The Writer's Workshop is a positive community to promote each other's work and learn the craft of writing and publishing
On dealing with Protagonist Syndrome
Simply put, it's trying to find the answer to the question of "Why is she the main character and not someone else?" (in my case, it's a she) Often, I've found that with a large cast, many side characters are smarter than the protagonist, more accomplished, or even simply have a more interesting skill or personality quirk, to the point that the protagonist seems bland by comparison. So how do you make your main characters stand out as special?
In my case, I've thought about her being more ambitious, more willing to take initiative in trying out big projects and crazy ideas. I wonder if that is enough.




I've always used the which character has the most to lose as the main character. I've had this argument multiple times and have had to deal with this in other critiques, but the most interesting secondary characters can be the most interesting secondary characters and yet if they are the protagonist, they'd be a terrible point of view. They either have nothing to lose or have already lost everything or who are so absolutely certain in their own sense of self worth that they would be fascinating as a secondary character and horrible as the point of view.
The character who has the most to lose should also be the character who wants something interesting enough to carry the length of the story and who will have at least three obstacles, internal and external between them and that thing that they want. So many people start off their main character as bland as possible because the author doesn't really know the main character when they start the novel. It's really important once you know who your character is and what they'd wanted all along, that you go back and rewrite the beginning so that character that you now know inside and out is the one that appears on page one, chapter one.
Part of it is that maybe they need to be the most likable?
I struggled with this for a while, too, and I think it comes from wanting to insert myself into a blank slate of a character... Or something... But part of it was making sure the story was driven by the actions of that main character.
That's why they're the main character, because the choices before them are the ones telling the story.
Here's my question: Why is she the main character and not someone else? Why not make one of your other characters the main character? What do you lose? Perhaps you even gain a lot more complexity by combining that side character who's more interesting with the circumstances of the main character. Don't try to force something to fit. If it's not fitting, maybe when you ask why, that means that character isn't meant to be, and a better way is just barely around the corner if you change the tone of your question.
It's really easy for our main character to always have the least personality of any. You don't need to develop them as much because they have enough plot to keep them going, and all the other characters add flavor. Often this is because the protagonist is the character you most identify with, and, well, you're just not as exciting (sorry).
A few writing exercises to try to fix this:
The events of your story are the most important events in the life of one of your characters, leaving them a different person than before those events began.
That's the protagonist.
(Yes, this means that Cameron is the protagonist of Ferris Bueller's Day Off, despite Ferris being more likeable, in the title, and having more screen time. But Cameron is the protagonist.)