Over in the supporting characters poll , I suggested a new poll on which characters authors hate to write or have the most trouble getting down 'on paper' successfully.

So I thought I'd ask the question here instead. Rather than have to make up a specific list of characters for a poll which may or may not contain the character an author is thinking about as an answer. This seems simpler.

So...which character drives you to frustration as you write by being totally un-cooperative - and why? Is it a character you feel unable to empathise or connect with? A character you just dislike? Or do you feel they are so complex that you just cannot get them right?

For myself...I can't say that there are any characters which really fall into the category. But there were certainly a few that I felt afraid to tackle. Lex. Martha. In the end, I was happy with the result, but it was daunting to start with.

LabRat

I really have trouble writing Lex. He's just so evil, I can't get my mind around him. Villains are tough for me.

Luthor it is.

Not sure why - maybe because of his over-the -top evilness. Or maybe because I always liked to have some original major characters in my fics, and the villain(s) were a way to do that. Or maybe it was because I knew I could fall into the trap of merely rewriting a Luthor A plot rather than developing a new one.

Or maybe it's the 'ear' for his speech patterns.

Still, I never consciously made a decision *not* to write Luthor - he just never wandered into a story. And that's how characters appeared for me - they showed up. Half the time I didn't know which one would turn out to be the villain.

c.

Lois, I think. I have trouble relating to her, for some reason. I'm a lot more like Clark: laid back, a goody-two-shoes, things like that.

I always had trouble with Clark. I *love* Lois, because she lets my sense of humor come out. I can work a good babble.

I suppose I'd have to say Lex Luthor. Mainly because most of my stories take place in future seasons, so Lex is long dead. In the one story where I did feature Lex, I found it difficult to hear his voice and see his mannerisms inside my head.

I like inventing my own villains, though I did very much enjoy writing Mindy Church and found her easy to get down on the page. Does that say something about my character?

I can't totally remember, but I think I had difficulty writing Jimmy Olsen once. Again my stories are in the future and I'm not totally comfortable that I have aged Jim realistically.

Yours Jenni

I'd have to say Martha and Jonathan. It's hard to write them without seeming so country hospitality, "aw shucks," etc., when in reality they should be critical of some of Clark's decisions and, let's face it, parents have moments where they're really disappointed in their children, even adults, and aren't too thrilled to see them.

The fic I am writing now has Jonathan being VERY unsupportive of Clark's lifestyle, and I have had to really stop and think as I write him to make sure there is a fine line between his love for his son and his disapproval of what Clark is doing without being over- or underbearing.

The character I find hardest to write is Tempus. The first story that I wrote that Tempus appeared in... I'm not sure I had him say a single word. I just couldn't do it. I've gotten better since then, I think, but I still struggle with getting his voice right.

ML

This reminded me that I need to post the other quiz for who you LIKE to write. Sorry. I'll try to get that done.

Anyway, I hate to write Jimmy. Per the other thread, I can never find anything that needs him. I've never found a way to make him central to any of my stories. Whenever I have him do anything, it's because he's there and he has to do something. I've never had a single story concept that couldn't move forward without Jimmy Olsen.

As for villains, I hate Lex but I like to write him. Arrogant and intelligent evil is great fun to write. That's Lex

Bob

Ok get ready for a laugh, I think.

I honestly don't like writing Superman. I've spent the last decade in this fandom avoiding him like I avoid scrubbing my upstairs toilet.

I think I finally have a reason why, though. I'm a hardcore Season 1 fan, and Superman's a little...too perfect for me in Season 1. I spend most of my time in Season 1 Lois' head, and I get an overload of who she thinks he is--maybe a little too flashy and dazzling, and that's not what I want to write about at all. I think he's only made 2 appearances in my vignettes so far, and until I want to write a real novel that debunks the flashy and dazzling, he'll probably not venture too far into my monitor.

Peace
JD

The character I least like writing is Jonathan. I can't get into his head at all and he has no 'thing' for me to fall back on. I have a similar problem with Perry, but when in doubt I just have him either yell at everyone to get back to work, or have him mention Elvis and get everyone else to stop paying attention. However, as I love including Martha, Jonathan tends to come as part of the package, so it's hard for me to avoid him.

