Most Horrible Character

[Tsuyoiko]

Which characters have you particularly disliked and why?

Two spring to mind for me.

Dean Moriarty from On The Road: Jack Kerouac (through the character Sal) goes out of his way to convince us that Dean is a misunderstood intellectual hero, but I thought he was just horrible. He squirms all the time, drives like a maniac, drinks and takes drugs, steals without any conscience and worst of all beats his wife. I just can't see any redeeming features. He reminded me so much of T-bag from Prison Break :lol:

Madame Bovary: I couldn't help comparing this character to Anna Karenina and finding her wanting. She was shallow, self-absorbed, greedy and selfish, and never showed any signs of remorse or of wanting to change, whereas Anna was tormented by guilt and was fully aware of the effect of her actions on others.

[Stella Mica]

Harald from The Group by Mary McCarthy. He is beyond horrible -- leaves his wife in an insane asylum, has affairs on her, thinks he's god.

[higley]

Nurse Ratched, to be sure. I don't think it's possible not to loathe her.

And although I think I'm in the (female) minority, judging by previous responses to this opinion--one girl actually got quite angry with me--I never liked Heathcliff, or pitied him, or saw any point in making excuses for him. I'm mystified as to why he gets grouped with the romantic male figures.

[mayneverhave]

Odette, Mme Swann, of In Search of Lost Time.

Poor Swann. He should have known better, but the nonsense she put him through...

Also, I did not tend to care for any of the characters in Hemingway's The Sun Also Rises, except perhaps the narrator. Even so, I loved the novel.

[kelby_lake]

Scout in To Kill A Mockingbird. God, she was annoying.

[Dimitra]

Heathcliff for me.

[Fen]

Phoebus from Hunchback of Notre Dame he caused so much suffering with out being the least bit aware of the pain he was causing. He never thought about others or the consequences of his actions. Just thinking about him makes me angry.

I think what really annoys me is that he could be the cause of so much anguish, be in the midst of it yet be so blissfully unaware. It seemed so utterly unfair.

[Mr Endon]

My reply to that is a blend of higley's and mayneverhave's responses: for me there isn't a single likable character in Wuthering Heights, yet I quite like the novel. And I guess the same applies to Women in Love. It's not like I think they're 'horrible', though; in the former they're all too flawed to be likable, in the latter too weird.

In Portuguese literature, the choice is obvious: the obnoxious Dâmaso Salcede, from Os Maias.

[Dark Lady]

And although I think I'm in the (female) minority, judging by previous responses to this opinion--one girl actually got quite angry with me--I never liked Heathcliff, or pitied him, or saw any point in making excuses for him. I'm mystified as to why he gets grouped with the romantic male figures.

Completely agree with you; except I would go one step further and add almost all the other characters in Wuthering Heights as well! Can't think of one likeable character in that novel.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Completely agree with you; except I would go one step further and add almost all the other characters in Wuthering Heights as well! Can't think of one likeable character in that novel.

Yes the characters are pretty repulsive (or stupid) but it is a pretty damn good book.

As for mine well, Medea kills her own children, which is pretty harsh. God in Paradise Lost is a bit of an evil dictator so he can join the list, Lady Macbeth is pretty blood thirsty, though there are plenty of Shakespeare villains which are up there. Frankenstein's monster is particularly devilish when he has been shunned by society as is Mr Hyde, so they would probably be mine.

[prendrelemick]

Antonio in The Merchant of Venice, and his friends. I end up wanting Shylock to get his pound of flesh.

[*Classic*Charm*]

Anna Karenina. I couldn't wait for her to be gone.

[JuniperWoolf]

I am disgusted with Mildred from Of Human Bondage. Even saying her name makes my mouth feel violated. She's everything that I don't want to be. The worst part is, I know several women that resemble her personality in real life. Some people just shouldn't have kids.

Mae and Gooper from Cat on a Hot Tin Roof were pretty gross people, but you could tell that they were miserable with themselves and their lives which kind of lessened my dislike for them (especially Gooper).

Sam Spade sucks.

Every character in Dracula except for Renfield rubbed me the wrong way.

[JBI]

Scout in To Kill A Mockingbird. God, she was annoying.

I'm going to go with this one too. Certainly the most overrated American novel, but what do you expect really? It seems the perfect schoolroom text - it actually praises the innocence of the white girl girl in relation to her racist surroundings, and ultimately robs the voice of African Americans subjected to racism, and gives the voice instead to, once again, a white person, one who is too smart to be racist, yet at the same time, is ultimately privileged by all the racist programs in her society.

[Scheherazade]

I'm going to go with this one too. Certainly the most overrated American novel, but what do you expect really? It seems the perfect schoolroom text - it actually praises the innocence of the white girl girl in relation to her racist surroundings, and ultimately robs the voice of African Americans subjected to racism, and gives the voice instead to, once again, a white person, one who is too smart to be racist, yet at the same time, is ultimately privileged by all the racist programs in her society.Or the novel is simply depicting how things were at the time when a white person was needed to voice the injustice an African American was subjected to.

