« heroes | Main | what a girl wants in a fictional hero »
heroes, chickens, eggs
1) Can the appearance of a given character on my list (or anybody's list) be simply a matter of sexual attraction? That is, is sexual attraction the chicken, or the egg?
2) Can a fictional hero be perfect, but not sexually attractive?
3) Can a fictional character be sexually attractive, but not any kind of hero?
Christina's point: "For the record, I don't think a fictional hero can be perfect AND sexually attractive." And she's right, of course; perfect characters, I have said elsewhere, make for lousy fiction. So that was a poor choice of words on my part to start with, unless we're going to get into sticky semantics where perfection brings with it the idea of its own imperfection. With that in mind, the question is now: Assuming that sexual attraction is the result of a number of characteristics that add up to a good match between reader and character, what are those characteristics?
The first issue to get out of the way is the physical. Looking at my own list, these men don't have a lot in common physically except that they are all fairly large in stature and physically strong. We are told so directly about Darcy, Philippe, Niccolo, Nathaniel; it's possible to extract that conclusion in the cases of Phin and Daniel; John Crichton, of course, we can see. Not all of them are handsome in any traditional sense. Niccolo especially we are told is considered plain, if not ugly, by many. Some are handsome, and that's made clear: Darcy, Phin, Nathaniel. Others we are left to draw our own conclusions, and then, of course, there's John Crichton, who (sometimes life is good) we can judge for ourselves.
I've been trying to think of a fictional character who I found physically unattractive but would still put on my short list. So far I haven't come up with one, but I'll keep thinking. I'm also thinking about the rest of the characteristics that go into making these seven characters work for me personally.
April 12, 2004 10:31 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.tiedtothetracks.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-t.cgi/82
Comments
Is it possible to think of a fictional character as unattractive yet still think them "hot?" I wonder if you would even think the character as unattractive if you have some sort of connection to or feel something them.
For me Ron Pearlman in Beauty and the Beast was extremely hot, and in the current Hellboy too. Wait. I think Ron Pearlman is hot. But he is not a classically handsome dude.
I think I am muddling this, but as I am at work and should be actually working...
Posted by: Lanna Lee at April 12, 2004 11:50 AM
I know you don't like the Bronte sisters but I have always found Edward Rochester (who is pretty much the stereotypical gothic hero) to be an extremely, er, likeable character, and he's not physically attractive in the usual sense.
Posted by: Rachel at April 12, 2004 01:07 PM
....perfect characters, I have said elsewhere, make for lousy fiction.
Though, they make up a lot of fanfic.
::shudders::
Posted by: Ter Matthies at April 12, 2004 09:26 PM
Hi Sara,
I can answer the chicken and the egg thing....
A chicken and an egg are lying in bed.
The chicken is leaning against the headboard smoking a cigarette with a satisfied smile on its face.
The egg, looking a bit pissed off, grabs the sheet and rolls over, saying, "Well, I guess we finally answered THAT question"
Posted by: Tracey at April 13, 2004 12:08 PM