# Can a racist character be likable?



## zizekpress (Mar 9, 2011)

Tough question. I'm pretty sure they can be compelling...but likable?

Any examples from fiction where it's been done?


----------



## Cal_Noble (Mar 5, 2011)

I think for a novel with a "racist" to be successful it must achive one or more of the following:

Be social commentary
Have a valid character arc (possibly falls under previous)
Be such a compelling character that people will overlook his racism (some people cannot set aside belief systems while reading, whether those beliefs are religious, political, social, etc)
Be comical (think Archie Bunker... though even that might not fly in today's PC atmosphere)
So over the top that it draws the ire of a vocal group who inadvertently advertise for you by claiming your book MUST be burned!!! (yes, with three !!!)

Just my thoughts

EDIT: I thought this asked "can a book with a racist character..." 
I think the above still holds true. This has been my fascination over the past few years/novels&#8230; trying to show that no matter what someone is, he or she is not ALL bad. There are redeeming qualities in everyone. Even Dhamer's mama loved him. Capone's friends thought he was great. So, there has to be something else that balances whatever sins he commits.


----------



## zizekpress (Mar 9, 2011)

Cal - Yeah, the racist who is also a bit of a clown is how i tried to do it in my book.

Another tactic is to have other characters to show their unease/disgust about the racist things the guy says. It's easier if the racist character has a minor role in the story and the main characters are the disapproving ones.

For your book, I guess most of the characters are racist, so it's more difficult...just go for social commentary or gritty realism. And if you get accused of glamourising racism then you get a whole lot more in sales...probably...well, it worked for 'Trainspotting.'


----------



## Cal_Noble (Mar 5, 2011)

zizekpress said:


> For your book, I guess most of the characters are racist, so it's more difficult...just go for social commentary or gritty realism. And if you get accused of glamourising racism then you get a whole lot more in sales...probably...well, it worked for 'Trainspotting.'


Haha. I'll take it.
I went for gritty realism.
I just hope readers will trust me long enough to see why the realism is there. Those betas who have gone the distance loved it. We'll see how people who have no reason to trust me receive it.


----------



## KJ Kron (Mar 24, 2011)

Are you asking this question as a reader or writer?  As a writer, I wouldn't attempt it.  As a reader, I suppose the character could be likable - but there are different degrees of like, different degrees of racism, and different degrees of writing skill.  I've read a book with a Korean character that was racist against the Japaneese - and in the process of reading the book, discovered a history I didn't know about.  I could understand the racism - even though I'm not racist against the Japaneese.


----------



## zizekpress (Mar 9, 2011)

Cal_Noble said:


> Haha. I'll take it.
> I went for gritty realism.
> I just hope readers will trust me long enough to see why the realism is there. Those betas who have gone the distance loved it. We'll see how people who have no reason to trust me receive it.


where's it set?


----------



## zizekpress (Mar 9, 2011)

KJ Kron said:


> Are you asking this question as a reader or writer? As a writer, I wouldn't attempt it. As a reader, I suppose the character could be likable - but there are different degrees of like, different degrees of racism, and different degrees of writing skill. I've read a book with a Korean character that was racist against the Japaneese - and in the process of reading the book, discovered a history I didn't know about. I could understand the racism - even though I'm not racist against the Japaneese.


I'm asking as reader and writer. I think it's a challenge for a writer, perhaps the ultimate challenge.

Yeah, the Korean/Chinese racism towards the Japanese is very understandable from many of their people's perspective considering the recent history of WW2 and what kind of textbooks they have at schools. Apparently, the Japanese don't study the war, though that may have changed by now. And it doesn't matter how much the Japanese have changed since 1945 and how they don't have an army just a self-defence force, because a lot of the Chinese/Koreans won't be persuaded by this, they still hate them.

But what if the racism comes from a white american guy from New Orleans who doesn't like black people? Is it harder to make them likable?


----------



## Cal_Noble (Mar 5, 2011)

zizekpress said:


> where's it set?


Ultimately, Alabama. The majority of it takes place in a hotel... (the title ... Hotel Sangria)

but it begins with skinheads in chicago, the homeless man in Atlanta, and a freaky man wandering around an alabama cotton field. LOL.

Seriously, I don't try to glamorize racism. I just try to be honest to my characters. Some have big warts and are unashamed of them. Others put makeup on their blemishes.