[The Comedian]

Anna Karenina. I couldn't wait for her to be gone.

*raises his glass in cheers!* I couldn't bear this book because of my disdain for this character -- whine, whine, whine, all the while getting what she deserves.

[sixsmith]

I couldn't stand Igantius in 'A Confederacy of Dunces' which is rather problematic given the entire novel is just him railing against everyone and everything.


Tommy in 'Seize the day' annoyed the crap out of me. (Why people don't consider this a very minor work from Bellow is beyond me).


But my gold medal annoying character is without doubt Raskalnikov. A literary whinger to beat all comers.

[Chilly]

Frankenstein's monster is particularly devilish when he has been shunned by society as is Mr Hyde, so they would probably be mine.

I'm sorry, I disagree about Frankenstein's monster. In fact, Frankenstein himself bothered me much more. It was his fault and he wouldn't admit it, then he doesn't fix the problem when he can. The monster, on the other hand, was a good person and only did the things he did because it was the only thing left for him.

[amarna]

Erika Kohut, main character of Elfriede Jelinek's "Piano Player", was pretty obnoxious.

[five-trey]

Pyotr Petrovich Luhzin from Crime and Punishment. I hated how arrogant and sleazy he was. I found Svidrigailov an interesting character so I didn't really hate him, despite the fact that he is the more despicable.

Other notables:
- Lavinia Mannon from Mourning Becomes Electra.
- Madame Defarge from A Tale of Two Cities
- Daisy Buchannan from The Great Gatsby

[Emil Miller]

In a book that has a number of horrible characters, Felicia Ballshotte is easily the most objectionable person in Emil Miller's Pro Bono Publico.

[PoeticPassions]

Other notables:
- Lavinia Mannon from Mourning Becomes Electra.
- Madame Defarge from A Tale of Two Cities
- Daisy Buchannan from The Great Gatsby



I quite agree with Daisy. She was such an unlikeable character.

[amalia1985]

Roger Chillingworth from Nathaniel Hawthorne's The Scarlet Letter
Madame Defarge from Charles Dickens' A Tale Of Two Cities
Bernarda Alba from Lorca's The House Of Bernarda Alba

[LitNetIsGreat]

I'm sorry, I disagree about Frankenstein's monster. In fact, Frankenstein himself bothered me much more. It was his fault and he wouldn't admit it, then he doesn't fix the problem when he can. The monster, on the other hand, was a good person and only did the things he did because it was the only thing left for him.

Yes I have great sympathy for him at the start, but once rejected he certainly pushes and goes over the boundaries with the whole women and children killing thing!

[Gretchen]

Nastasya Filipovna from Dostoevsky's The Idiot.

[Jeremiah Jazzz]

Most of William Faulkner's characters like Jason Compson and most of the Bundrens are such horrible people. The ability to create such a rotten character is an incredible skill, which is why I like Faulkner. I also despise Malachi Mulligan in Ulysses, ugh...

[PabloQ]

Cathy from East of Eden was pure evil. Morally corrupt, loveless, soulless. She shoots her husband and deliberately doesn't kill him so that he'll remember her hatred of him long after she's gone.

[jocky]

Dont know if this one will count, but how about the computer HAL from Arthur C Clarke's '2001 A Space oddysey' ? Now there was a character that set your teeth grinding. It was a cathartic moment when he had his transistors removed.

[five-trey]

Nastasya Filipovna from Dostoevsky's The Idiot.

I'm reading it right now and, I've got to say, her and Ganya annoy me to no end.

[Dark Lady]

I think it's interesting that some of the characters mentioned are, I think, intended to be awful by the author but some perhaps aren't.

I would say characters like Jason Compson and Frankenstein's monster (and Frankenstein himself) are meant to be nasty. They're intended to promote thought but not sympathy.

However, I don't know if characters like Anna Karenina and Heathcliffe are meant to be utterly unsympathetic. I got the feeling I was supposed to like them despite the fact they were despicable. But I didn't. They ruined the novels for me to a greater or lesser extent.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Heathcliffe's certainly a brute, but as I said earlier it's a damn fine novel, and better because of Heathcliffe's personality I think. I quite like Mr Lockwood despite the fact that he is a bumbling fool.

[mayneverhave]

Might I add, also, Polonius, of Hamlet. I constantly hear people pull the "To thine own self be true" quote out of Hamlet, but I'm sure most people forget exactly which character they are quoting.

Polonius, a shameless social climber, eavesdropper, and "sponge" for the King's use, out of all the characters in the play for Hamlet to stab behind an arras, I'm glad it was him. Besides that fact, the Polonius family scenes are by far the most boring of the play.

[*Classic*Charm*]

*raises his glass in cheers!* I couldn't bear this book because of my disdain for this character -- whine, whine, whine, all the while getting what she deserves.

I KNOW!! I hated her so much! She was so vain and selfish and hypocritical and just all over the place. I know she was all messed up on drugs by the end of it, but I was so ready for her to be done. To be honest, there wasn't a single character in that novel I had much use for. Every now and then I start to think a character has a redeeming quality or two, like Dolly, but then she would do something so completely idiotic that I would go back to thinking she's awful again. Maybe that's just me though.

