The most Memorable Character in all of literature?

I would say the Hebrew Bible's Yahweh because he lies at the center of the three major religions in the West and has inspired controversy, literature, countless other works and re-workings, not least of all in the figures of Allah and Christ, who are pretty much reactions to Yahweh and the Hebrew Bible. As the saying goes, Christ hardly sneezes in the Gospels without referencing the Tanakh.

Though while Yahweh may not be as revered as Christ today (though indeed various normative interpretations of him from various books of the OT still live on) he is still, I believe, the backbone of our entire Western religious and even literary identity. All monotheistic representations of God seem to be derived from the J writer's Yahweh, from Milton's watered-down God in Paradise Lost (who is a weak character when compared to the greatly human Satan) to Michelangelo's mighty God swooping out of the clouds in the Sistine Chapel. Even Freud's hyperbole that the Yahweh is the origin of the super-ego in the West, I certainly don't dismiss the similar claim that there has never been a more powerful and omnipresent embodiment of the super-ego in literature.

I would also argue that Yahweh is probably the most enigmatic and strangest character in all of literature. I would be hard-pressed to name any characterization that is more uncanny than J's (the hypothetical writer of the best parts of the Torah). What character has inspired so many readings of this perplexing passage here?:

Quote:

---

And the LORD said unto Moses, When thou goest to return into Egypt, see that thou do all those wonders before Pharaoh, which I have put in thine hand: but I will harden his heart, that he shall not let the people go.

22 And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the LORD, Israel [is] my son, [even] my firstborn:

23 And I say unto thee, Let my son go, that he may serve me: and if thou refuse to let him go, behold, I will slay thy son, [even] thy firstborn.

24 And it came to pass by the way in the inn, that the LORD met him, and sought to kill him.

25 Then Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast [it] at his feet, and said, Surely a bloody husband [art] thou to me.

26 So he let him go: then she said, A bloody husband [thou art], because of the circumcision.

---

KJV trans

Another personal favorite passage of mine and one that has enamoured me for so long is Jacob's wrestling with a strange man who turns out to be Yahweh himself:

Quote:

---

And he rose up that night, and took his two wives, and his two womenservants, and his eleven sons, and passed over the ford Jabbok. And he took them, and sent them over the brook, and sent over that he had. And Jacob was left alone; and there wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day. And when he saw that he prevailed not against him, he touched the hollow of his thigh; and the hollow of Jacob's thigh was out of joint, as he wrestled with him. And he said, Let me go, for the day breaketh. And he said, I will not let thee go, except thou bless me. And he said unto him, What is thy name? And he said, Jacob. And he said, Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel: for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed. And Jacob asked him, and said, Tell me, I pray thee, thy name. And he said, Wherefore is it that thou dost ask after my name? And he blessed him there. And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved. And as he passed over Penuel the sun rose upon him, and he halted upon his thigh.Therefore the children of Israel eat not of the sinew which shrank, which is upon the hollow of the thigh, unto this day: because he touched the hollow of Jacob's thigh in the sinew that shrank.

---

Then there is the triumphant meeting between Yahweh and Moses with his priests on the top of Mount Siani which is altogether unlike anything literature has ever offered.

Quote:

---

9 Then went up Moses, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel:

10 And they saw the God of Israel: and [there was] under his feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in [his] clearness.

11 And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: also they saw God, and did eat and drink.

---

Christ of course is right there along with Yahweh as one of literatures most memorable characters (even though I am personally more moved and awed by the J writer than any of the writers of the Gospels) and I find all of his various representations fascinating, for they are about as diverse as Yahweh's; from the love-thy-neighbor Christ of Matthew to the anti-Semetic Christ of John to the Gnostic and enigmatic Christ of Thomas to the warrior Christ of Revelations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sulla

I wouldn't pick Christ from the Bible. His dialogue is weird and he has no serious development at all.

There's plenty of Christ figures in fiction who do it better.

---

The so-called "lack of character development" is probably because it's a pre-novel ancient text and was meant as scripture. Also, I don't know what you mean by the "weird" dialouge. Sure the dialouge in the Gospels isn't in modern English dialect (that would be weird if it was), it's made up of sermons, soliloquies, question-and-answer bits, etc.