----------



## theraven (Dec 30, 2009)

Depending on the situation and the time it's set in, I might be able to find a racist character likable as long as the views and actions of the character aren't over the top ugly and violent toward those of another race. And in a way I'd expect part of the story arc to be about that character changing, especially if it's a point of view character. If the book was set in present time, I doubt I'd be able to find anything redeeming about a racist character especially if its a POV character and one I'm suppose to like. I'd avoid buying the book as I wouldn't want to spend time with that person.


----------



## Mo (Mar 25, 2011)

I think that as long as you give the character other redeeming qualities that anyone can be likable, even if they're criminals or have ideologies that we disagree with. It's better to have your characters be honest and realistic than to try and sweep stuff under the rug for the sake of political correctness; any intelligent reader will understand that it's the characters and setting that give rise to these character-flaws, not necessarily the author themselves.


----------



## R. Doug (Aug 14, 2010)

Just off the top of my head:

Archie Bunker
George Jefferson


----------



## KJ Kron (Mar 24, 2011)

White guy from New Orleans?  It depends how you do it.  I've seen fiction with a worse character creating sympathy.  I'm thinking of the Kevin Bacon movie where he's a child molester - which I feel is worse than being a racist - and the movie created some sympathy.  So can it be done?  I guess.


----------



## hughewil (Mar 14, 2011)

I think it also depends on the kind of racism.

Is it racism born of hate or is it simply racism because of lack of understanding of another culture and xenophobia.  

One is more easily overcome and can be somewhat understood.

Also is the character redeemable?  Like Ed Norton in American History X, he may start out being despised but transform into a likeable charater.


----------



## zizekpress (Mar 9, 2011)

I guess certain character arcs make the racism easier to take...the transformation role, like Ed Norton in American History X...but maybe it's the characters who just are and don't change in the novel that are harder to do/write...

Also, you have characters who are killers that can be more likable than racist characters...is this weird?


----------



## zizekpress (Mar 9, 2011)

R. Doug said:


> Just off the top of my head:
> 
> Archie Bunker
> George Jefferson


I've heard the first name, but not sure where he's from...

A lot of James Ellroy's characters are racist. In fact, it's almost like a given in most of his books. Not sure if many of them are likable...


----------



## Patrick Skelton (Jan 7, 2011)

Sure, why not?


----------



## telracs (Jul 12, 2009)

why do you want him to be "likable"?  if he's compelling and the story makes a point, great.  but i'm not going to invite him out for drinks with friends.


----------



## R. Doug (Aug 14, 2010)

Archie Bunker was the bigoted character played by Carroll O'Connor in the '70s comedy series _All In The Family_. George Jefferson was the black equivalent played by Sherman Helmsley first in _All In The Family_ and later in the spinoff series _The Jeffersons_.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

There was a thread over at Amazon recently asking if suicide can be funny. Most people said no, I said yes -- and went on about gallows humor and how laughter heals. I think that it takes talent to make suicide funny, and it will always miss with some people, depending on their experiences and if their nature is to find humor in tragedy. 

I think this is the same thing. Yes, a bigot can be likable, but it's a challenge to do so, to explain the why, to find the humanity there. To not, in seeking to redeem the character, excuse or marginalize the bad parts of this person.


----------



## CaitLondon (Oct 12, 2010)

I think you can bring out good humanistic points, i.e. rotten to the core, but he's a perfect father to his kids. Some value in there that is common, upstanding, a connect to the reader.


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

The cynic in me says that a racist character can easily be likable, if his/her racial prejudices match those of the reader, especially if it's displayed at least somewhat subtly as opposed to an over-the-top, xenophobic sort of racism.


----------



## Mo (Mar 25, 2011)

NogDog said:


> The cynic in me says that a racist character can easily be likable, if his/her racial prejudices match those of the reader


I don't think that's fair, I mean maybe for some people who actually are racist that may be the case, but non-racist people can find racist characters likeable. Just as non-criminals can find some criminals likeable etc.

I can empathize with lots of people who are different from me, it doesn't mean I agree with everything they think or do.

Honestly I think people make too big of a deal out of things like this.


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

Mo said:


> I don't think that's fair,...


No one said life would be fair. 



> ...I mean maybe for some people who actually are racist that may be the case, but non-racist people can find racist characters likeable. Just as non-criminals can find some criminals likeable etc.


I never said they couldn't be likable in other circumstances, just that it would be easier. Frankly, I suspect you would find that many people who claim not to be racist are, in fact, to some degree racist -- not strongly so, not flagrantly so, often trying to overcome it and likely at times embarrassed by it when they detect it; but IMHO the truly and totally non-racist human being is a very rare creature. (There are, after all, many degrees and types of racism, from those who would advocate genocide against one race to those who would sub-consciously be more likely to hire someone of their own race over someone of another race.)