[Tsuyoiko]

Lady Macbeth is pretty blood thirsty

That's true, but I think it's fun to dislike her :D


Anna Karenina. I couldn't wait for her to be gone.


*raises his glass in cheers!* I couldn't bear this book because of my disdain for this character -- whine, whine, whine, all the while getting what she deserves.


However, I don't know if characters like Anna Karenina and Heathcliffe are meant to be utterly unsympathetic. I got the feeling I was supposed to like them despite the fact they were despicable.


I KNOW!! I hated her so much! She was so vain and selfish and hypocritical and just all over the place. I know she was all messed up on drugs by the end of it, but I was so ready for her to be done.

It makes me feel quite defensive when people say they "hate" Anna. I almost wonder if I was reading a different book than everyone else as she didn't seem at all despicable to me. I think she was deeply depressed, going through life like a zombie, until Vronsky awakened a need in her that she didn't even know she had. I think she resisted him as much as she could, but because she was so depressed she was too weak to resist his advances. The very fact that she turned to drugs proved to me her mental instability, and I don't think it's appropriate to attach blame to a person who is suffering from a crippling mental illness.

Anna is among the characters I feel most sympathy and affection for. Vronsky was the character I hated.


To be honest, there wasn't a single character in that novel I had much use for. Every now and then I start to think a character has a redeeming quality or two, like Dolly, but then she would do something so completely idiotic that I would go back to thinking she's awful again. Maybe that's just me though.

I think that's the strength of this novel, and of Tolstoy in general: the realism of the characters. All real people have flaws and do idiotic things that make us question their characters, and I think Tolstoy reflects this perfectly.


Nastasya Filipovna from Dostoevsky's The Idiot.

I agree, she was very annoying. But though she got on my nerves, I couldn't exactly hate her because she was clearly insane.

[Dark Lady]

Heathcliffe's certainly a brute, but as I said earlier it's a damn fine novel, and better because of Heathcliffe's personality I think. I quite like Mr Lockwood despite the fact that he is a bumbling fool.

Ah well. To each their own. I'm sure there are novels I love that other people can't stand! :p

Personally, I was deeply disappointed by the novel. I wanted to like it but I got more and more fed up of it the more I read. I do think it's possible to write a novel that is enjoyable whilst the characters are not likeable but I didn't think Emily Bronte managed this. I just disliked all the characters so much by the end that I didn't really care what happened to them. You always need a reason to carry on reading a novel. If it is character driven (as I think WH is) then the reader needs to care enough about the characters to want to see what becomes of them. Unfortunately I gave up caring about the characters in WH fairly early on.

[mona amon]

Pavel Smerdyakov from The Brothers Karamazov really gives me the creeps. Even his horrible name- though I suppose that's not his fault. Anyway, there's his revolting sadism, and he's just like Iago, bringing about the destruction of those more noble than him in an inhumanly cunning manner.

[Tsuyoiko]

Pavel Smerdyakov from The Brothers Karamazov really gives me the creeps. Even his horrible name- though I suppose that's not his fault. Anyway, there's his revolting sadism, and he's just like Iago, bringing about the destruction of those more noble than him in an inhumanly cunning manner.

I almost listed him in my opening post, but the fact that he is so obviously the villain made me hesitate to class him alongside the other two, who I felt it was just my opinion to dislike.

But I agree, he's horrible :flare:

[mona amon]

Ah, I see what you mean! :idea:

[LitNetIsGreat]

Ah well. To each their own. I'm sure there are novels I love that other people can't stand! :p

Personally, I was deeply disappointed by the novel. I wanted to like it but I got more and more fed up of it the more I read. I do think it's possible to write a novel that is enjoyable whilst the characters are not likeable but I didn't think Emily Bronte managed this. I just disliked all the characters so much by the end that I didn't really care what happened to them. You always need a reason to carry on reading a novel. If it is character driven (as I think WH is) then the reader needs to care enough about the characters to want to see what becomes of them. Unfortunately I gave up caring about the characters in WH fairly early on.

It is definitely worth another attempt, I think I gave up the first time but perseverance unlocks its full potential. One of the most interesting aspects of the novel is the unreliability of all the narrators to the extent that the "truth" of what we are hearing about the characters has to be taken with a very big grain of salt. I mean really, who is the real Heathcliffe?

Personally, I rate this novel well high up there amongst the best novels ever written.

[*Classic*Charm*]

It makes me feel quite defensive when people say they "hate" Anna. I almost wonder if I was reading a different book than everyone else as she didn't seem at all despicable to me. I think she was deeply depressed, going through life like a zombie, until Vronsky awakened a need in her that she didn't even know she had. I think she resisted him as much as she could, but because she was so depressed she was too weak to resist his advances. The very fact that she turned to drugs proved to me her mental instability, and I don't think it's appropriate to attach blame to a person who is suffering from a crippling mental illness.

Anna is among the characters I feel most sympathy and affection for. Vronsky was the character I hated.