Hi Shadow,

No laughter from me. The character I least like writing is Lois. I prefer writing in the S1 and S2 time frame; but, to be completely candid, I don't like the early Lois -- to put it politely, she is too "driven" for my tastes. Frankly, I just don't see what appealed about her to Clark then. Yes, she was beautiful, intelligent, and independent; she was also unscrupulous (committing breaking and entering and theft without thinking twice, if it would help her get a story), hot-tempered, thoughtless and mean (repeatedly insulting Clark to his face) and ruthless (stealing a story from her partner. And although she at least claimed to be remorseful afterward, I don't recall her ever trying to make the situation right by asking Clark's forgiveness and then confessing to Perry - those would have been the true signs of genuine repentance.). On the one hand, she wasn't a nice person; but OTOH, she wasn't evil, so she isn't fun to write in the way a good villain would be.

She softened considerably in S3 and S4. I like her much better in the latter seasons. Unfortunately, I disliked the plots of most of the latter seasons enough that I tend not to write my own fiction in those seasons.

If you've read my stories, you may have noticed that they tend to be from Clark's POV and often have minimal Lois involvement. If she is there, she primarily serves as love interest and motivation for Clark. (Ann, in case you are reading this: My treatment of Lois has nothing to do with her gender and everything to do with Lois' character in particular. Had she been more like her S3 and S4 self in the first part of the series, I would undoubtedly be including her as a more major character in my stories.)

So, Shadow, you aren't alone in having a hard time writing about a main character.

Joy,
Lynn

I don't have trouble with the major characters or even the minor characters or villains in a general way, but one character I have never been able to write is Max Deter. He's just too slimy, smarmy and cowardly, and I just can't handle him. Unlike Lex or Tempus -- who I like to use because they're just pure evil, larger than life and clever -- Max turns my stomach.

Nan

Guess... actually, I don't really hate to write Jimmy, I just don't like the character.

If I need to add a pesky, irritating, semi-useless character, I have no trouble adding in Jimmy.

Truth is, I like Lois (I know everyone is shocked to hear that)and I like to write her. Anyone else is just used to give Lois and occasional breather.

Tank (who occasionally likes to write Lucy because she is the perfect foil to frustrate Lois in matters of the heart)

My apology for going somewhat off topic but I feel compelled to defend S1 & S2 Lois here. I guess that's not a surprise.

She's no meaner than Clark really when you consider the actual incidents, and they are very few , that reveal Lois to be less than perfect.

c.

All right. I'll bite. Specific examples of Clark being mean, please? The only one I can think of is the Godzilla incident, which was mean, but which was also retribution for Lois' earlier actions. (No, I am not excusing what he did; just saying that it wasn't an action he took out of the blue -- unlike a lot of Lois' actions against and cutting remarks toward Clark.)

As for Lois, I can think of a lot of examples off the top of my head. Aside from the specifics I mentioned earlier, there were the "way, way after" comment, Mr. Greenjeans, and Hack from Nowheresville. There was the way she tore down everything about Smallville before she even saw the place. And I could easily go on.

Don't get me wrong - I don't think Clark was perfect; not by a long shot. He was unreliable, he was a liar, and it was because of his unspoken demands that Lois love Clark rather than his alter ego that the "two person love triangle" lasted as long as it did. But his lack of reliability and his deceptions were limited to self-preservation and attempts to serve the greater good. I am not going to venture into a discussion on whether the ends justify the means in this case; I'm just pointing out that, whatever you may think of his actions, his heart was in the right place. Yes, he was a lunkhead and he should have told Lois about himself long before she discovered his secret. And there were probably times that he ran out on her when the emergency services personnel could have handled the situation. But all that is a far cry from the shoddy way Lois treated him and others in S1 and S2.