> I can empathize with lots of people who are different from me, it doesn't mean I agree with everything they think or do.
> 
> Honestly I think people make too big of a deal out of things like this.


Probably, but with such a hot-button topic, the author would almost certainly be walking a tightrope if the objective was to create a character who was both a racist (in anything more than the most minor ways) and likeable (not just empathizeable, if I may coin a word). I am _not_ saying it cannot be done nor that the _only_ way it would work is if the reader at some level agreed with the character -- just that otherwise it could be very tricky and susceptible to a bad reader experience if the author did not handle it just right.


----------



## Mo (Mar 25, 2011)

NogDog said:


> Frankly, I suspect you would find that many people who claim not to be racist are, in fact, to some degree racist -- not strongly so, not flagrantly so, often trying to overcome it and likely at times embarrassed by it when they detect it; but IMHO the truly and totally non-racist human being is a very rare creature.


You're probably right about that!

I think this applies. 








> I am _not_ saying it cannot be done nor that the _only_ way it would work is if the reader at some level agreed with the character -- just that otherwise it could be very tricky and susceptible to a bad reader experience if the author did not handle it just right.


Fair enough. 

P.S. Fellow Terry Pratchett fan here!


----------



## R. Doug (Aug 14, 2010)

MichelleR said:


> There was a thread over at Amazon recently asking if suicide can be funny.


_M*A*S*H_, Donald Sutherland, Eliot Gould, Sally Kellerman, Fox, 1970.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

R. Doug said:


> _M*A*S*H_, Donald Sutherland, Eliot Gould, Sally Kellerman, Fox, 1970.


That was mentioned, also Harold and Maude.


----------



## JMCornwell (Apr 1, 2011)

It depends on the racist and the writer. 

There is something admirable about a racist who is open and honest and never deviates from his core principles and even more so about a racist who is willing to admit he is a racist and is willing to see things from a different perspective.

I just finished SWEET JIMINY by Kristin Gore and one of the characters, a doctor, is racist. He is likable before he sees people as more than just black and white. What changes him is having to really look at the corpses of a father and daughter, both black, that he saw murdered. He was in the pack of racists who ran them off the road and he stood and watched while they were murdered and tossed in the river. Although he waits 40 years before coming forward with the truth, he is a cantankerous man with a certain charm and flair, and he deals even-handedly with everyone around him. He volunteers at the local swimming pool as a lifeguard and he sits in the local bar with his friends and drinks and works on his history of the area. Aside from the flaw in his character, he is not only likable, but he is memorable.


----------



## gryeates (Feb 28, 2011)

Racism is an aspect of human behaviour that is deeply unpleasant but, if the character is well-presented, I think a reader can still empathise with them. I've given otherwise 'likable' characters some racist traits in my books because they are set in a time period when it was more prevalent and socially acceptable but also to be accurate from personal accounts that I had read by people in that time.


----------



## Wunderkind (Jan 14, 2009)

NogDog said:


> I never said they couldn't be likable in other circumstances, just that it would be easier. Frankly, I suspect you would find that many people who claim not to be racist are, in fact, to some degree racist -- not strongly so, not flagrantly so, often trying to overcome it and likely at times embarrassed by it when they detect it; but IMHO the truly and totally non-racist human being is a very rare creature. (There are, after all, many degrees and types of racism, from those who would advocate genocide against one race to those who would sub-consciously be more likely to hire someone of their own race over someone of another race.)


I would argue that being a racist (belief of one race's superiority over another's) is a higher threshold than being prejudiced (adverse opinion without adequate facts). I would agree with a statement that it might be rare to find a person that had absolutely no prejudices, but I don't know that I would agree that racism is equally common. Could be wrong...


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

It's hard but can be done.  Archie Bunker was a good example earlier.

Clint Eastwood's character in Gran Tourino.  But I suppose that's different as that character changed through the movie and redeemed his self on that front.


----------



## JMCornwell (Apr 1, 2011)

Wunderkind said:


> I would argue that being a racist (belief of one race's superiority over another's) is a higher threshold than being prejudiced (adverse opinion without adequate facts). I would agree with a statement that it might be rare to find a person that had absolutely no prejudices, but I don't know that I would agree that racism is equally common. Could be wrong...


I think it depends where you live.


----------



## Wunderkind (Jan 14, 2009)

A fair point. Racism may be more prevalent in certain places than others, but I still believe that racism is less common that prejudice.