I think that's the strength of this novel, and of Tolstoy in general: the realism of the characters. All real people have flaws and do idiotic things that make us question their characters, and I think Tolstoy reflects this perfectly.

Interesting point of view. I certainly didn't get the impression that she was depressed at the beginning of the novel. I think of Anna as a very superficial person who was happy with everything she had at first because it was the perfect picture for her society- wealthy, prominent husband and a child. But then she saw Vronsky and suddenly what she had before wasn't good enough. She wanted a young, good-looking, well-liked husband plus all the benefits and it just didn't go the way she daydreamed. She was most definitely suffering from a severe depression by the end, but that's not the reason why I detest her. It was her behaviour when she was in a healthier state of mind that I cannot forgive. If there is one thing about your view I MUST disagree with, it's that Anna resisted Vronsky. I don't think that was the case at all. Her behaviour towards her husband and son is completely unforgivable. But don't worry- I hated Vronksy just as much!

I think you're right about Tolstoy and the strength and realism of his characters. They really are real people and subject to the views and opinions of their times.

[Stargazer86]

I'm going to go with this one too. Certainly the most overrated American novel, but what do you expect really? It seems the perfect schoolroom text - it actually praises the innocence of the white girl girl in relation to her racist surroundings, and ultimately robs the voice of African Americans subjected to racism, and gives the voice instead to, once again, a white person, one who is too smart to be racist, yet at the same time, is ultimately privileged by all the racist programs in her society.

I agree with Scher. The novel was written by a white woman who grew up in the south. I don't think who tells the story undermines the struggle or makes the story's quality any less. Maybe its a bit "overrated" but it is an excellent story and well told. It is very moving and an important part of American literature

[Desolation]

Nastasya Filipovna from Dostoevsky's The Idiot.I think that Aglaya was easily just as bad. She mocked the Prince and showed him no affection, then threw a fit when he didn't immediately choose her.

My vote goes to Luzhin from 'Crime & Punishment.'

[wat??]

Tom Buchmann - The Great Gatsby

Dmitri Karamazov - The Brothers Karamazov
I like Dmitri, but I also think he's horrible.

[Tsuyoiko]

Interesting point of view. I certainly didn't get the impression that she was depressed at the beginning of the novel.

I agree, she seems to be healthy at the beginning of the novel. But considering the depth of her later depression, I think it's unlikely that she could have been as healthy as she seemed. I don't think a crippling, suicidal depression like that could develop without some underlying mental instability. And with hindsight you can see the signs earlier. For example, her intense agitation on hearing of the accidental death of a guard, and her conclusion that it is an omen of evil.


If there is one thing about your view I MUST disagree with, it's that Anna resisted Vronsky.

After dancing with Vronsky at the ball in Moscow, Anna does not stay on to supper and determines to leave for Petersburg on the following day. On meeting him at the station, she begs him to leave her alone and dashes into the train. And finally, at Princess Betsy's, although it is now clear that she will give in, she is still trying to resist him, if only in words: "Then do this for me: never say such things to me, and let us be friends,"

[Dark Lady]

It is definitely worth another attempt, I think I gave up the first time but perseverance unlocks its full potential. One of the most interesting aspects of the novel is the unreliability of all the narrators to the extent that the "truth" of what we are hearing about the characters has to be taken with a very big grain of salt. I mean really, who is the real Heathcliffe?

Personally, I rate this novel well high up there amongst the best novels ever written.

I did consider re-reading it. I was going to read that and The Great Gatsby again because I felt I must have missed something the first time I read them. (I didn't dislike The Great Gatsby the same way I did Wuthering Heights but I expected more from it.) However, when I was studying for my Victorian Lit exam I wanted to refresh my memory of WH in case I needed to pull it out as a back up option to write about. I read some summaries to help me remember character names etc and it just reminded me of all the reasons I disliked it so much. Perhaps at some point I'll give it another try but for now I have a list of sixty-something books I want to read that's growing every day!

[*Classic*Charm*]

I agree, she seems to be healthy at the beginning of the novel. But considering the depth of her later depression, I think it's unlikely that she could have been as healthy as she seemed. I don't think a crippling, suicidal depression like that could develop without some underlying mental instability. And with hindsight you can see the signs earlier. For example, her intense agitation on hearing of the accidental death of a guard, and her conclusion that it is an omen of evil.

Interesting. I never really considered that :)



After dancing with Vronsky at the ball in Moscow, Anna does not stay on to supper and determines to leave for Petersburg on the following day. On meeting him at the station, she begs him to leave her alone and dashes into the train. And finally, at Princess Betsy's, although it is now clear that she will give in, she is still trying to resist him, if only in words: "Then do this for me: never say such things to me, and let us be friends,"

Not buying that. She may have done those things, but to me that's not enough. She resisted to a point, but not completely. If she was really determined to do the right thing, she never would have entered into the affair with him. He did not force her.

[JacobF]

Bernard in Brave New World. He was fickle, mopey, and even taking into account his circumstances in the World State I couldn't strain a single iota of sympathy for him. He was a whiny, boring version of Winston in 1984.

