"Good" Character Flaws and Why They Matter
I’ve talked about flaws before (check out this post to see the four kinds of character flaws!), but I want to do it again. Character flaws are one of the most important things to get right, and I think they’re one of the easiest things to get wrong.
“Good” flaws are very important for all of your main characters, good and bad. They give them something internal to struggle with, and that’s important for a few reasons. It will affect the decisions your characters make and it will make them feel more like real people—it will also make the time between dramatic plot points more important. That downtime is when a lot of the character development is made more obvious.
Flaws cause tension between characters and their loved ones, and if you plan it right, they can ruin everything (in a good way).
Let’s look at some “good” flawed characters so you can see what I mean.
Javert in Les Misérables
Flaws: Stubborn, prideful, power hungry
I remember finishing this book and being sniffly the rest of the day; that’s how hard it hit me in the feels. There are a lot of sad things in that book, but one of the saddest is Javert. I talk about him a lot—how can I not? He’s just so tragic. Javert has such a strong sense of justice that he can’t stand the idea of forgiveness. There’s nothing wrong in believing in something, but his belief is taken to an unhealthy extreme. It destroys him.
Justice is a wonderful thing—but so is mercy.
Javert might be the human antagonist in Valjean’s life, but I don’t think he’s evil. I think he’s someone who likes to be in control because he didn’t have any control over his life as a child. He’s ashamed of his past and his parents, so he does everything to distance himself from it, becoming a policeman to enforce the laws they couldn’t keep. He isn’t compassionate because that means giving people grace; understanding that everyone has flaws and make mistakes. He hates his parents for their own flaws and can’t seem to accept any in others—or himself.
I could say that his flaw is stubbornness, but I think it’s deeper than that. There’s pride wrapped up in that, as well as a lust for power.
Mr. Thornton in North and South
Flaws: Impatient, greedy, proud
There is a hill I am prepared to die on, and that hill is this: *deep breath* North and South is a better story than Pride and Prejudice.
And Mr. John Thornton is way better than Mr. Darcy.
There. I said it. Come for me if you want, but you’re not changing my opinion on this.
I don’t think Mr. Darcy is all he’s cracked up to be; he doesn’t really improve by the end of the story. He doesn’t become a better, less selfish person when he falls in love with Elizabeth, there’s just something to distract us from those things for a while.
Let me tell you why I like Mr. Thornton. He definitely seems proud, sure, but he’s also ashamed of his past when he was poor. And prideful or not, he can admit when there are things he’s lacking—it’s what drives him to pursue tutoring with Mr. Hale.
Mr. Thornton worked hard and saved every penny to pull himself and his family out of poverty when his father died. Instead of making him compassionate toward other people in that situation, this made him feel like he was better than anyone else who was still poor. He believed that anyone who is still poor must just be lazy and want to live that way. John has no time for frivolous things that would waste his time; time is money, and he’s always thinking about money.
Because of his childhood, he’s an individualist, but he slowly learns to see the benefits of community. Over time, thanks to Margaret, the attitude he has toward people who are still living in unfortunate circumstances changes and he becomes a much kinder employer. Margaret gets him to care about something other than money—which I think was an understandable thing to be obsessed with. He was haunted by what it was like to be poor and he determined to not be that way again.
And where Mr. Darcy blames others for his behavior, John Thornton owns it as a flaw. Compare Mr. Darcy’s second proposal to John admitting his feelings for Margaret, saying, "I have never loved any woman before: my life has been too busy, my thoughts too much absorbed with other things. Now I love, and will love."
Edith in Downton Abbey
Flaws: Low self-esteem, spiteful, discontent
I could have picked any number of characters from this show to talk about, because they’re well-written and I love even the ones I dislike, but let’s look at Edith. She’s the middle child and she certainly acts like it. From the first episode she’s talking about wanting what her sister was going to have, and that attitude carries on for a very long time. Edith seems like a very unhappy person; I don’t think she likes herself very much, and it affects how she treats other people. And when relationships don’t work out the way she hopes, each one of these failures seem to make her more bitter toward the people who have the life she wants.
Over the course of the show Edith does find people she genuinely cares about, and she does improve herself and continue to grow. Eventually her attitude mellows out and she and her older sister (maybe her greatest rival) Mary are able to have a better relationship.
Edith’s flaw is her low self-esteem, and that causes her to act out and causes problems in her life and relationships.
Emily Brent in And Then There Were None
Flaws: Self-righteous, judgmental, harsh
"There was no self-reproach, no uneasiness in those eyes."
If you’ve read this book before, you know that all of the characters have their own flaws and sketchy pasts. If you haven’t read this book before, do yourself a favor and pick it up. It’s in my top five favorites; I’ve read it multiple times, but the ending is still just as surprising and impactful as it was the first time (and lemme tell ya, that’s saying something).
Emily Brent is one of the characters who accept an invitation to Soldier Island. Her flaw is self-righteousness. She can do no wrong. She won’t admit to herself that it’s even possible—much less feel any remorse for the awful crime she committed. No one seems to like her very much because of her attitude, and her high and mighty opinion of herself is ultimately part of her downfall.
What’s the difference between a good flaw and a bad flaw?
The difference between good and bad flaws comes down to how they affect the character. Does their flaw get them in trouble? Does it cause inner turmoil? Is it a problem to be solved, rather than a trait they (and others) choose to ignore? These are all things that will make for a three-dimensional character, and you’ll end up with a story that isn’t just about what Bad Things the Bad Guy does to the characters.
But if a flaw is treated as nothing more than an annoying habit, then it doesn’t matter, and you risk writing a flat character.
How do you make sure your character has good flaws?
The quick answer here is to be intentional. Get to know your characters really well. Give them obstacles to overcome—both from the world around them and from within. The best flaw is one that affects them the whole way through a story.
Let’s look at a good flaw: Greed. If your character is greedy at the beginning of your story, then it should be part of their arc (assuming it’s a positive one) to make them realize this is a problem and to work to change that about themselves. Something in the plot probably forces them to see what really matters in life, and as a result they become selfless and less focused on their possessions.
You can plot your character’s arc ahead of time if you’d like, much in the same way you outline your story.