----------



## JMCornwell (Apr 1, 2011)

Wunderkind said:


> A fair point. Racism may be more prevalent in certain places than others, but I still believe that racism is less common that prejudice.


Prejudices tend to go with groups: fat people, blacks, Arabs, Jews, smart people, dumb people, ********, etc. In a sense, I think that is racism, although the racial boundaries are not so well defined. Basically, it comes down to difference. Whoever is different in one way or another gets the prejudicial boot. It's so much easier to turn prejudice into a racial issue because that is a difference that is much easier to see, much more tangible.

I think we try to be less racially prejudiced, but it's still there. I think it's hard-wired.


----------



## jason10mm (Apr 7, 2009)

I would postulate that EVERY human is negatively biased towards some cultural, ethnic, gender, religious, or physical trait, thus we are ALL racist to some degree. Is anyone likable then?

Having a character be racist must serve a goal, just like having a character that is tall, young, a male, likes cookies, prefers the sword to a gun, flys starships, or bites their nails. Figure out the goal and what you want to say to your readers and that will tell you if the racist character trait is necessary. As for the character being likable, a well written likable character is likable, regardless of what they do. A poorly written character that is supposed to be likable, not so much.

If the book's central focus is on the racism then the characters growth towards or away from it is key, whether a specific reader likes the character will depend on their feeling about the racism. If the book is about something else and the racism is just a character trait then I doubt it will matter much to the character as a whole, how the racism is expressed (for laughs, as a plot point, or whatever) can contribute to their likablility (that funny Italian, how he hates the Polish! versus an anti-semetic WW2 American soldier who relentlessly kills the Jews he is ostensibly supposed to be saving).


----------



## JMCornwell (Apr 1, 2011)

jason10mm said:


> I would postulate that EVERY human is negatively biased towards some cultural, ethnic, gender, religious, or physical trait, thus we are ALL racist to some degree. Is anyone likable then?


_The i Tetralogy_ was a book about racism, specifically racism as it pertained to a group of men in a concentration camp in WWII Germany. The first part was horrific, but not without a sense of hope. What was most horrific was the second part of the story where one of the most brutal German guards tells things from his point of view. What he did was horrific, but the real impact of the story was how much I found myself seeing things from his POV and finding it rational. That was the big shock, not that he was a brutal guard, but that he was an average human who became a monster, and yet was still, on some level, understandable.

We all have prejudices, try as we might to hide or disguise or deny them. Rational human beings do their best to work through those prejudices, but they are still there. What makes a truly great story is how the writer portrays and deals with them, how he draws the reader into the world and makes it seem rational, believable, even understandable. _Sweet Jiminy didn't make prejudice seem rational, but did underscore how, even in modern times, it still lies just below the surface, no matter how people try to qualify it. It's subtle and therefore much more poisonous. Bringing that out, however you do it, is walking a tightrope high in the air between two skyscrapers when the wind is blowing. It can be done, and done with finesse. I think that's what writers, good writers, do, hold a mirror up to life and show the real face._


----------



## The Real McCoy (Oct 8, 2010)

Would anyone like to have a go at defining what a racist is?


----------



## JMCornwell (Apr 1, 2011)

The Real McCoy said:


> Would anyone like to have a go at defining what a racist is?


You mean other than someone who hates people of different races and considers them less evolved, less intelligent, and less human than they are, someone they can pin all the ills of mankind and the world onto and use his race to make it palatable because he's inferior?


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

The dad from the TV show "All in the Family" was very racist, and yet the show was very popular.


----------



## JMCornwell (Apr 1, 2011)

BTackitt said:


> The dad from the TV show "All in the Family" was very racist, and yet the show was very popular.


Even still, Archie Bunker, for all his prejudices and racism, was funny and human. He had his good side, too, and the show was a comedy.


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

The Real McCoy said:


> Would anyone like to have a go at defining what a racist is?


From the Merriam-Webster web site:


a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
racial prejudice or discrimination

The first is perhaps the more extreme definition: that those of one race are innately superior to another race. The second can include that but could also just(?) be a dislike or hatred for another race causing one to be prejudiced against them without necessarily any (strong) belief that one's race is genetically or otherwise inherently superior.


----------



## JMCornwell (Apr 1, 2011)

NogDog said:


> From the Merriam-Webster web site:
> 
> 
> a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
> ...


Looks suspiciously like what I said.


----------



## JFHilborne (Jan 22, 2011)

I think it would be tough but possible to write a likable racist character. The reasons he/she is racist would be need to be understandable and valid. It might also depend on how they deal with their racism, whether they act on it etc.... I agree with an earlier comment that they would also need redeeming qualities to be acceptable/likable to readers. Anything is possible.


