epistler (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
epistler) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
antishurtugal_reborn2025-03-31 05:34 pm
epistler) wrote in antishurtugal_reborn2025-03-31 05:34 pm
Entry tags:
Trig, Angela, Greg, And How To Fail At Comic Relief Characters
Obviously we dislike 99.9% of Paolini's characters, but the three who seem to be the most universally loathed are his three comic relief characters - Angela, Trig, and Greg the LOLCRAZY ship mind.
I've been thinking about that recently, and decided it would be interesting and hopefully instructive to look into why these characters failed so drastically in more detail, and how to write a funny character in a way that is actually successful.
To begin with I'm gonna lump Angela and Greg together because their style of "humour" is very similar. They are both painted as very eccentric and in Greg's case mentally unbalanced. As a result they say all sorts of bizarre and random things such as Angela talking about counting pigeons right out of nowhere.
Just saying random stuff is not funny. The odd non sequitur can work, but it has to be done properly, and if 95% of the character's dialogue is nothing but, the reader is just going to want them to shut the fuck up. Especially so if they never stop fucking blathering.
This is reason one as to why both characters are irritating as fuck instead of funny.
Then we have Trig, who is supposed to be funny because he's naïve and innocent and asks nosey questions as a result, and also he looks like a dork with his stupid-looking outfit and generally gawky appearance. However, his antics come off not as clueless but as thoughtless, insensitive, and rude. His supposed naivety is ruined by the fact that it comes coupled with a complete inability to read the room and know when to keep his mouth shut, as a result of which he comes off as just not caring about other people's feelings and having no tact. So of course we don't find him funny and charming. Instead we just hate him and kept wishing he would just fucking die. The more so that Paolini kept using his ass for Tragedy Fodder by putting him in supposed danger all the time.
What are the two key issues here? Well obviously the first is that their "humour" is not funny. The second is that Paolini didn't bother (or was unable to) make any of these characters likeable.
So how do we avoid falling into this trap? There are a few important factors to consider.
First off: don't write comic relief characters in the first place.
Instead, write characters who are funny. If you only think of a character as "the comic relief" you have already failed, because now they cannot have any identity outside of that, and you will feel compelled to have them do nothing except crack jokes and comically fall on their arse all the time. That's not a character. That's a clown.
A funny character shouldn't just be cracking jokes all the time to begin with, because nobody behaves like that either unless they're a comedian who's currently on stage. And nobody would ever like someone who acts like that. A well-adjusted person/character knows when to be light-hearted and when to get serious.
Most of the time, I've found the best approach is to make the character not take themselves too seriously and perhaps do something silly from time to time by accident, such as the classic Disney sidekick gag where the character boasts loudly about what amazing senses they have only to immediately get jumped because guess what, they're way more incompetent than they're prepared to let on. An ability to laugh at yourself is also an important skill you need if you want to be amusing to other people as well as likeable.
The other factor to consider here ties into the last sentence above: the funny character must also have likeable traits that are not related to them being funny.
The last comical character I wrote was funny because he was pompous, self-important, grandiose and stupidly reckless, as a result of which he was frequently laughed at and would periodically get himself into a pickle and need to be bailed out. The other characters naturally found these traits annoying and kept calling him out on it, but they didn't tell him to fuck off and start hating him because he was also incredibly kind and considerate, brave, loyal, and always putting his friends first. So like any of us they put up with his irritating traits because they loved him far too much for that to be a deal-breaker. He is never once intentionally a jerk, even when someone's being a jerk to him. He's just kind of a doofus.
Being a doofus is forgivable.
Being an asshole is not.
And Angela, Greg and Trig are assholes. Angela is a bully and an abuser who doesn't have a kind word to say to or about anybody (traits which only get worse the more pagetime she gets). She and Greg both constantly insult people and act like they're superior to everyone else. Trig, like I said, is an asshole who constantly puts his foot in it by asking rude questions and never learns his lesson because he clearly just doesn't care.
On a related note, Saphira and Eragon (and later Morontagh and Thorn) constantly insulting and belittling each other is obviously supposed to be amusing banter between best pals but fails because Paolini failed at the "best pals" part. So instead they just come off as if they hate each other.
Comic relief that is not funny is one of the most irritating things on earth, so therefore it is really not surprising that a failed comic relief character is going to be the one we all want to throw into one of those machines that grind up old couches, feet first, then set the goopy remains on fire and toast marshmallows while singing a happy tune.
Of course, it also helps rather a lot if you, the author, has a good sense of humour. Paolini thinks newt puns are the height of comedy. Enough said.
I've been thinking about that recently, and decided it would be interesting and hopefully instructive to look into why these characters failed so drastically in more detail, and how to write a funny character in a way that is actually successful.