That said, it is arguable that there may be better "Christ-figures" in literature even than Christ himself. Indeed I am far more moved by Dostoyevsky's Prince Myshkin than even Matthew's immortal depiction. That said, my favorite "Christ-figure/version" is probably the Christ from the non-canonical Gospel of Thomas.

On the radio show Desert Island Discs, the guests are asked to say which book they would take with them to the island. In the early days of the show, so many people chose either The Bible or The Complete Works of Shakespeare that the point of thing - which was to provide a hook for original and entertaining discussion - was rather dulled. So a rule was introduced that you get those two books for free, and what would your other one be?

Do you think we here at Litnet could introduce an informal convention that the Bible and the Koran don't feature in discussions of general literature? As things stand, it's inevitable that theists will cite their religious text - which, after all, they believe to be more important and more crammed to the gills with meaning than all other books put together. And atheists will tend to cite those texts in order to make their own point, which usually comes down to the view that they're not more important and more crammed to the gills with meaning than all other books, but simply part of the broad literary canon.

None of which really advances the general discussion much, but does tend to divert any thread towards a religious debate rather than a conversation about books.

Once Isabel Allende, the novelist daughter of President Allende of Chile, was on Desert Island Discs and when she was told that Shakespeare and The Bible came by default said she didn't want either of them. I was so shocked I missed what she chose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seasider

Once Isabel Allende, the novelist daughter of President Allende of Chile, was on Desert Island Discs and when she was told that Shakespeare and The Bible came by default said she didn't want either of them. I was so shocked I missed what she chose.

---

Indeed. The woman's an idiot. You're going to need something to start a fire with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarkBastable

Do you think we here at Litnet could introduce an informal convention that the Bible and the Koran don't feature in discussions of general literature? As things stand, it's inevitable that theists will cite their religious text - which, after all, they believe to be more important and more crammed to the gills with meaning than all other books put together. And atheists will tend to cite those texts in order to make their own point, which usually comes down to the view that they're not more important and more crammed to the gills with meaning than all other books, but simply part of the broad literary canon.

---

I don't know if you're referring directly to me or not but note that I am indeed not a theist and that I do not think that even something like the Torah is "crammed to the gills with meaning than all books put together".

Also, why not discuss religious texts as literature? To ignore the literary importance of these works is to ignore a great part of literature because they are so immensely influential and vital to the "canon".

I think the problem lies in people having to get rhetorical over things, I simply cited what I thought was the most memorable literary character in literature, I wasn't advertising my religion or something because I have none.

Sherlock Holmes
Yossarian (Catch 22)
Olafur Karason (World Light, Halldor Laxness)
Grendel (Grendel, John Gardner)
the unnamed narrator of Hunger by Knut Hamson

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanielBenoit

I don't know if you're referring directly to me or not but note that I am indeed not a theist and that I do not think that even something like the Torah is "crammed to the gills with meaning than all books put together".

Also, why not discuss religious texts as literature? To ignore the literary importance of these works is to ignore a great part of literature because they are so immensely influential and vital to the "canon".

I think the problem lies in people having to get rhetorical over things, I simply cited what I thought was the most memorable literary character in literature, I wasn't advertising my religion or something because I have none.

---

I don't know which you are - theist or atheist. Your reason for citing it, in fact, is the second I suggested.

I tend to agree with you that the works have great literary importance. And I'm all for the rhetorical. Which is why I gave the 'why not' in my post.

I'm simply saying there's an argument for taking those books out of the game. I can't enforce that - and I didn't expect everyone to agree with me. But I think it would be a good idea.

Raskolnikov in Crime and Punishment (Dostoevsky).

I would say the Hebrew Bible's Yahweh because he lies at the center of the three major religions in the West and has inspired controversy, literature, countless other works and re-workings, not least of all in the figures of Allah and Christ, who are pretty much reactions to Yahweh and the Hebrew Bible.