[Lady Marian]

Uriah Heep in "David Copperfield." He was slippery, slimy, fawning, servile, base, and evil.

I love adjectives. :D

[bazarov]

Anna Karenina. I couldn't wait for her to be gone.

Why everybody dislike Anna? I never got that.

Emma Bovary - the ultimate choice.

[Tsuyoiko]

She resisted to a point, but not completely. If she was really determined to do the right thing, she never would have entered into the affair with him. He did not force her.

I understand why people tend to see it that way. But I don't think Anna had the willpower to make decisions for herself. I don't think she "chose" to have an affair, I think she acquiesced to the most pressing demands upon her. Vronsky was pursuing her aggressively, he was giving her far more seemingly positive attention than she had ever received from Karenin, who admits later on that he married her somewhat reluctantly. Anna would never have actively sought the affair. Vronsky was the instigator and therefore, in my opinion, the blame lies with him.

At one point (I can't find it at the moment) Dolly comments that women never truly get to choose for themselves, they only get to pick from the choices presented to them by men. That's what Anna did; Vronsky fought harder for her, so he's the one she chose.


Why everybody dislike Anna? I never got that.

Emma Bovary - the ultimate choice.

I agree completely. However, at first glance their situations seem very similar. Why do you dislike Emma but not Anna? I have my reasons, but I'm interested to see if yours are similar :)

[bazarov]

I agree completely. However, at first glance their situations seem very similar. Why do you dislike Emma but not Anna? I have my reasons, but I'm interested to see if yours are similar :)

http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?t=32974

Emma is actually total opposite of Anna. She was crazy, selfish and mean - almost like Zola invented her.

[V.Jayalakshmi]

Dear Members,
Yes, lots of choices there.I do add Mr.Bumble from Charles Dickens's "Oliver Twist' as the choice as he was unkindness personified and we do find many like him in real life,unfortunately entrusted with children's welfare.

Like Anna Karenena's choice that surprise me like some above, why not Rebecca herself and her maid Mrs. Danvers;from the novel "Rebecca' by Daphne DuMaurier.

[*Classic*Charm*]

I understand why people tend to see it that way. But I don't think Anna had the willpower to make decisions for herself. I don't think she "chose" to have an affair, I think she acquiesced to the most pressing demands upon her. Vronsky was pursuing her aggressively, he was giving her far more seemingly positive attention than she had ever received from Karenin, who admits later on that he married her somewhat reluctantly. Anna would never have actively sought the affair. Vronsky was the instigator and therefore, in my opinion, the blame lies with him.

At one point (I can't find it at the moment) Dolly comments that women never truly get to choose for themselves, they only get to pick from the choices presented to them by men. That's what Anna did; Vronsky fought harder for her, so he's the one she chose.

Anna didn't have the willpower to decide for herself? Then she should have removed herself from the situation. The excuse "Vronksy's here and paying more attention to me" isn't good enough. If she were being tempted by something she didn't want, she should have gone home to her child. She could have kept him away had she really wanted to. Even if she would never have sought it herself, she consented to let it happen. The fact that she and Karenin entered their marriage perhaps less than enthusiastically is no excuse whatsoever to have an affair.



Like Anna Karenena's choice that surprise me like some above, why not Rebecca herself and her maid Mrs. Danvers;from the novel "Rebecca' by Daphne DuMaurier.

Mrs. Danvers was horrible. Good choice!

[mollie]

I am startled to see Anna Karenin and Emma Bovary being selected as the most horrible characters in fiction. Annoying, exasperating, infuriating yes, but most horrible?

O'Brien in 1984 is unspeakably evil and cruel, and ruined countless people's lives for no reason but that of the pursuit of power.

The Strickland character in The Moon and Sixpence is a solipsistic, cruel and nasty person.

Heathcliff from WH is a vicious sociopath.

Dorian Grey, Alex from A Clockwork Orange, Pinkie from Brighton Rock, ad infinitum - are Anna and Emma really worse than all of those?

[*Classic*Charm*]

I am startled to see Anna Karenin and Emma Bovary being selected as the most horrible characters in fiction. Annoying, exasperating, infuriating yes, but most horrible?

Yes. Horrible. I despise her.

[DaveB]

I'm going to go with this one too. Certainly the most overrated American novel, but what do you expect really? It seems the perfect schoolroom text - it actually praises the innocence of the white girl girl in relation to her racist surroundings, and ultimately robs the voice of African Americans subjected to racism, and gives the voice instead to, once again, a white person, one who is too smart to be racist, yet at the same time, is ultimately privileged by all the racist programs in her society.


Always on the soapbox. It gets tiresome.

[mollie]

Yes. Horrible. I despise her.

More horrible than the list of murderers, rapists, genocidal maniacs, torturers etc. I've listed? Really, genuinely, she is the absolute worst you can come up with?

[rtc143]

Jay Gatsby because of his obsession. I don't know, he just annoyed me too much. Oh those 20s....

Also, I didn't really like Leonce Pontilier from The Awakening... he seemed like a stereotype of the "typical family man" who doesn't spend time w/ his loved ones. Crap.

