Why We’re Drawn to Broken Characters

How Entertainment Becomes Emotional Recognition

We don’t fall in love with perfect characters.

We fall in love with the ones who unravel.

The woman who keeps showing up even when she’s exhausted.

The man who makes terrible choices but understands why he makes them.

The character who carries grief quietly, or rage openly, or shame so deeply it reshapes their life.

Across film, television, and literature, audiences are increasingly drawn to characters who are fractured, morally complicated, emotionally raw, and visibly struggling. This is not accidental—and it is not unhealthy. It is psychological recognition.

Entertainment does not merely distract us. At its most powerful, it reflects us back to ourselves.

How We Relate: Identification Over Idealization

Psychologically, audiences connect to characters through identification, not aspiration. Identification occurs when viewers or readers temporarily experience a story from a character’s perspective, emotionally and cognitively stepping into their inner world (Cohen, 2001).

Broken characters feel real. Their emotional reactions mirror our own lived experiences—grief, fear, anger, guilt, longing—emotions that are often suppressed or softened in everyday life.

Research on narrative transportation shows that people become more emotionally engaged when a story feels authentic and psychologically consistent, even if it is dark or uncomfortable (Green et al., 2004). When a character struggles in ways we recognize, the story feels less like fiction and more like validation.

In short, we relate because:

• We recognize ourselves

• We feel emotionally understood

• We are allowed to experience difficult emotions safely

Broken Characters and Emotional Validation

Broken characters permit audiences.

Permission to:

• Be angry without being villainized

• Be grieving without needing closure

• Be flawed without redemption arcs tied to perfection

From a mental health perspective, this mirrors emotional validation: acknowledging that a person’s internal experience is understandable given their circumstances (Linehan, 2015). When entertainment validates emotional pain instead of resolving it too quickly, it resonates deeply with viewers who are navigating unresolved trauma, chronic stress, illness, or loss.

Examples—and Why They Work

Mare of Easttown

 (2021)

Mare Sheehan is not inspirational. She is irritable, grieving, emotionally closed off, and exhausted. Her appeal lies in her honesty. She represents unresolved grief and the way trauma can stagnate growth rather than inspire strength.

Why it works:

Mare’s emotional numbness aligns with real grief responses, particularly complicated grief, where loss remains psychologically present long after the event (APA, 2020).

Sharp Objects

 (2018)

Camille Preaker embodies internalized trauma—self-harm, emotional detachment, substance use, and fractured identity.

Why it works:

Audiences are not asked to like Camille. They are asked to understand her. This taps into trauma recognition and mirrors how unresolved childhood trauma manifests in adulthood (van der Kolk, 2014).

Breaking Bad

 (2008–2013)

Walter White’s transformation is disturbing, yet audiences stayed emotionally invested long after his moral collapse.

Why it works:

Walter’s arc allows viewers to explore power, resentment, and moral erosion without personal consequence. Research suggests dark narratives allow for emotional processing of taboo emotions—anger, revenge, and control—within a safe psychological boundary (Raney, 2004).

Normal People

 (Sally Rooney)

Connell and Marianne are emotionally stunted, miscommunicative, and deeply wounded by their pasts.

Why it works:

Their pain is subtle, relational, and internal—mirroring attachment injuries and emotional neglect. Viewers who have experienced insecure attachment often recognize themselves in these characters (Bowlby, 1988).

Why “Perfect” Characters Fail Us

Perfect characters are emotionally unrelatable. They resolve conflict too efficiently, regulate emotions unrealistically, and often exist to reassure rather than reflect reality. Psychologically, perfection creates distance. Brokenness creates proximity.

Audiences disengage when characters:

• Recover too quickly

• Heal without process

• Suffer without psychological consequences

Real people don’t heal linearly—and neither do compelling characters.

Entertainment as Emotional Processing

From a neuroscience and psychology standpoint, stories function as emotional simulations. They allow us to experience, rehearse, and regulate emotions indirectly (Oatley, 2016).

For individuals experiencing:

• Grief

• Burnout

• Chronic illness

• Trauma

• Identity shift

…broken characters provide containment, not escape.

They say:

“Your pain makes sense.”

“You’re not alone in this.”

“Healing doesn’t have to look pretty.”

What This Says About Us

Our attraction to broken characters reflects a cultural shift away from toxic positivity and toward emotional realism. We are no longer interested in stories that tell us everything will be fine.

We want stories that tell us:

• It’s okay to struggle

• It’s okay not to be redeemed

• It’s okay to survive without transformation

In a world that demands productivity, optimism, and resilience, broken characters offer resistance. They tell the truth.

Conclusion

We don’t watch broken characters because we are broken. We watch them because they are honest.

Entertainment becomes powerful when it stops trying to fix us and starts recognizing us. In seeing fractured characters survive—imperfectly, painfully, and without neat resolution—we feel less alone in our own unfinished stories.

And sometimes, that recognition is more healing than hope.

References

American Psychological Association. (2020). APA dictionary of psychology. APA Publishing.

Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base: Parent-child attachment and healthy human development. Basic Books.

Cohen, J. (2001). Defining identification: A theoretical look at the identification of audiences with media characters. Mass Communication & Society, 4(3), 245–264. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327825MCS0403_01

Green, M. C., Brock, T. C., & Kaufman, G. F. (2004). Understanding media enjoyment: The role of transportation into narrative worlds. Communication Theory, 14(4), 311–327. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2004.tb00317.x

Linehan, M. M. (2015). DBT skills training manual (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.

Oatley, K. (2016). Fiction: Simulation of social worlds. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(8), 618–628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2016.06.002

Raney, A. A. (2004). Expanding disposition theory: Reconsidering character liking, moral evaluations, and enjoyment. Communication Theory, 14(4), 348–369.

van der Kolk, B. (2014). The body keeps the score: Brain, mind, and body in the healing of trauma. Viking.