The Perfection of Imperfection

Last year, when a few of my buddies and I went to watch Justice League to celebrate my birthday, we had an interesting discussion on the way there. We were talking about CW's The Flash, and one of my friends interjected, "I'm tired of Barry making the same mistake over and over again. Why doesn't he learn?"

I argued, "Well, that's what we tend to do. We're often repeating our mistakes, even though we know the consequences."

His response shocked me: "But I don't want him to be like that. I want to be inspired by him to do better."

"But then he's not relatable," I said. "If he's not making mistakes, how're we supposed to identify with him?"

source

I don't remember how the rest of the conversation panned out, but some writers (myself included) create a character who never messes up. Actually, based on what little I've planned about the new Portal Chronicles over the last few years, David is an example of this. He has no flaws; he's a "perfect" Christian. The others look up to him, but I realize now that readers look up to characters who are imperfect, yet do their best to do the right thing in spite of their brokenness.

See, the whole issue is a bit of a paradox. An imperfect character is the perfect one to use in a story, while a perfect character is the opposite. We as authors need to always be careful of this.

Let me give you an example. Suppose I have two characters, Ryan and Drake. Ryan is the embodiment of an unrealistic human. He never messes up. No temptation is a challenge for him; never does he stray in any regard. Drake, on the other hand, knows he's screws up. He makes bad choices. He succumbs to temptation; he tries his best to do right, but sometimes he does the wrong thing to get there.

Both set out on a journey to save their world from an evil power that has completely taken over. This villain ensures that the men encounter foes, lusts, and other traps along the way. Ryan breezes through. He recognizes those who pretend to be on his side and doesn't befriend them. When he is offered bountiful wealth, power, or satisfaction, he always turns them down. He bests the villain and saves the world.

Drake is in more of a pickle. He's vowed to always do what's right, but that doesn't mean he never wavers. He trusts the wrong people and ends up in deep trouble that costs him in some form or another. He considers taking the proffered power, as it might mean he can betray the villain when said antagonist doesn't expect it. But it might also hurt his integrity, or he might never want to lose that power. He turns down wealth and satisfaction, but it can be difficult sometime. Finally, after crawling through his deepest darkness and fighting off his worst demons, he manages to break the evil that has captured the land.

Tell me: at the end of the day, what're readers going to be appreciate more? Frankly, I don't think they would even bother finishing Ryan's story, that's how uninteresting it is. But we want to see the hero struggle and mess up, because we can never make the correct choices in life. Sometimes we give in to our temptations. So when the protagonist is imperfect and still strives to do good, we are inspired and look up to them.

Now, there can sometimes be a fine line between imperfection and immoral, so we need to make sure we establish that division. Of course, you can always go for a redemption story, but then you need to make sure that the character's change is believable. Captain Brixton in Maelstrom, a pirate story of mine, is an example of this. He becomes obsessed with a very precious diamond, to the point that he values it more than his crew, who are like family to him. It takes a monstrosity threatening the empire and the death of a crewmember to shake him from his ill state. Does that mean he's perfect right away? No, it's something he has to work on, and he's going to be challenged along the way. And that's what makes him interesting.

source

You also have to be aware that not everyone is a fan of the imperfect character, even when that's the best type of protagonist. This is evident in Anne Elisabeth Stengl's Heartless. Because it's an allegory of Jesus establishing a relationship with us, Princess Una represents us. And let me tell you, she makes plenty of mistakes. This book actually got a lot of hate because of her. Just look up reviews and see how many people rail on her, not realizing that she is the ambassador for their imperfect nature. Mrs. Stengl wrote her that way for a reason, and they don't seem to understand that. But just because you might have a few haters for choosing that route does not mean you shouldn't.

To conclude, I'll bring it back to the example of Barry. He's often told not to mess with time, and he still does, even when seeing the disastrous consequences. Maybe it's the heat of a moment, or maybe his emotions are rampaging. Or perhaps he's like us and sometimes forgets just how bad things went down last time he made the same decision. At the end of the day, he tries to make things right, protect his loved ones, and save Central City from any threat that rises up. That is why he is such an amazing protagonist.

Never forget the power of the imperfect character.

This was a bit out of the blue, wasn't it? I figured I should do more writing tips on here, even if they might be kind of obvious. What'd you think of this post? Was it new for you, a good reminder, or something you'd never use? Let's discuss in the comments!