More than Just a Rating discussion

When you read in a review that the characters are 'likeable' what do you expect when you meet them?

If you use the term in your review, what do you mean by it?

This question inspired by a thread in the SFFBC group:
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

I very seldom read reviews prior to reading a book, so this doesn't truly answer the question "... when you meet them?", but here goes:
What I expect from a character that someone else has described this way is
a) someone who has at least one trait that we can admire, and
b) also that the author has has presented this trait as natural or unpretentious.
While I am more likely to be concerned with the "truth" of characters when writing notes or reviews about them, I do occasionally describe them as likeable. Perhaps the most important characteristic for me to describe a character as 'likeable' is that they share something positive with me or my experience. It's not the only criteria, but if we have zero in common, they won't make it to likeable status. Having something in common does not restrict one to a particular universe or time period; it only presupposes that the character has enough depth and truth that I can ascribe a kind of relationship between us.
The quintessential character that we "love to hate" must be Scarlett O'Hara from Gone with the Wind. Scarlett never does become truly likeable, because she is first and foremost a conceited little brat. Ah, but she is so truly written by Margaret Mitchell, we immediately recognize her, even though she exists in a history that none of us has truly experienced. Scarlett answers the question of how much is enough. I can't describe her as likeable, even though she has some traits I can admire, because she has at least one trait that overshadows the rest, and I can't get past that one.
Edit: This question inspired by a thread in the SFFBC group:
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
Just to add that I didn't read the referenced thread before I wrote this, but I don't see anything I want to change or add to this comment. But by all means, read the other thread. It is pretty interesting.

I think your post sums up the best parts of the other thread pretty well, actually, and furthers the discussion. Iow, thank you so much for your insights!

Cheryl wrote: "When you read in a review that the characters are 'likeable' what do you expect when you meet them?

If you use the term in your review, what do you mean by it?

This question inspired by a thread..."
When others use the term "likeable", I assume that they believe that most people will enjoy certain characters. I think this holds true, especially for age-old character archetypes and tropes.

When I use the term "likeable" in my reviews, its only for me. It's a reminder that I hold congenial characteristics with a character.

Sincerely,

KOD

To me a "likeable" character may not even be pleasant, but rather in a review it means the character is correct for the part. A simple, truly likeable, character would not work for me unless as a foil for other more menacing beasts. Each character should contain their shades of grey, even when obvious tropes (as Data suggested- above). For me Hannibal Lecter, Captain Quire, Long John Silver and even Miss Havisham are as likeable as "Cathy Earnshaw" or Jane Eyre, perhaps more so. This is simply due to the style and content of the tales that I enjoy. I suspect that the phrase "Likeable Character" is redundant.

That's exactly the problem, Raymond. Not to pick on you, but until these conversations I never would have thought of interpreting somebody's use of the word likable to mean something more like apt or authentic or interesting.

Welp, I'm going to have to remember that the word probably doesn't mean what I think it means, and skip reviews that use it then!

I suspect that most reviewers use "likable in a similar sense" as in an inane character with a certain sense of worth (John boy Walton) to tell the tale. It is rare however that they are important to the story, the hero is often forgettable compared to the protagonist unless the hero is deeply flawed. Few remember Will Graham (even though he was flawed) but all remember Hannibal Lecter. Few Bob Cratchit but all Scrooge. Few Cunnegonde, all Candide.

I'll try to keep this discussion in mind when discussing characters. It never occurred to me that some interpret likable to be related to "like me."
When I use likable in describing a character I'm thinking engaging, interesting, not a bland boring character. I started to say not vicious and mean but then I realized that in some genres I read the characters I like most are vicious and mean as a matter of survival. I don't know that I've ever described them as likable in a review but I may very well have.

Thanks! :)

Of course, most words like this are subjective, but I have indeed found 'likable' to mean too many diverse things to too many ppl.