Just so you don't think I'm being totally one sided, I do understand that the reasons behind a lot of Lois' actions stem from her own insecurities -- that, as I wrote in a private discussion with someone earlier today, "Because of her upbringing, she doesn't feel worthy of love, nor does she feel that love is something that could last even if she found it. She sublimates her desire for love into a desire for respect; and, since she feels at some gut level that relationships (even friendships) are impossible for her, she throws herself into her work as a means of trying to prove her worthiness as a person. I think I understand her motives; I just don't like thinking AS her. Villains can be fun to write because you can allow yourself to think in ways that would normally be anathema to you; Lois, however, is not a villain. Thinking as her is just plain painful." I can feel sorry for her, but I wouldn't enjoy being in her (i.e., the S1 and S2 version of her) company, and I don't like getting into her head to write her.

But then again, if everyone enjoyed writing the same characters, we would have far less varied fanfic. Vive la difference!

Joy,
Lynn

p.s., I am guessing that this is the start of what could be a long conversation, so I'll let you know in advance that I won't be able to get onto the computer much at all during this coming work week. If others have kept the discussion going through the week, then when I have a chunk of free time I can spend at a computer the following weekend or work week, I'll probably chime in some more then.

Ah, but so were hers. Her ultimate goal was truth - to get to the bottom of what was going on.

So she was competitive. That's the "american way' stuff in the Superman slogans.

being cutting to Clark - he was the interloper - she had never had a partner and then Perry gives her one?? How to undermine her confidence?

Not criticising Clark here - he wanted the job and his skills got it for him. But victim of evil Lois - nope. Just "let the game begin" fun.

c. ( we're soooo off topic here - sorry)

I disagree with you there...Although truth was a goal of hers, it was not her ultimate goal. I think her ultimate goal was a lot more self-centered than that (And note that I said "self-centered" and not "selfish")...If she were ultimately after the truth, she wouldn't be stealing stories, nor would she be so jealous of Clark for winning the Kerth she thought she should have gotten. Her ultimate goal, I think, is the same as Clark's, actually -- to prove herself worthy of acceptance. But he tries to achieve that goal by helping other people and putting them before himself. She tries to achieve it by earning people's respect for her as a reporter, and, ironically, is willing to trod all over anyone in order to accomplish her goal. It's no coincidence that Clark wrote the human interest pieces and not Lois, nor that he was the more popular of the two individuals at the office.

Within limits, yes. She exceeded those limits. The American way does not include law breaking, for example. Or at least, the ideal of the American way does not.

Actually, that might make for an interesting story, perhaps in an alternate universe: Superman capturing Lois and turning her over to the police for breaking and entering.

Oh, yeah, that does bring to mind another character flaw with Clark: At worst, he's a hypocrite; at best, he is inconsistent in integrating the ethics of his dual personae. As Clark, he stole something (a vial, perhaps?) for evidence in Smart Kids. As Superman, he would never condone such an action. As Clark, he lies all the time. As Superman, he insists on telling the literal truth. (Although even as Superman, he has been known to mislead with the truth.)

She *chose* to work with Clark in the pilot; she could have chosen to fly solo. Moreover, in RfaS, Perry tells Lois explicitly that he is partnering her with Clark because, inter alia, she has experience. He clearly intends for her to be, in essence, a mentor to Clark. Far from undermining her confidence, that ought to build it up.

On that, at least, we can agree.

Joy,
Lynn

well, you know I'm going to interpret this differently.

She stole only one story and that she regretted as soon as she did it - her confession to Lucy about how pathetic that was, As for the Kerth - well remember the context - this was her first couple fo months back after the fiasco of her Luther engagement - she had to be unsure of herself given how she missed the Luther story. Also recall her concern in that ep about losing her edge. And by the end of that ep, she's very proud of clark for winning.

As for chosing to mentor Clark - I'm not so sure that was her choice exactly - sometimes you have to pick up on what the boss is hinting you do.

c.

This will likely be my final post this week; I don't expect to get much computer time again until next Friday.

I agree; she didn't choose to mentor Clark. She only chose to work with him rather than work alone during the pilot episode. It was Perry who chose her to mentor Clark because of the experience she had. That should have been an ego boost to her, rather than something that would undermine her confidence. No boss worthy of the position would choose a horrible reporter to mentor someone; the fact that Perry chose her to mentor Clark should tell her that he respects her abilities as a reporter.

And on that note, I wish you a good week; if you want, we can pick up this discussion again next weekend.