----------



## JMCornwell (Apr 1, 2011)

JFHilborne said:


> I think it would be tough but possible to write a likable racist character. The reasons he/she is racist would be need to be understandable and valid. It might also depend on how they deal with their racism, whether they act on it etc.... I agree with an earlier comment that they would also need redeeming qualities to be acceptable/likable to readers. Anything is possible.


The best characters are 3-dimensional. Just because someone is a racist, doesn't mean he doesn't have good qualities. Consider a man. Hard working, family man, at odds with his parents and sister, feels as though he has been marginalized, set aside. He loves his family and works hard for them. He tills the earth every spring and plants a garden so his family will have fresh vegetables. He adores his children and grandchildren and every holiday is a special occasion. On the side he buys old houses and rehabs them while his wife chooses paint, wallpaper and furnishings to complement his work. They are a team and his family is tight knit. His only flaw is that he is a racist. His children have no such prejudices and call him on it all the time, but he is a dyed in the wool racist. The heart of the story is what made him that way? What could a black man, or Amerindian or Arab (you choose) have done to him in the past to make him despise the whole race? He is likable in every other respect, but this one.


----------



## JFHilborne (Jan 22, 2011)

@JMCornwell: Exactly. A character like that is intriguing and believable. Readers might dislike his racist attitude but get plenty of other qualities about him to like.


----------



## JMCornwell (Apr 1, 2011)

JFHilborne said:


> @JMCornwell: Exactly. A character like that is intriguing and believable. Readers might dislike his racist attitude but get plenty of other qualities about him to like.


That's what makes writing such fun and such a challenge, creating characters that live and breathe -- and make mistakes.


----------



## purplepen79 (May 6, 2010)

mooshie78 said:


> Clint Eastwood's character in Gran Tourino. But I suppose that's different as that character changed through the movie and redeemed his self on that front.


Love that movie--I cried buckets. I think just about anything is possible when it comes to creative license--however, it may take a creative genius to pull it off and have people still reading or watching in 50 years. I've noticed a number of people mention how much they love _Gone With the Wind _ on other threads. I love that book too--wonderful romance--but it's full of scenes that make me cringe. But still I keep reading it because I know it was written in a different time, so I take it not only as a novel but as a representation of its time and how far we've come since then. If a writer today had written it, I wouldn't feel the same way about it. Context is everything.

I wonder what attitudes we take for granted in today's world that will be considered prejudiced or unenlightened in 50 years.


----------



## JeanneM (Mar 21, 2011)

In order for me to have a liking or empathy towards a racist character, I think the following would have to apply:

1.)  He was brought up into it so didn't have much of a chance to feel differently.
2.)  In his heart he isn't really an evil person.
3.)  He needs to learn and evolve during the book.

In the Heat of the Night was a very popular movie and television series and if I recall, the main character(Rod Steiger in the movie...Carol O' Connor in the TV series) was pretty popular but you could see his evolution during these shows from someone who was raised into it into someone who learned to think for himself and learn.

If those qualities aren't present I would have a hard time liking him.  But then again, maybe some characters don't need to be liked; depending on his role and importance in the book.  Good luck with it.


----------



## JMCornwell (Apr 1, 2011)

purplepen79 said:


> But still I keep reading it because I know it was written in a different time, so I take it not only as a novel but as a representation of its time and how far we've come since then. If a writer today had written it, I wouldn't feel the same way about it. Context is everything.
> 
> I wonder what attitudes we take for granted in today's world that will be considered prejudiced or unenlightened in 50 years.


As you said, context is everything. A writer today could've written that kind of book and it would sell, but not taken out of its time.


----------



## The Real McCoy (Oct 8, 2010)

JMCornwell said:


> You mean other than someone who hates people of different races and considers them less evolved, less intelligent, and less human than they are, someone they can pin all the ills of mankind and the world onto and use his race to make it palatable because he's inferior?


Yes, I most certainly do mean someone other than all that. Suppose someone doesn't hate people of other races, doesn't consider them to be less evolved, doesn't consider them less intelligent, less human than their own race. Suppose this person takes no offence whatsoever at anyone who pokes fun at his race or accent just as long as it's OK for him (or her) to make jokes about other races because they're different, or perhaps mimics their accent, despite being good friends with many of these people. Are you saying that person isn't racist?