Yes, I was thinking of Yahweh/God as well after posting my suggestion of Christ or Moses. Like Jesus, Hamlet, Don Quixote, Satan, and a few other characters he lives outside of the original text as well: in Dante's Comedia, in Milton's Paradise Lost, in Blake's poems, on the Sistine, in Bach's cantatas, in Bob Dylan's Highway 61, etc... Like few other characters he also lives in other forms: as the unknown forces in Kafka, as the great whale (?) in Moby Dick, etc... Most of the other suggestions are nominations of characters that are but personally memorable, which is well and fine. There are but a few who tower over the whole of literature... and the arts as a whole.

obviously, mythological characters such as Christ, Buddah, J (or Y), Zeus, Ulysses, Hercules, Prometheus, Satan have a strong advantage of all others. They have millions of writers, they can have a thousand faces, the can be silly, deepth, simple, etc.

I do not give the throne to the bible so easily (even because greek mythology goes to the bible once or while), but it is easy... Quixote and Sancho are the only who go near the myths...

it's inevitable that theists will cite their religious text - which, after all, they believe to be more important and more crammed to the gills with meaning than all other books put together. And atheists will tend to cite those texts in order to make their own point, which usually comes down to the view that they're not more important and more crammed to the gills with meaning than all other books, but simply part of the broad literary canon.

The Bible is indeed a unique book in that it is indeed considered a sacred texts by a great many. I don't see this as any reason to take it out of literary discussion or automatically include it. While many theists or believers may indeed take the position that the Bible is a book above all books, I would presume that just as many would be adverse to discussing the Bible as literature. However, I would guess that it is because the Biblical texts are such a central part of Western culture that many avoid them or don't even think to include them when talking of "desert island books", the "greatest stories", the "greatest poetry", etc... It is interesting just how many readers express such shock and surprise when they truly do sit down and read the Bible as literature for the very reason that it often is quite different from what they thought it was.

The Bible, I would add, is also unique in that it is not a single book or text but rather a collection or compendium of often brilliant texts (histories, fictional narratives, lyrical poetry, aphorisms, visionary poetry) compiled by a single culture the Hebrew people (two cultures if we count the "New Testament" as a compendium of texts accepted as canonical by the early Christian Church)... As a result, there are but few books that can possibly rival the Bible... and many of them are compendiums or collections in themselves: the Mahabharata, the Arabian Nights, the collected works of Shakespeare, the great classical compendiums of Chinese and Japanese poetry etc... Of course if were to compile a similar collection of history, fictional narrative, and poetry (The collected plays of Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides, Thucydides and Herodotus' histories, Plato's Republic, the poems of Sappho, Theocritus, etc... and the Epics of Homer) we might start to really rival the Bible... and we might also recognize the work for what it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stlukesguild

it's inevitable that theists will cite their religious text - which, after all, they believe to be more important and more crammed to the gills with meaning than all other books put together. And atheists will tend to cite those texts in order to make their own point, which usually comes down to the view that they're not more important and more crammed to the gills with meaning than all other books, but simply part of the broad literary canon.

The Bible is indeed a unique book in that it is indeed considered a sacred texts by a great many. I don't see this as any reason to take it out of literary discussion or automatically include it. While many theists or believers may indeed take the position that the Bible is a book above all books, I would presume that just as many would be adverse to discussing the Bible as literature. However, I would guess that it is because the Biblical texts are such a central part of Western culture that many avoid them or don't even think to include them when talking of "desert island books", the "greatest stories", the "greatest poetry", etc... It is interesting just how many readers express such shock and surprise when they truly do sit down and read the Bible as literature for the very reason that it often is quite different from what they thought it was.

The Bible, I would add, is also unique in that it is not a single book or text but rather a collection or compendium of often brilliant texts (histories, fictional narratives, lyrical poetry, aphorisms, visionary poetry) compiled by a single culture the Hebrew people (two cultures if we count the "New Testament" as a compendium of texts accepted as canonical by the early Christian Church)... As a result, there are but few books that can possibly rival the Bible... and many of them are compendiums or collections in themselves: the Mahabharata, the Arabian Nights, the collected works of Shakespeare, the great classical compendiums of Chinese and Japanese poetry etc... Of course if were to compile a similar collection of history, fictional narrative, and poetry (The collected plays of Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides, Thucydides and Herodotus' histories, Plato's Republic, the poems of Sappho, Theocritus, etc... and the Epics of Homer) we might start to really rival the Bible... and we might also recognize the work for what it is.

