Most Horrible Character

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JBI

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gretchen

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.'

Tom Buchmann - The Great Gatsby

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by *Classic*Charm*

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by *Classic*Charm*

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,"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neely

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!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tsuyoiko

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 :)

Quote:

---

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.

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.

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

I love adjectives. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by *Classic*Charm*

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

---

Why everybody dislike Anna? I never got that.

Emma Bovary - the ultimate choice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by *Classic*Charm*

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bazarov

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 :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tsuyoiko

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/for...ad.php?t=32974

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

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tsuyoiko

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by V.Jayalakshmi

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!

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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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?

---

Yes. Horrible. I despise her.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JBI

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by *Classic*Charm*

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?

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mollie

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by *Classic*Charm*

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mollie

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 :)

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

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scheherazade

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wat??

Tom Buchmann - The Great Gatsby

---

Tom was mean!:flare:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Josh Wardrip

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.

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jinjang

(cautiously I might add) God in Old Testament

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kelby_lake

Tom was mean!:flare:

---

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

Gatsby should have shot him...or something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Josh Wardrip

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:

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jinjang

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kelby_lake

Tom was mean!:flare:

---

I found Daisy to be awful as well...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by limajean

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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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

Quote:

---

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:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PoeticPassions

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mona amon

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/v7...oyLockhart.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dark Lady

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:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Madame X

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

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by limajean

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.