[*Classic*Charm*]

More horrible than the list of murderers, rapists, genocidal maniacs, torturers etc. I've listed? Really, genuinely, she is the absolute worst you can come up with?

It's a personal thing I suppose. Perhaps if I was more familiar with all the murderers, rapists, genocidal maniacs, etc., I might think differently. Maybe it's because I've never actually encountered a person like that, I find it difficult to think of them as being real people. But Anna irritates me to my very core and contains all the everyday qualities that I most dislike in others and thus, I find her absolutely horrible.

If you want me to list someone else, I'll also say Alec D'Urberville. I hate his too, but he doesn't make me grind my teeth like Anna Karenina does.

[mollie]

If you want me to list someone else, I'll also say Alec D'Urberville. I hate his too, but he doesn't make me grind my teeth like Anna Karenina does.

Not at all, if you can't stand her, you can't stand her, fair enough. And I'm sorry if it seemed like I was having a go at you or trying to tell you what to think, I was just surprised by it, and you were the one who responded!

At any rate, thanks for your reply. Food for thought.

[*Classic*Charm*]

Not at all, if you can't stand her, you can't stand her, fair enough. And I'm sorry if it seemed like I was having a go at you or trying to tell you what to think, I was just surprised by it, and you were the one who responded!

At any rate, thanks for your reply. Food for thought.

No need to apologize whatsoever :)

[Zee.]

Well, it depends on what the OP meant when they wrote "horrible"

Horribly written? horrible nature?

Someone mentioned Alex from A Clockwork Orange and although his nature is "horrible" he was a brilliant character.

With that being said i'm going to interpret "horrible" as the most irritating, annoying character and that would most definitely be....


JANE BLOODY EYRE. THE MOST ANNOYING BITT...CHaracter (hehe)
ever written.

EVER.

Female characters irritate me. Generally speaking

[Josh Wardrip]

Might raise a few eyebrows, but Stephen Dedalus in Portrait (not so much in Ulysses). Annoyed the piss out of me.

[kelby_lake]

Or the novel is simply depicting how things were at the time when a white person was needed to voice the injustice an African American was subjected to.

Yes, but it's done in a patronising way. It's a very patronising novel to anyone who isn't a WASP.


Tom Buchmann - The Great Gatsby


Tom was mean!:flare:

[mollie]

Might raise a few eyebrows, but Stephen Dedalus in Portrait (not so much in Ulysses). Annoyed the piss out of me.


Doesn't raise mine. He irritated the hell out of me.

[jinjang]

I agree with Mollie in the sense that some of you seem confused "annoying" with "horrible."

Here is my list:
Ternadier in Les Miserables;
Humbert Humbert in Lolita;
Count Dracula;
Sauron in Lord of the Rings;
(cautiously I might add) God in Old Testament

[Mr Endon]

(cautiously I might add) God in Old Testament

Dear me, that's a bold one! Props!

[wat??]

Tom was mean!:flare:

I really wanted to see him get his comemupance. It never happened :(

Gatsby should have shot him...or something.

[Tsuyoiko]

Might raise a few eyebrows, but Stephen Dedalus in Portrait (not so much in Ulysses). Annoyed the piss out of me.

He doesn't annoy me personally, but I know what you mean. The guy is pretentious even inside his own head :lol:

[andave_ya]

Anna Karenina from the novel of the same name,
and
Lord Henry from Dorian Gray.

[PoeticPassions]

Ternadier in Les Miserables;

(cautiously I might add) God in Old Testament


I wholeheartedly agree with Thernadier... he had no reedeming qualities, whatsoever.

I add God in Paradise Lost to the Old Testament

Lima, I also agree with Jane Eyre.. while generally enjoyed the book, I found her character to be so... frustrating, to say the least.


Tom was mean!:flare:

I found Daisy to be awful as well...

[Dark Lady]

JANE BLOODY EYRE. THE MOST ANNOYING BITT...CHaracter (hehe)
ever written.

EVER.

Female characters irritate me. Generally speaking

What did you find particularly annoying about poor Jane? She irrates me in parts but I quite like her on the whole and the novel is one of my favourites.

[Madame X]

Ms. Eyre? Prim, proper, and perfectly prudish, like a good little Victorian. :p I personally find M. Rochester to be the more galling, however...to the opposite extreme, that is. Far too irritatingly temperamental.

[Dark Lady]

Ms. Eyre? Prim, proper, and perfectly prudish, like a good little Victorian. :p I personally find M. Rochester to be the more galling, however...to the opposite extreme, that is. Far too irritatingly temperamental.

Ah now I know how the Wuthering Heights fans feel when I vent about it! :lol:

I always think of her as having had a pretty hard life and she has had to toughen up to deal with it all. A good little Victorian? Yes in some ways. But in others quite radical for the time.

And I love Rochester! Despite his mood swings...and the fact he locked his wife in the attic.

[mona amon]

Ms. Eyre? Prim, proper, and perfectly prudish, like a good little Victorian. :p I personally find M. Rochester to be the more galling, however...to the opposite extreme, that is. Far too irritatingly temperamental.