---

I agree with you. Or you agree with me. I'm not arguing about the merit of the Bible as a part of Western literary heritage.

I'm simply saying that citing it in threads about general literature tends to divert the thread. As we are so neatly demonstrating.

It could be argued that many great works are essentially a rewriting of Judeo-Christian themes, even if not consciously. Hamlet is, after all, a martyr to a moral corrosion of state power, if anyone has seen the recent production with Patrick Stewart as Claudius. The topic question intrigues, but remains nearly impossible to answer, because most of us would frame it against the backdrop of Western tradition.

I'd select Oedipus. He represents not only the first tragic figure, but represents the need, in our culture, for a hero, whether fallen our not. We tie our fate in the west to the emperor.

While he's not my personal favorite, I would say that Achilles is the western hero archetype par excellence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oshima

While he's not my personal favorite, I would say that Achilles is the western hero archetype par excellence.

---

Not as Brad Pitt portrays him :D. I recently saw Troy and it was one of the best bad over the top melodramas I've seen out of Hollywood, in terms of contemporary classicism.

The character I remember the most is probably Humbert Humbert, as his full psycological portrait is painted on the pages which bring him to life. Lolita as well, but less so.

For me, Falstaff will always be a personal favorite. As will Leopold Bloom.

Also, I think Odysseus beats out Achilles as the Western hero par excellence, almost no secular character has been represented by so many different authors, from Homer to Dante to Joyce (in the character of Bloom). The figure is almost a secular Christ in that he is used to reflect aspects of the author, for Odysseus has been presented as a man of action to a man of necessity, from a Reinissance man to a political Machiavellian, from the ordinary hero to the mythical legend. He somehow encompasses a certain major part of our Western mythology (in a very general sense) and may be the most memorable secular character alongside those of Shakespeare and Cervantes.

Huck Finn
Most characters in David Copperfield
Protagonist in Notes from Underground
Raskolnikov
Don Quixote
Protagonist in The Tell-Tale Heart (Edgar Allan Poe)
Roderick Usher in The Fall of the House of Usher (Edgar Allan Poe)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jozanny

It could be argued that many great works are essentially a rewriting of Judeo-Christian themes.

---

Or it could be argued that the same themes tend to crop up in all story-telling.

I have no problem discounting The Bible and its leading characters as contenders here. Whatever they did, or represent, its such a boring read, I struggled to finish it.

Of the many suggestions above, Sherlock Holmes seems to be the most memorable, with his iconic deerstalker and pipe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Travis_R

The character I remember the most is probably Humbert Humbert, as his full psycological portrait is painted on the pages which bring him to life. Lolita as well, but less so.

---

interesting...the doc agrees that he was quite the literary character...and lolita wasn't chopped liver when developing a character either...

My #3 and #2 have been mentioned (Judge Holden & Raskolnikov), but my #1 favorite character is without doubt Thomas Sutpen, from Absalom, Absalom!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by callipygias

My #3 and #2 have been mentioned (Judge Holden & Raskolnikov), but my #1 favorite character is without doubt Thomas Sutpen, from Absalom, Absalom!

---

a memorable character indeed...one of faulkner's finest w/o a doubt...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by country doctor

•Holden Caulfield, The Catcher in the Rye, J. D. Salinger, 1951
•Ignatius Reilly, A Confederacy of Dunces, John Kennedy Toole, 1980

---

These were the first two I thought of.

Personally, Oliver Twist.. But just because of a play I was in, in 5th grade..

flem snopes was quite the character from faulkner's imagination...he might not get all the attention that some of his other characters do, but he doesn't have to take a back seat to any of them either...

just an unbelievably interesting character...and very believable too...

Going to throw out a plug for Miss Havisham from Great Expectations simply because the images of her in the midst of all her wedding day garb and flying at Pip aflame are some of the strongest I have had whilst reading a novel. Although admitedly I havn't read nearly as many books as other around here so this could change when I start working my way through.

Probably already mentioned, but my vote goes to Don Quixote.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iamnobody

Probably already mentioned, but my vote goes to Don Quixote.

---

Oh! I love that character.

