McAnally's (The Community Pub) > Author Craft
Writing villains
o_O:
--- Quote from: Aminar on August 16, 2012, 12:54:26 PM ---Right and wrong aren't that hard to see in a narrative.
--- End quote ---
In some narratives, that is true. I don't like narratives where that is true.
And that brings us full circle to the start of the thread - do you want your villain to be perceptible as being wrong? Or do you want to be able to see him as a second hero with differing goals? I find that the latter is very much something I prefer.
--- Quote ---And the point of fiction is to escape like the point of candy is to taste good.
--- End quote ---
Well, I would also argue that the primary point of some fiction is very much not to escape but rather at least a dozen other things (to satirize? to provide enabling emotional language to a reader in analogous situations? to make political points? to examine hypothetical notions for their own sake?) Escapism is then secondary.
--- Quote --- If those things make you feel guilty you might want to look at why. Neither of those things is wrong when it doesn't hinder your ability to manage life. If indulging for short amounts of time makes you feel guilty you likely stress yourself out overmuch. If so, don't worry so much. Enjoy life. It isn't incredibly long and most of it isn't fun.(I apologize if this offends. Like I said. My empathy gene is overactive and the comments worried me.)
--- End quote ---
Sorry, it wasn't meant to be understood that way - it was meant to be understood more like the way Jacquy Pfeiffer talks about the French concept of food in Kings of Pastry. (my synopsis follows) If you're only going to have a small amount, then have the best. That way you will not feel that you have missed something when it is finished.
It is exactly to avoid that feeling of missing something at the end (and to thereby avoid stress), that I don't prefer fiction whose primary point is to escape. (Unless it's the best, of course, and my 'best' includes 'rich with second, third, fourth flavors and as many textures as can possibly work together.').
OZ:
--- Quote ---From my perspective that kind of objective use of right and wrong as terminology is every bit as uncomfortable as good and evil, and to save the life of a serial killer such that he continues killing is not by any means defensible as doing the right thing;
--- End quote ---
I am stretching this a bit but this is why I got to the point that I can hardly stand Batman. His continued failure to kill the Joker has led to the slaughter of thousands with the accompanying despair of those left behind. He has allowed this not because of any greater good but only for his personal satifaction of not taking a life. Rather than any nobility, I find him selfish and unbalanced.
When writing, I like to try to see things from the antagonist's point of view. For one thing it helps to keep me from "cheating" by having the protagonist succeed only because of the antagonist's stupidity.
o_O:
--- Quote from: OZ on August 16, 2012, 06:22:47 PM ---When writing, I like to try to see things from the antagonist's point of view. For one thing it helps to keep me from "cheating" by having the protagonist succeed only because of the antagonist's stupidity.
--- End quote ---
I completely support your efforts in this arena.
Aminar:
--- Quote from: the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh on August 16, 2012, 05:53:36 PM ---OK. From my perspective that kind of objective use of right and wrong as terminology is every bit as uncomfortable as good and evil, and to save the life of a serial killer such that he continues killing is not by any means defensible as doing the right thing; some of my writing is exploring that, because I am tired of characters who make judgements based on what appears immediately right and wrong before their noses without considering the longer-term consequences.
Would depend a lot to me on what the personal desires are, and how accurately the good of others is seen. I mean, where would you count a character whose personal primary motivation is To Be A Good Person, and who goes around helping other people out of the purely selfish desire to count as someone good ? (Not hypocritically or to be perceived as good in the community, but to be able to honestly see themselves as sincerely and genuinely good ?)
--- End quote ---
How is that selfish? Reasons behind helping people don't matter. I get payed to mentor at risk teens. I go to work to get payed. I picked the job because I like helping people. Is it selfish that I wouldn't do so without getting paid? No.
On the topic of actions being right with bad consequences. We cannot foresee the consequences of our actions. We should not be judged for consequences that cannot be foreseen. All we, as fallible humans, can do is what is right in the moment.
On the subject of do I want the villain to be a second hero with a different philosophy than the hero? Hell no, possibly an antagonist for a while, but not a villain. That's whats called a hero. In the end they compromise with the other hero and figure things out in such a way as to stop the people that are honestly the villains. Because there are honestly people worth being cast as villains and I loathe stories where a bunch of sides that are all trying to do the right thing end up butchering each other due to lack of communication, closed minded characters, and the author trying to be gritty and shocking. They make me feel sick to my stomach and hate the characters for being idiots. But I like my heroes rational enough to try to avoid senseless violence.
o_O:
--- Quote from: Aminar on August 16, 2012, 08:51:43 PM ---
On the topic of actions being right with bad consequences. We cannot foresee the consequences of our actions. We should not be judged for consequences that cannot be foreseen.
--- End quote ---
Why ever not?
Why should the future hand us a blank responsibility check, to do anything we want so long as we have an "I didn't know!" excuse?
--- Quote ---and I loathe stories where a bunch of sides that are all trying to do the right thing end up butchering each other due to lack of communication,
--- End quote ---
I have to say I very much like storyshapes such as Lem's Fiasco and Brust's To Reign in Hell.
--- Quote --- They make me feel sick to my stomach and hate the characters for being idiots.
--- End quote ---
Well, but wouldn't this be rather close to judging those same characters for unforeseen consequences to their actions?
The reader can foresee the consequence of communicating in a particular way to clear a minor problem, but if the character cannot have the same vision and does something else instead, wouldn't the principle of 'doing what seems right in the moment' excuse the character?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version