----------



## JMCornwell (Apr 1, 2011)

The Real McCoy said:


> Yes, I most certainly do mean someone other than all that. Suppose someone doesn't hate people of other races, doesn't consider them to be less evolved, doesn't consider them less intelligent, less human than their own race. Suppose this person takes no offence whatsoever at anyone who pokes fun at his race or accent just as long as it's OK for him (or her) to make jokes about other races because they're different, or perhaps mimics their accent, despite being good friends with many of these people. Are you saying that person isn't racist?


Racists come in all flavors, yes, even with a smile at their own jokes, and hate is the motivator even if it doesn't burn red hot. The subtle hate is just as hateful as the virulent red hate.

Not everyone who mimics another accent is being prejudiced or racist. Sometimes they're actors.


----------



## R. Doug (Aug 14, 2010)

The Real McCoy said:


> or perhaps mimics their accent, despite being good friends with many of these people. Are you saying that person isn't racist?


I'll say it. I lived in England for two years. I became very adept at mimicking the local English accent, convincingly enough that people didn't know I was American. Does that make me a racist? (same race) Does that make me xenophobic toward the English? (England was my favorite Air Force duty station) Does that mean I was belittling the English? (I certainly don't think so; I have the utmost respect for them to the point that I still follow English news some 35 years later via the BBC and The Guardian)

In short, I'm quite the Anglophile, but according to some here I must be a vehement hater of everything English because I developed the ability to mimic their accent and I occasionally will tell an English joke.


----------



## JMCornwell (Apr 1, 2011)

R. Doug said:


> I'll say it. I lived in England for two years. I became very adept at mimicking the local English accent, convincingly enough that people didn't know I was American. Does that make me a racist? (same race) Does that make me xenophobic toward the English? (England was my favorite Air Force duty station) Does that mean I was belittling the English? (I certainly don't think so; I have the utmost respect for them to the point that I still follow English news some 35 years later via the BBC and The Guardian)
> 
> In short, I'm quite the Anglophile, but according to some here I must be a vehement hater of everything English because I developed the ability to mimic their accent and I occasionally will tell an English joke.


Mimicking a language does not mean one hates another race or is prejudiced. Sometimes it is little more than protective coloring, like the chameleon changing to blend into the surroundings. Many people begin to sound like the people around them when they're around them for very long. Actors work long and hard to perfect an accent that is different from their own. I don't think that's the issue here. There's a big difference in most people's eyes between mimicking an accent to blend in and adding snark to the mimicry.


----------



## Plotspider (Mar 15, 2011)

Cal_Noble said:


> Ultimately, Alabama. The majority of it takes place in a hotel... (the title ... Hotel Sangria)
> 
> but it begins with skinheads in chicago, the homeless man in Atlanta, and a freaky man wandering around an alabama cotton field. LOL.
> 
> Seriously, I don't try to glamorize racism. I just try to be honest to my characters. Some have big warts and are unashamed of them. Others put makeup on their blemishes.


I think characters _can_ have racist ideas and be likable. The reason: character growth. IF your characters are not growing, then they are likely not well-rounded characters. They are the stereotyped bullies of Stephen King and/or other novels where someone is racist because they're evil or evil because they're racist. Not even KKK members are universally racist all the time, because even they will meet someone they don't just want to blow up on the spot of another race. It is when members of the other race _supposedly_ live up to some preconceived stereotype in the character's mind that makes the character angry or dangerous towards all members of that race. Even racist characters have to 'get along' sometimes with members of other races. An incurable racist with such ignorant beliefs that looking at a member of another race puts him into a frenzy, turns that character into flat monster and villain, and never a protagonist. A character who is ignorant about other races, therefore having created mental heuristics about those races and what those races mean to him, makes a character have an opportunity to grow. Racism is not the chief of sins, but instead is largely an expression of not knowing or not understanding or even being afraid of something different. A character without ignorance or fear is stupid, poorly written, or simply unrealistic. Just because that particular ignorance doesn't make the character love everyone all the time no matter how different they are from him, doesn't mean the character is necessarily a bad person; instead, it means he's got some learning to do. What makes such a character unlikable is when they refuse to acknowledge the evidence that runs counter to their notions and continue to hate or fear another race merely because of this.

Anyway, having said this, the little boy from the book The Cay begins unsure of black people and compares them to animals or monstrous figures, but... (I won't spoil anything, but it wouldn't take Einstein to figure out where such a story is going). Mrs. Daisy from Driving Mrs. Daisy towards black people at first. Again, we have the main character of American History X, who is at times a likable and understandable, though shockingly troubled and viciously racist, character and who should be pitied more than anything at the beginning AND ending of that story. Of course, his little brother is racist, but mostly because he's confused and trying to impress people in his life.