But probably Sam Gamgee. And definitely Frodo Baggins, Gandalf, Aragorn, and etc.(*Their all from LOTR.)

It's really kind of hard to argue with Luke's suggestions of God, Jesus, Moses, Satan, et al, from the Bible. I mean, really, who could even compete?

Anyways, Biblical beings aside, I'd like to nominate a few Tolstoy characters...Pierre and Andrei from War and Peace, and Levin and Anna from Anna Karenina.

Nietzsche's Zarathustra also seems to have made a pretty decent impact on the Western World. That might just be one of those personally memorable characters, though.

I think Faust deserves a shot.

I'd probably have to go for Dean Moriarty, though there's an endless list to choose from. Prince Andrei, Jay Gatsby, Leopold Bloom, Sam Gamgee, Atticus Finch, McMurphy and Melquíades, are all also excellent mentions

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Desolation

Anyways, Biblical beings aside, I'd like to nominate a few Tolstoy characters...Pierre and Andrei from War and Peace, and Levin and Anna from Anna Karenina.

---

Pierre is one of my favorite characters although it was difficult to understand him sometimes. I also agree about Andrei, Levin and Anna.

I don't know if plays count but if they do, nothing beats the tie between Romeo and Juliette.

If plays do not count, I would have to say Don Quixote.

These are characters that truly ring and have rung in the ears of millions, throughout so many countries and over such a long time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aliengirl

Pierre is one of my favorite characters although it was difficult to understand him sometimes. I also agree about Andrei, Levin and Anna.

---

I love Pierre. I'm only 350 pages through the book, but whenever there's a battle scene, I can't help but think, "Man, I'm tired of reading about people getting blown up, I want to see what happens to Pierre during the next dinner party!" He never ceases to entertain me.

Here are my few memorable characters.

Mephistophilis - Doctor Faustus
Dorian Gray - The Picture of Dorian Gray
Heathcliff - Wuthering Heights
Joe Gargery - Great Expectations
Levin - Anna Karenina
Billy Buck - The Red Pony
Bathsheba Everdene - Far from the Madding Crowd
Emma - Emma

well my choices have been mentioned but Raskolnikov, Humbert Humbert and Levin.
I dont know if you want to read the whole Karenina novel if you are just studying characters. I think that Anna was good but in comparison to the all time great characters of prose, she doesnt really live up. Levin is really excellent though.
I think Raskolnikov (or almost any of the main characters in Dostoevskys famous works) and Humbert Humbert are must reads for studying characters.
For various reasons not as many female characters have been mentioned, its really tough me for me to pinpoint truly amazing female characters off the top of my head. Maybe Elizabeth Bennett?

Dunya in Crime and Punishment.

Since this is an individual question, I will answer individually.

The way I read I place myself in the novel. This means that I can hear, see, smell, touch, and sense things as one of the characters themselves. This makes nearly every protagonist and antagonist in every book memorable to me, so long as the work is worth the cost of admission.

There are, however, characters who remain with me and on whom my life is based. This may sound weird, since we are talking about fiction, but some characters are good. And since it is fiction, they can be good to the point of obsurdity.

Sam Damon and Ben Krisler from Once an Eagle, Gus McCrae and Cpt Call from Lonesome Dove are my main for good guy characters

Long John Silver from Treasure Island and Courtney Massengale from Once an Eagle (I love that book. It is the only one I read at least once a year) are my antithesis characters. In fact, if I call someone a "Massengale" or "Courtney" there is no higher insult, though most people don't get it.

For readers, I imagine Legolas, Gimli, Aragorn, Hector, Achilles, Candide, Dr. Jekyll, and Winston would be memorable. (List incomplete)

the book with the most interesting characters of all time has to be catch 22. although all are not all looked at in depth, they are the most unique characters in literature.
certainly yossarian is tops
but what about
milo minderbender--the worlds greatest entrepreneur
major major major major--he was only in when he was out
the soldier in white--just switch the drip from out to in
mcwatt
snowden
doc deneka
dunbar
nately
nately's whore
the chaplain
wintergreen

i could go on. almost every character in the book is fascinating and unique. sometimes it is who are they which can be just as interesting as what are they.
not a character study, but a study of characters!