In order to write a successful story, you need the worst protagonist for the plot. Hear me out: the main character has to be the least suited, least able, and least competent to overcome the difficulties the plot throws at them. At least, at the beginning. Otherwise, where’s the struggle?
This is another idea from writer and coach Daniel David Wallace, who talks about the protagonist stuck in the wrong play. For example:
- Hamlet fails to enact justice (or revenge) for the death of his father. His problem? Indecision.
- Othello fails to see past his jealousy; he trusts the wrong people.
What would happen if you swapped protagonists?
- The incisive Hamlet will sniff out Iago in their first meeting.
- Man of action Othello will kill Claudius before the end of Act One.
But Shakespeare knows how to spin out a dilemma beyond ten minutes.
How many detectives does it take?
A good, real-world detective will do the legwork and solve the case in a tedious and thorough way. Over many weeks or months. And the case isn’t over until they present their testimony in court. Frankly, most police work is deadly dull.
Your typical crime novel detective pings around like a pinball, They flail around, fail to lock in all the suspects, bog down in their personal problems, annoy their colleagues and senior management. Their rash, emotional decisions cut corners and probably get more victims killed. They try to solve the case solo, or with the help of a single side-kick. Rarely does a fictional detective utilize all the resources available within his or her department.
You really don’t want any of these ‘great detectives’ assigned to your case in real life.
No justice without drama
Daniel’s argues the protagonist has to be bad at dealing with the plot.
There’s no satisfaction in killing the usurper or sniffing out the malicious troll in in Act One. What fills three hundred pages if the detective cross-references the witness statements and makes an arrest on day three?
So the protagonist can’t come to a decision too soon. They must wrestle with their problems. The plot presents external problems; a series of events occur that get in the way. But the character’s arc of change must overcome their internal problems of wants, needs and misbeliefs.
Hamlet’s indecision means that he waits too long to act. Only after he’s poisoned does he kill Claudius. Othello only recognizes the rash, delusional response of his jealousy after he kills Desdemona. These fatal flaws seal their tragedies.
And all those fictional detectives? Their rugged individualism, self-belief and, yes, arrogance overcomes any adherence to sound procedure. Plus or minus a drink problem, sleeping with the main suspect, or failing to cross-check witness statements. That’s until some act of individual genius reveals the truth. Case closed, trauma and consequences notwithstanding.
No pride without prejudice
You want more proof? Elizabeth Bennett’s willful individualism and prejudice overcomes all good sense for three hundred pages. Any of her peers would have snatched Darcy’s hand at the first asking. This is how little she values her family’s future security. Poverty threatens every day, but Lizzie refuses the sacrifice demanded of her. She’s a terrible person. A terrible protagonist. She can’t deal with the plot. But she has values, standards, an arc of change. That’s why we love her. She’s a great protagonist.
Snow White? Too trusting of strange old women handing out apples. Bridget Jones? Can’t cope with the life she dreams of as a modern single woman. Nicholas Nickleby? Can’t stand on the sidelines while injustice unfolds before his eyes. Pip from Great Expectations? He’s just the wrong protagonist. Really. He does nothing.
A girl who sees the future
At the beginning of my fantasy series, Jovanka is a terrible protagonist. She believes in her future as fixed and immutable. She clings to visions, follows her one set path no matter the cost or the sacrifice. All through The Ghost and the Vipers, she makes rash choices about all the things that don’t matter. No lack of action there, but never the right actions. Until new visions reveal new paths. She has choices. She must decide for herself, choose her own path.
That’s when the worst protagonist for the plot turns things around, right before the end.
What about those hyper-competent characters like James Bond and Sherlock Holmes who are EXACTLY the best protagonists for the plot?
Good point; you found the 1% that proves the 99% rule. Both are flat-arc characters. We don’t read to see them change, we read to see them do what they do with that hyper-competence against insurmountable odds or impossible mysteries. The plot still trips them up, but we stick with them to see how they adapt and overcome.
Thanks