For the record: treating the South, and southerners, as though they invented racism and the only real racists are in the South, or from the South (when racism has been going on since the dawn of time, and was even a major factor amongst the ancient Hebrews and other societies featured in the Bible), is just as much a stereotype and just as much racist as anything else.


----------



## The Real McCoy (Oct 8, 2010)

JMCornwell said:


> Racists come in all flavors, yes, even with a smile at their own jokes, and hate is the motivator even if it doesn't burn red hot. The subtle hate is just as hateful as the virulent red hate.
> 
> Not everyone who mimics another accent is being prejudiced or racist. Sometimes they're actors.


Exactly. We should all be allowed to joke about our neighbours near and far as much as we want, because without hate there is no racism. This brings me to the original topic. As a writer I'd find it impossible to depict a true racist as likeable. I'd have to show the groundless hatred seeping through to give the racist character its third dimension. Apologies if I sent this topic off on a tangent.


----------



## JMCornwell (Apr 1, 2011)

Plotspider said:


> For the record: treating the South, and southerners, as though they invented racism and the only real racists are in the South, or from the South (when racism has been going on since the dawn of time, and was even a major factor amongst the ancient Hebrews and other societies featured in the Bible), is just as much a stereotype and just as much racist as anything else.


There was enough racism in the North to make sure that a black president and a woman weren't elected after the war. Victoria Woodhull was a publisher and suffragette who ran for president after the Civil War. Her running mate was Fredrick Douglass. There was so much prejudice against them that her opponents actually ran her into bankruptcy to keep her and Douglass out of the election. How's that for racism and prejudice? It's easier to treat southerners as racist because they were the most recognizable symbol of racism and oppression, especially after _Uncle Tom's Cabin_. That kind of things stays with people through generations.

I do, however, think you can have a likable racist character who does not change as long as his finer points outweigh his racism.


----------



## JMCornwell (Apr 1, 2011)

The Real McCoy said:


> Exactly. We should all be allowed to joke about our neighbours near and far as much as we want, because without hate there is no racism. This brings me to the original topic. As a writer I'd find it impossible to depict a true racist as likeable. I'd have to show the groundless hatred seeping through to give the racist character its third dimension. Apologies if I sent this topic off on a tangent.


I don't think there is such a thing as a "true" racist and no one is so one-dimensional there are not qualities that can outweigh the racism. It's all about perspective. See something from one angle and it appears to prove your point, but shift it just a little and another facet is shown that disproves your point. People are complex, even dyed-in-the-wool racists.


----------



## The Real McCoy (Oct 8, 2010)

JMCornwell said:


> I don't think there is such a thing as a "true" racist and no one is so one-dimensional there are not qualities that can outweigh the racism. It's all about perspective. See something from one angle and it appears to prove your point, but shift it just a little and another facet is shown that disproves your point. People are complex, even dyed-in-the-wool racists.


If there's no such thing as a true racist then there's no such thing as a dyed-in-the-wool racist. Same thing, different terminology.


----------



## JMCornwell (Apr 1, 2011)

The Real McCoy said:


> If there's no such thing as a true racist then there's no such thing as a dyed-in-the-wool racist. Same thing, different terminology.


Wool would be true and dyed-in-the-wool would be altered. It's a matter of perspective. Someone unwilling to give up their views would not be a "true" racist, just a hard core racist. Unless that is what you meant.


----------



## The Real McCoy (Oct 8, 2010)

JMCornwell said:


> Wool would be true and dyed-in-the-wool would be altered. It's a matter of perspective. Someone unwilling to give up their views would not be a "true" racist, just a hard core racist. Unless that is what you meant.


So, to unravel what you're saying: if someone unwilling to give up their views would not be a true racist it therefore follows that some who is willing to give up their views would be a true racist. How can that be right? True racist, hard-core racist, dyed-in-the-wool racist. Once you unstrip the convoluted semantics they're all one and the same thing.


----------



## JMCornwell (Apr 1, 2011)

The Real McCoy said:


> So, to unravel what you're saying: if someone unwilling to give up their views would not be a true racist it therefore follows that some who is willing to give up their views would be a true racist. How can that be right? True racist, hard-core racist, dyed-in-the-wool racist. Once you unstrip the convoluted semantics they're all one and the same thing.


I think you have it backward. A racist is a racist. I think you're arguing about how much and whether or not it's fatal.


----------



## The Real McCoy (Oct 8, 2010)

JMCornwell said:


> I think you have it backward. A racist is a racist. I think you're arguing about how much and whether or not it's fatal.


Not sure I understood that.