Joy,
Lynn

I checked the pilot scripts but couldn't find a reference to Perry telling Lois to mentor Clark. Did he tell her to do that in a later episode? Maybe someone can reference it in Lynn's absence?

thanks

c.

Just time for a quick post. She chose to work with Clark during the pilot script. Perry chose to partner her them in Requiem for a Superhero.

Joy,
Lynn

Thanks for taking the time to check, Lynn It sounds like you've got a busy week ahead.

c.

I've been following the discussion between Carol and Lynn and just want to add my 2 cents. I agree that Lois was hard to love in S1. She was all prickles and hard edges, but it was her independence and feistiness that drew many of us to become folcs. I was never a Superman fan or a Clark Kent groupie, but I found Lois a refreshing heroine who was more than a victim yelling "Help, Superman." She was strong and fearless with a defined goal and a work ethic designed to achieve it--truly an icon for the nineties.

As a secondary matter, Lynn , you said that in the pilot script, Lois chose to work with Clark Kent. I don't know what the script said, but that wasn't my recollection of the episode, so I watched the 2 hour pilot last night. As we know scripts often varied, but canon is what was shown in the episode. Lois doesn't really 'choose' to work with Clark so much as he is thrust upon her. She asks Perry for a task force to work on the space shuttle story. He says she can take Jimmy. She asks for someone else who is not available, and Perry says "Take Kent." She retorts that she won't work with a hack from Smallville, adding "I couldn't make that up." Perry says it's Kent or nothing, so she acquiesses saying "Never let it be said that Lois Lane is not a team player."

To me, that's not 'choosing' to work with Clark. Maybe you interpret it differently. But her snappy dialog is another of the reasons I thought she was great. At the end of the pilot, having tested Clark and found him useful, she takes him along on her next story. In that sense, I think you could say she chose him to work for her.

As for which character I don't like to write for, I find writing for Superman is the hardest because he isn't real. I can get inside the heads of all the others, including Clark, but not Superman.

At least, that's how I see it.

Jude

That's really interesting, Jude. To be able to get inside Clark's head but not Superman's. It's funny, isn't it, the way the mind works. I guess I don't distinquish between them. For me, it's always Clark's thoughts inside Superman's head. (If that made any sense )

ML

Hi M.L.,
I hadn't thought of it that way, but you're right. I've always regarded Clark as human and Superman as that demi-god. What was it Clark told Lois? Something like, "Superman is what I can do, Clark is who I am." That may not be quite accurate, but the sense is there. Anyway, that's how I've always thought of the two of them. Perhaps I should try looking at Superman from a different perspective?

Jude

Funny. After your comment, I've been attempting to think about Superman from your perspective.

ML

This may be surprising to anyone who's read 'The Longest Road' stories, but I hate writing Dr. Friskin. She's a great character and I love trying to give her a backstory and writing little insights into who she is. I view her as a very typical Metropolitan (by which I really mean New Yorker, I don't care what canon says, Metropolis is New York as far as I'm concerned). But I am not a shrink. I don't know what it is that shrinks learn in shrink school and so I really just have to make stuff up and not worry too much if it's not realistic. Since I like getting the details right, it's very frustrating.

Rac, that is very ironic, since I've been using your work as the gold standard for Dr. Friskin. Your story is so convincing - Dr. Friskin is always acting in a way I'd expect a psychologist to act - that I was so sure that you were a professional therapist or had training. I guess I shouldn't feel too intimidated about making stuff up, huh?

As for me, I don't think I've written enough to know which characters I hate to write. However, I've shied away from Martha and Jonathan more than once. I didn't feel I could do them right.

Oh, and I also really, really hate writing Sam Lane. I see him as an irredeemable character and I frankly can't stand him. Granted, he's more socially tolerable than Ellen (but I blame Ellen's attitude of constantly playing the victim largely on Sam), but his narcissism, self-centeredness, misogyny, and obliviousness are all just such grating character traits.

Rac

Don't think I hate any of them, but I don't seem to be able to write a successful Lex - in my stories which mention him (Superman Returns and Smallville crossovers) he's died three times. I think the same would happen if I tried to write him for the L&C verse.