To begin with I'm gonna lump Angela and Greg together because their style of "humour" is very similar. They are both painted as very eccentric and in Greg's case mentally unbalanced. As a result they say all sorts of bizarre and random things such as Angela talking about counting pigeons right out of nowhere.
Just saying random stuff is not funny. The odd non sequitur can work, but it has to be done properly, and if 95% of the character's dialogue is nothing but, the reader is just going to want them to shut the fuck up. Especially so if they never stop fucking blathering.
This is reason one as to why both characters are irritating as fuck instead of funny.
Then we have Trig, who is supposed to be funny because he's naïve and innocent and asks nosey questions as a result, and also he looks like a dork with his stupid-looking outfit and generally gawky appearance. However, his antics come off not as clueless but as thoughtless, insensitive, and rude. His supposed naivety is ruined by the fact that it comes coupled with a complete inability to read the room and know when to keep his mouth shut, as a result of which he comes off as just not caring about other people's feelings and having no tact. So of course we don't find him funny and charming. Instead we just hate him and kept wishing he would just fucking die. The more so that Paolini kept using his ass for Tragedy Fodder by putting him in supposed danger all the time.
What are the two key issues here? Well obviously the first is that their "humour" is not funny. The second is that Paolini didn't bother (or was unable to) make any of these characters likeable.
So how do we avoid falling into this trap? There are a few important factors to consider.
First off: don't write comic relief characters in the first place.
Instead, write characters who are funny. If you only think of a character as "the comic relief" you have already failed, because now they cannot have any identity outside of that, and you will feel compelled to have them do nothing except crack jokes and comically fall on their arse all the time. That's not a character. That's a clown.
A funny character shouldn't just be cracking jokes all the time to begin with, because nobody behaves like that either unless they're a comedian who's currently on stage. And nobody would ever like someone who acts like that. A well-adjusted person/character knows when to be light-hearted and when to get serious.
Most of the time, I've found the best approach is to make the character not take themselves too seriously and perhaps do something silly from time to time by accident, such as the classic Disney sidekick gag where the character boasts loudly about what amazing senses they have only to immediately get jumped because guess what, they're way more incompetent than they're prepared to let on. An ability to laugh at yourself is also an important skill you need if you want to be amusing to other people as well as likeable.
The other factor to consider here ties into the last sentence above: the funny character must also have likeable traits that are not related to them being funny.
The last comical character I wrote was funny because he was pompous, self-important, grandiose and stupidly reckless, as a result of which he was frequently laughed at and would periodically get himself into a pickle and need to be bailed out. The other characters naturally found these traits annoying and kept calling him out on it, but they didn't tell him to fuck off and start hating him because he was also incredibly kind and considerate, brave, loyal, and always putting his friends first. So like any of us they put up with his irritating traits because they loved him far too much for that to be a deal-breaker. He is never once intentionally a jerk, even when someone's being a jerk to him. He's just kind of a doofus.
Being a doofus is forgivable.
Being an asshole is not.
And Angela, Greg and Trig are assholes. Angela is a bully and an abuser who doesn't have a kind word to say to or about anybody (traits which only get worse the more pagetime she gets). She and Greg both constantly insult people and act like they're superior to everyone else. Trig, like I said, is an asshole who constantly puts his foot in it by asking rude questions and never learns his lesson because he clearly just doesn't care.
On a related note, Saphira and Eragon (and later Morontagh and Thorn) constantly insulting and belittling each other is obviously supposed to be amusing banter between best pals but fails because Paolini failed at the "best pals" part. So instead they just come off as if they hate each other.
Comic relief that is not funny is one of the most irritating things on earth, so therefore it is really not surprising that a failed comic relief character is going to be the one we all want to throw into one of those machines that grind up old couches, feet first, then set the goopy remains on fire and toast marshmallows while singing a happy tune.
Of course, it also helps rather a lot if you, the author, has a good sense of humour. Paolini thinks newt puns are the height of comedy. Enough said.
no subject
Listen and respond with respect - that's the ASReborn way!_
As it is my own way! (And I note I haven't encountered much else on this site; that's a nice contrast with (apparently) most of the internet, isn't it?)
God Douglass' attempts at drama are ridiculous. There's a reason why in my own sporkings I kept making soap opera references, because her stupid romantic dramas are right out of The Days Of Our Lives with all the OMG Surprise Pregnancies, the cheating, the love triangles, blah blah blah. I mean good lord, give it a rest already!
Yeah, if she'd gone for Soap Opera Fantasy, I'd be fine with it, but trying to write an Epic Fantasy as one doesn't quite work. ...That makes me wonder if it works any better in her The Crucible and The Troy Game series; have you ever read a bit of those?
Oohooo I am SO tempted to bring those back in Kippurbird's place...
And I'd really love reading more, too!
no subject
God yes. I stay out of most other internet spaces, or I just look at content without engaging because what's the point? I'm not going to get anything worthwhile out of some creep responding with "mmkay" or "lol ur stupid".
