way in which they are comprised.
Take a look at Tolkien; he did indeed work on this, but only to a certain extent. And he didn’t focus his attention on the nature of the structure of his cultures when in his writing. Rather, he focused on his characters, history, and things like that.
But anyways, I could be wrong, and I’m sure there are some loose ends up there, but my brain is fried right now, so…XD
Yes, I’d say it is worth a read. The Fork, The Witch, and The Worm that is. It’s interesting, if more of a fan pleaser, or the integration of fantastical ideas for future novels.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.