Shortcomings offers a very different kind of protagonist than what we have seen so far. Ben Tanaka edges very close to being a true narcissist; he seems almost exclusively interested in only his own personal problems, non-receptive to the feelings and emotions of others, and seemingly incapable of dealing with people in way that doesn't demean, mock, or somehow otherwise belittle them. Most of his problems stem from flaws in his own personality, but he seems incapable of understanding this, and thus, incapable of addressing the issues. Even in the small section we have read, there are no less than three separate scenes where major arguments flare up between Ben and Miko, simply because Ben is unable to take any measure of criticism.
How does this affect your reading of Shortcomings? Does following such a selfish character make the book more difficult to read, or does it make it more engaging? Do you see any of your own personality traits in Ben, or any other characters in the book? Do those personality flaws make the characters more relatable in some way? Or am I completely off the mark, and is Ben just misunderstood?
I personally have a harder time reading books with somewhat deplorable or morally ambiguous main characters. I have a hard time feeling sympathy for them, and I just struggle to get into the novel. In fact, I rather dislike Ben. When Miko leaves him, I felt happy and proud of her and very little sympathy for Ben. He deserved it.
ReplyDeleteHowever, in the same context, Ben's faults and failures only serve to make him that much more relatable. The mundane action and lack of overly dramatic events makes Shortcomings a much more realistic novel, even more so than King. Even though King was entirely based off of real-life events, not many people can relate to a historical figure of such importance as Martin Luther King Jr. This is also the reason why Tomine's artwork seems more realistic than all the other graphic novels we've read.
I agree with you. I think Ben is just incredibly self-absorbed and melodramatic. He pities himself too much and doesn't sympathize with those around him, and I think this makes him an unlikable character rather than misunderstood. The title of the novel, Shortcomings, makes it clear that the protagonist has some major character flaws and faults.
Personally, I disagree with Sebastian. I can see where he's coming from, but I generally enjoy stories that focus on dislikable characters. It just raises so many more questions about the choice of telling the story. Why is this awful person so important that the author had to tell a story about him? It makes it so much more interesting than following the story of the general "everyman" always do-gooder kind of guy.
ReplyDeletePrime example: Boromir from Lord of the Rings. I would argue that he is one of the best characters in the whole trilogy for the fact that he is so fallible, that he falls under the power of the ring and tries to take it. He realizes his mistakes though, and ultimately dies one of the best heroes in the books. This is the kind of story that is so relatable and can be so very convicting.
So I guess I would say that's sort of what I'm expecting from this story. Perhaps not completely a wrapped-up closed ending where everything is solved and he's suddenly just a better person (wouldn't be realistic at all,) but a coming of age of some sort where he starts on a path to something better, as in fixing himself.
Following a deplorable character is so intriguing in a story. Because in reality, in our own little ways, and sometimes in bigger ways, we are all a bit deplorable. A goody-two shoe character really isn't that compelling because it's not something anybody can relate to. I think there is an important detail that must be met in a story though when having a deplorable character: he needs to save the cat. Metaphorically of course. But this character has to do something towards the beginning of the story that is at least remotely morally good to give the reader a reason to root for them. We need a reason to like them. I feel like Tomine did not really give us this in his story, and that's the one thing that really holds me back from rooting for this character at all. He's kind of awful right from the first scene. Relatable in his awfulness. But awful. And this inhibits us from getting behind this character fully. The only reason Ben is even remotely likable is because some of his arguments are pretty relatable. Not entirely. But the style of argumentation, his lack of understanding and quick short fuse is pretty relatable I think.
ReplyDeleteI wish Tomine would have worked towards at least making the character somebody to root for a little bit more.
It is pretty obvious that Ben's personality is flawed, but that's why the book is called Shortcomings. Personally I think that Ben's character is the perfect way to capture the attention of the reader. When we read, we usually expect the main character to be flawless and the voice of reason. Pretty much the hero of the story. Shortcomings breaks away from the cliche and dives into something different. If we follow something story-writing the same way other people do it, we'll just be reading the same old crap. there is another book that turns the protagonist in an antagonist in The Talented Mr. Ripley. In that book, Highsmith (the author) details her main character, Mr. Ripley, into a sociopath that kills a wealth man an takes over his identity. The best way to write a story, is to design your characters that have never been seen or thought could exist before. This is what makes Shortcomings such an excellent read.
ReplyDeleteI don't know if anyone else encountered this but I really didn't know who the protagonist was going to be until Miko left and I realized we were going to stay with Ben.
ReplyDeleteI thought Ben was a tad bit annoying (especially when arguing with Miko) but I thought all of the characters had their unflattering moments. I think it sets you up for more satisfation when the characters change though. Ben being such a whiney-butt makes me really want a character to call him out on his crap.
I find Ben to be a fascinating protagonist because he is so different from the kind we usually see. He is almost more of an antihero than a hero because he is so focused on himself that he hardly sees those around him. However, it doesn't actually make it any more difficult to read. I find myself so curious about his eccentricities that I want to keep reading so that I can figure out why he acts the way he does.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that every single character we have seen thus far has very prominent flaws is also very intriguing. Unlike most novels, we see their flaws almost instantly (possibly due to the graphic nature of this story), which in turn draws the reader further into the story.
As for whether or not Ben is misunderstood, I think that he may be, but not in the way this question suggests. I think most of the people around him know exactly who he is, even better than he does. I haven't finished the book yet, but he clearly seems to have deep-rooted insecurities that control him to the point that he cannot see beyond them.
With all the altruistic characters we’ve been reading about lately, I found Ben Tanaka to be a nice change in pace. I didn’t find this story difficult to read at all. In fact I couldn’t put it down. I was able to read it in what felt like an hour. Although this was little to do with the characters and more with the way the story was delivered. I like how the book didn’t dwell on certain aspects for to long, and kept up a pretty nice pace throughout. The amount of information Tomine fit into one panel was profound.
ReplyDeleteI also found Ben to be the most relatable character that we have come across so far. For instance, the scene on page 28 where Miko finds his porn stash, I found this scene to be very relatable because it’s a very stereotypical argument for a real couple to have. It was one instance where I was fully on his side. I doubt that the fact that most of the girls were white was intentional. It may have been a subconscious or even unconscious decision on Ben’s part. I found his argument that one of the ladies was Latino was comical.
For the most part, all the characters have their faults, and no one was likeable throughout. I actually enjoyed this aspect of the book, and was able to see myself and many other people I know in the characters. We all have our shortcomings, but I actually found the ending kind of hopeful. The amount of character growth and change exhibited in all the characters was astounding.
I think the character of Ben Tanaka is rendered quite realistically and is (quite coincidentally) very relatable because I share many of his personality flaws. People seem to praise Tomine’s ability to render reality, and if your life consists mostly of really self-absorbed Gen X academic types, then Tomine’s doing a pretty good job.
ReplyDeleteI guess what I don’t understand is that for Tomine, rendering reality seems to be an end in and of itself instead of a means to some other, more interesting goal. To the point we’ve been assigned so far, I really don’t see any tension in the story that is captivating me as a reader or making me interested in Ben as a character. Ben argues with his girlfriend. And then they argue some more. And then…yep…they’re arguing again. Without meaningful tension or a likeable protagonist…there’s nothing that’s enticing me to keep reading (except the fact that I have to!)
Reading the text is not difficult to read personally based off the characters personality type. Yet, it seemed a little jumpy between panels where I found myself confused as to how we went from one place to another.
ReplyDeleteIt is a nice take, and in all honesty makes me look beyond the text and more into society and personal beliefs than many of the other readings. I definitely related to Ben amongst other characters, and thus kept me reading.