Like Yarros, she really seems to have no real interest in the Epic Fantasy side of things, instead putting all her focus (especially after a certain point) on soap opera romance bullshit. The fantasy stuff just amounts to an excuse to give her favourite character more stupid powers. It's basically romantasy decades before the term even existed. No wonder some people refuse to take female fantasy authors seriously.
Hell, I myself was mistaken for a male author because, I'm told, "you write like a man".
Which seems to be code for "the focus is on plot, with minimal romance and no harping on about how OMG BEAUTIFUL the female protagonist is". Gosh, if only there was such a thing as female fantasy authors who aren't interested in romance, but hell if I've come across any.
I might have read the first book of one of them? Something about some manipulative bitch priestess who reads the future in entrails that move like snakes and there's a big pyramid with a dog-headed villain inside? That was the last of her books I ever read before giving up because it wasn't even "so bad it's good" any more. And people were shoving small statues up their asses on a regular basis and somehow not ending up with perforated bowels. God that was disgusting.
The meat glistened under the lamplight, warm and luscious and inviting. Eragon could feel his excitement rising higher and higher as he slowly caressed its soft curves in anticipation of the pleasures soon to come...
no subject
God yes. I stay out of most other internet spaces, or I just look at content without engaging because what's the point? I'm not going to get anything worthwhile out of some creep responding with "mmkay" or "lol ur stupid".
Exactly! And beyond that, I find this a rather nice space for longform content, which is exactly what I want.
Well, that sucks. (For Douglass, though... I don't know if I'd call it "romantasy"? She obviously does like the fantasy part, too, especially in the later books, something that I don't get the impression Yarros does.)
I might have read the first book of one of them? Something about some manipulative bitch priestess who reads the future in entrails that move like snakes and there's a big pyramid with a dog-headed villain inside? That was the last of her books I ever read before giving up because it wasn't even "so bad it's good" any more. And people were shoving small statues up their asses on a regular basis and somehow not ending up with perforated bowels. God that was disgusting.
Oh, that was The Serpent Bride, the first book of the DarkGlass Mountain trilogy, the last series of books featuring Axis and co. Your description roughly tracks, though I'm not quite sure if Ishbel's that bad and the god was actually jackal-headed (and is called "Kanubai", because that is certainly not a rip-off of "Anubis" at all). For the last point... StarDrifter says that "it [is] not unknown for Coroleans to die from perforated bowels and wombs due to crowding in one too many deities." And yeah, I fully agree on Coroleas; we gain absolutely nothing from seeing how evil Coroleas is and how they torture the souls out of people and such. It's probably just there for the grimdark, and I don't like that.
That does make me want to read the other two trilogies even more... since The Serpent Bride is a severe regression from Threshold and Beyond the Hanging Wall and it features rather more royal drama than the other books... so I wonder if it came from the intervening trilogies. I also found the quality improved impressively fast after that book, which makes me wonder the same thing.
Yes, that was about what I was thinking of. :p
no subject
I love that DreamWidth also isn't trying to force AI on us and doesn't censor either. One website I frequent won't even let you use "gulag", "terrorism" or even "moron" in the comments section. Everything gets auto-censored, and it's getting worse.
He's made when a dog's head is stuck onto a baby's body, though I wouldn't be surprised if he randomly has a jackal head later on.
Wow, real imaginative.
Well that just makes it even dumber because it is not physically POSSIBLE to shove something so far up your vagina that it enters the womb. That's why tampons don't get lost in there. That's not even how impregnation works; the sperm have to make it the rest of the way on their own for a reason.
Me neither. Dark stuff should be there for a reason other than "just because".
no subject
I love that DreamWidth also isn't trying to force AI on us and doesn't censor either. One website I frequent won't even let you use "gulag", "terrorism" or even "moron" in the comments section. Everything gets auto-censored, and it's getting worse.
Which one is that? And yes, that's why I most probably won't be much active elsewhere.
He's made when a dog's head is stuck onto a baby's body, though I wouldn't be surprised if he randomly has a jackal head later on.
Let's see... Oh, there's this:
Jackals and dogs aren't the same, Douglass.
Well that just makes it even dumber because it is not physically POSSIBLE to shove something so far up your vagina that it enters the womb. That's why tampons don't get lost in there. That's not even how impregnation works; the sperm have to make it the rest of the way on their own for a reason.
Well, thanks for catching that already! I've got a strong suspicion that this is caused by trying to be as grimdark as possible...
no subject
They're SO afraid of losing advertisers that they're basically making it impossible to communicate. You can't use the word "abuser" any more either.
🤦♀️🤦♀️🤦♀️
Really, how the F would pregnancy even work if the womb wasn't sealed the way it is?
no subject
Yeah, that's the way I feel about Douglass most of the time so far.