Bye...


----------



## Plotspider (Mar 15, 2011)

tkkenyon said:


> Watch the recent SF movie _District 9. _
> 
> The movie was filmed in and takes place in South Africa, which should tell you something about the sensibilities right there.
> 
> ...


Thanks for bringing up D9. That was a good example of what I was talking about earlier and I totally agree. I agree with the Martin Luther quote, but I must say that truly finding Christ (truly, not hypocritically) should never be a bad thing and should do a character a lot of good. Unfortunately (and just as racist and stereotypically) a lot of characters in stories these days take a biased view of religion and become poster children for beliefs that are not supported in the texts the author is trying to make fun of. However, characters that go against religious characters are often hailed as heroes and characters who have deeply felt convictions about anything are often touted as ignorant and backwards (again, a stereotype, a kind of cousin to racism: ?religionism?). Of course, having a character who is open to everything but settling on convictions is a fun little trick authors do to win over their audience, making their hero be totally non-judgmental or totally non-exclusive about things makes him someone the audience could project on their own thoughts and be accepted, etc.

However, I do not think such characters are terribly realistic and in fact irritate me usually (they become vessels waiting to be filled with something, rather than something in and of itself: like a restaurant where you have make a sandwich instead of being served a sandwich. I can cook at home for much cheaper than going to a restaurant and cooking for myself).

I am thinking as I write this about Bella from the Twilight series, who is so completely vacuous and open to new ideas she practically lacks a personality completely (I am judging based on the movie representations of her here, but from what I've heard, the books are not too far away from that. I would be happy to know that Stephanie Meyer is a better writer than that, for all the hoopla about her work).

In short (too late) I admire a character that has feelings and a certain set perspective on an issue, that has deeply held beliefs more than I do someone who doesn't, even if those beliefs have to change through the course of the novel or story (usually especially when that happens) for that character to be a 'good' character. I just find it more compelling the characters who decide what they will believe instead of having their beliefs foisted upon them and to choose to be uncertain about everything.


----------



## Tony Rabig (Oct 11, 2010)

Check out Stanley Ellin's THE DARK FANTASTIC.  His villain is a racist, a truly dangerous vision and not a figure of comic fun like Archie Bunker.  Archie proved himself a buffoon every time he opened his mouth; not so Ellin's character Charles Kirwan.  Kirwan owns an apartment building next door to his own home; he blames black people for the decline of his building and neighborhood, for the decline of the local college where he spent his teaching career, and more.  He's fed up, and he's dying, and rather than wait for the cancer he plans to blow himself up along with his apartment building and as many of its tenants as he can take with him.  A large portion of the book consists of his taped testament explaining why he's doing this, and he's articulate and horrifyingly persuasive and certainly not a clown -- maybe not likable, but you can feel for him as well as the people he intends to kill, and if you want compelling the book is hard to beat.

Bests to all,

Tony Rabig


----------



## jhendereson (Oct 22, 2010)

Scarlett O'Hara, racist to the core and sincerely believed slaves were tickled giddy in bondage. Plus, she lusted after her friend's beau, Ashley Wilkes. Yet she's a great character.


----------



## Plotspider (Mar 15, 2011)

jhendereson said:


> Scarlett O'Hara, racist to the core and sincerely believed slaves were tickled giddy in bondage. Plus, she lusted after her friend's beau, Ashley Wilkes. Yet she's a great character.


Good example. Well done.

While I'm writing a reply, several characters in Star Trek are racist towards the other species, including Captain Kirk for a long time (ahhh, Geek Out!)


----------



## R. Doug (Aug 14, 2010)

Didn't stop Kirk from hitting on anything even remotely female in appearance, though.


----------



## Plotspider (Mar 15, 2011)

R. Doug said:


> Didn't stop Kirk from hitting on anything even remotely female in appearance, though.


But this was likely because to him, they were not people, they were objects for his consumption. I was talking about his racism towards Klingons in the movies mainly, though.


----------



## deesavoy (Feb 13, 2011)

MichelleR said:


> There was a thread over at Amazon recently asking if suicide can be funny. Most people said no, I said yes -- and went on about gallows humor and how laughter heals. I think that it takes talent to make suicide funny, and it will always miss with some people, depending on their experiences and if their nature is to find humor in tragedy.
> 
> Actually there's an old movie based on a French film called A Pain in the A** in which a killer is trying to assassinate someone, I forget who, and the idiot in the hotel room next door to him keeps trying to kill himself (and consequently blowing the assassin's chance to do his work) with increasingly hilarious results.


----------