Jane Eyre prudish? Contemporary readers certainly didn't think so.


I have finished the adventures of Miss Jane Eyre and think her by far the cleverest that has written since Austen and Edgeworth were in their prime. Worth fifty Trollopes and Martineaus rolled into one counterpane , with fifty Dickenses and Bulwers to keep them company; but rather a brazen Miss....[cut]....a thin, little, unpretty slip of a governess, who falls in love with a plain, stoutish Mr. Burnand, aged twenty years above herself, sits on his knee, lights his cigar for him, asks him flat one fine evening, and after a concealed mad wife is dead, at last fills that awful lady's place. Lady Fanny will easily extract the moral of this touching fable. - J. G. Lockhart, from a letter.

:lol:

[Zee.]

I wholeheartedly agree with Thernadier... he had no reedeming qualities, whatsoever.

I add God in Paradise Lost to the Old Testament

Lima, I also agree with Jane Eyre.. while generally enjoyed the book, I found her character to be so... frustrating, to say the least.


Yeah, right, exactly! she just annoyed the hell out of me. She was bland.


Jane Eyre prudish? Contemporary readers certainly didn't think so.



:lol:

Yes but we are talking about characters we PERSONALLY find horrible. I don't give two pennies and 5 whistle horns for the opinions of others when it comes to Jane Eyre because it does nothing to sway my view. I found the book to be dry, and it left the worst taste in my mouth. And she just drove me nuts.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v731/hpqueen333/GilderoyLockhart.gif

[Madame X]

I always think of her as having had a pretty hard life and she has had to toughen up to deal with it all. A good little Victorian? Yes in some ways. But in others quite radical for the time.

Admittedly, her spontaneous sojourn into the woods without a single thought as to how she might thenceforth sustain herself might be considered a bit...rash by some. :cool: No doubt an interesting episode, but I daresay the last (beginning with the introduction of St. John, et al). As far as her relationship with Rochester is concerned, call it lack of imagination but I remain utterly unconvinced. He is a constant brooder which intimates a "depth" of character that is never, in my eyes, truly substantiated. In a good mood, he's a doting dolt. Either way, I fail to see what constitutes their attraction (particularly her to him) unless I'm to believe it's a rather simple matter of mutual ugliness. :angel:

[PoeticPassions]

Admittedly, her spontaneous sojourn into the woods without a single thought as to how she might thenceforth sustain herself might be considered a bit...rash by some. :cool: No doubt an interesting episode, but I daresay the last (beginning with the introduction of St. John, et al). As far as her relationship with Rochester is concerned, call it lack of imagination but I remain utterly unconvinced. He is a constant brooder which intimates a "depth" of character that is never, in my eyes, truly substantiated. In a good mood, he's a doting dolt. Either way, I fail to see what constitutes their attraction (particularly her to him) unless I'm to believe it's a rather simple matter of mutual ugliness. :angel:

hahaha :)
But yeah, I never really understood why she fell in love with him. And, honestly, I though Rochester was quite two-dimensional. He didn't have much intrigue... or actual depth

[ImaginaryFriend]

Cathy from Wuthering Heights. She was so manipulative and cruel.

[mona amon]

Yes but we are talking about characters we PERSONALLY find horrible. I don't give two pennies and 5 whistle horns for the opinions of others when it comes to Jane Eyre ...

Sure. I completely agree. I don't think I said anything contrary to that in the post you quoted.

[Dark Lady]

Admittedly, her spontaneous sojourn into the woods without a single thought as to how she might thenceforth sustain herself might be considered a bit...rash by some. :cool: No doubt an interesting episode, but I daresay the last (beginning with the introduction of St. John, et al). As far as her relationship with Rochester is concerned, call it lack of imagination but I remain utterly unconvinced. He is a constant brooder which intimates a "depth" of character that is never, in my eyes, truly substantiated. In a good mood, he's a doting dolt. Either way, I fail to see what constitutes their attraction (particularly her to him) unless I'm to believe it's a rather simple matter of mutual ugliness. :angel:

Hmm. Are you not impressed by the Byronic hero? ;)

I always thought she was attracted to him because (horrible cheesiness alert, can't think of a way of saying this in a less nausea inducing way) he saw her for who she really was, unlike the moajority of the characters in the novel. I like the way he always refers to her as some sort of faery or sprite.

But each to their own! I dislike characters and books that some people love so I won't try to force my opinion on you.

[kelby_lake]

Cathy from Wuthering Heights. She was so manipulative and cruel.

Yep, she so was. Needed a good slap.

[brucevayne]

One particular character I dislike immensely (probably because I've recently read the book and its fresh in my mind) is Humbert Humbert from Lolita.

Yes I know its an easy choice but apart from disliking him for the...errr..."obvious" reasons, his personality is utterly dislikeable. He is pompous and amazingly arrogant in the way he considers himself above almost anybody and everybody he encounters. His disdain for females, especially older women (well, older than Lolita) is so strong that it becomes to be amusing - especially the way he constantly refers to Lolita's mother in bovine terms!

Hats off to Mr. Nabokov for creating such a despicable character!

[Gretchen]

I forgot the Thenardiers(spl?) and their daughter Eponine from Les Miserables. Horrible people.

[toni]

Rodolphe Boulanger from Madame Bovary is getting on my nerves for being absolutely arrogant and manipulative.


Yep, she so was. Needed a good slap.

:lol:

[mal4mac]

Antonio in The Merchant of Venice, and his friends. I end up wanting Shylock to get his pound of flesh.

I agree with that! Did you see the film version with Jeremy Irons as Antonio? The spitting scene at the beginning kind of turned me against him...

The evil aristocrats trying to seduce Nicholas Nickleby's sister are also up there. The most evil one gets an excellent comic comeuppance though. Nicholas might be the most likeable character in fiction... a bit too good to be true though... but who cares...

[Boo Radley]

Daniel Quilp from The Old Curiosity Shop. I couldn't wait for him to meet his end.

[bigben]

Kate in East of Eden.

Pinkerton in Madama Butterfly. Are operas literature?

[Inka]

I hate Ewels from "To kill a Mockingbird", and Alden Pyle from "The Quite American", though I liked him at first.

[Paulclem]

Archimandrite Luseferous from Iain M Bank's The Algebraist. He had the head of a rebel leader kept alive so that he could use the rebel leader's living head as a punchbag each morning. All aspects of his life seemed to include a vicious sadism including his use of women.

[Lulim]

Nicholas Bulstrode from Middlemarch, because he's such an ugly hypocrite

[Veho]

I've only read 30 pages of Silas Marner so far, but I'm finding Dunstan Cass horrid.

[IceM]

I thought Iago from Othello was horrible. He's a brilliant character, but his manipulation of Othello results in, I believe, every death that occurs, unless I'm leaving out someone.

Antonio from Bless Me, Ultima, was a coward. He's an emasculated wimp who lacks any form of moral fiber. Him hiding behind his mother for most of the major decisions, until the very end, was terribly frustrating to read.

[Dinkleberry2010]

Alex in A Clockwork Orange
pure evil

[meinabox]

Obidiah Slope from Barchester Towers by Anthony Trollope makes me cringe!
and the horrible slimey little Noel Vanstone in No Name by Wilkie Collins.
I'm sure there's plently more but theres 2 to be going on with.

[African_Love]

Scarlet O'Hara

[kiki1982]

I don't know. It's a contest:

Aramis (The Three Musketeers) turns quite horrible at the end of the trilogy... Horrible enough... I believe so...

Heathcliff. He's been named a couple of times, but somehow he is very pitiable. Yet he is truly horrible and scary before the end.

Tom Tulliver (The Mill on the Floss): he is so much convinced of his own righteousness that you would shout at Maggie to leave him and marry her guy. Even with that deformed wreck (that's how they considered it then) she'll be better off than with such a brother. (Yes, it's a long time since I was considering to give up. I am glad I didn't :))

Alec d'Urberville: he is also quite horrible, but maybe a little stuck in the ways of his class. Useless he is, but he is also convinced of the ways that are...

As a person... I would have to go for Tom Tulliver as he is not educated by the ways of his class, but just by his own pride, at the cost of his sister's happiness. She gives him all, he takes it for granted and still believes he is superior.

From a factual point of view, there is no contest, is there. It has to be Heathcliff. Aramis and D'Urberville are somewhere in the middle... Too much ambition on the one side and boredom on the other.

But that is so far of course... Next book will maybe bring another horrible one. :D

[Lulim]

A truly horrible character is Félix Tholomyès, in Victor Hugo's novel "Les Misérables", the student who abandoned Fantine, and was consequently responsible for all her misery:


Félix Tholomyès — Fantine’s lover and Cosette’s biological father. A wealthy student, he cares more about his own welfare than for his responsibilities. He does not think much of his relationship with Fantine, considering it as "a passing affair." After impregnating Fantine, he abandons her as a joke. Hugo then concludes Tholomyès’ involvement in the story by saying that "twenty years later, under King Louis Philippe, he was a fat provincial attorney, rich and influential, a wise elector and rigid juryman; always, however, a man of pleasure."

(quote: Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Les_Mis%C3%A9rables#Minor))

[kiki1982]

I do think Tholomyès is pretty horrible, but not volunatrily so, or rather Fantine's naivety also had a lot to play in that episode. She meets a wealthy student, has a good time (obviously also in bed), but did she think for one minute that he was going to marry her or what? Rich, studying at the Sorbonne (probably) in order to become a lawyer (?)... Did she really think that she would have made any chance, already alone in the world at about 17 and no money? That is not a wife for a Tholomyès.

Rich people never marry poor people. She could have let Tholomyès for what he was and turned her eyes to an honest worker and maybe she would have married and been happy...

I suppose that is what is really horrible, the surroudings of the situation. Her naivety and yearning for nice clothes and pleasure together with his taking advantage.

[mona amon]

I couldn't take Tholomyès/Fantine seriously at all. We've heard that story too many times before, and Victor Hugo didn't succeed in making it any different.