McAnally's (The Community Pub) > Author Craft
Writing villains
Aminar:
--- Quote from: o_O on August 16, 2012, 09:51:16 PM ---Why ever not?
--- End quote ---
Because we are only human. Some actions have obvious consequences. Most don't. Today I wound up watching X-men 3 with a client because in 2006 I went to a specific showing of X-men 3 that got me a job that showed me where I wanted to take my life.(Quite literally kicked off the chain of events that led me to who I am today.) That is an entirely unforeseeable chain of events. That isn't a blank responsability check, but doing the right thing as often as possible is better than the path of doing nothing that worrying about consequences too much leads to.
Basically speaking, intent is the only thing worth judging people on. Otherwise you hold people up to an impossible standard. If you hold yourself to that standard you will destroy yourself with self-recrimination. It isn't a healthy approach to life.
Now I will say that people should always think about the consequences of their actions and try to minimize the bad but to judge somebody based on the potential or unforeseen consequences of their actions is awful.
As to the character thing. it isn't judging the characters so much as hating that a writer would choose to do that to their readers. There are reasons to read. TO watch something that feels like a horrible car accident for hours on end isn't a very good one. It's why i don't like game of thrones. The whole time I feel sick knowing that bad things are going to happen to these people. I don't want to see that happen. But I'm too far into the series to stop. The further I read though, the sicker I feel.
the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh:
--- Quote from: Aminar on August 16, 2012, 08:51:43 PM ---How is that selfish? Reasons behind helping people don't matter.
--- End quote ---
If you're neither arguing for intent nor for results here, that seems to me to leave an interestingly narrow window for actually analysing, or justifying the morality your stories explore.
--- Quote ---On the topic of actions being right with bad consequences. We cannot foresee the consequences of our actions.
--- End quote ---
Not unto the end of the universe, no. But, to take an example that should be familiar to all of us, if your protagonist has a choice between saving his girlfriend and starting a war, and he picks starting a war knowing full well it will happen, that's a consequence he can foresee and be held responsible for.
--- Quote ---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.
--- End quote ---
You think every possible hero is by definition capable of compromising with every other possible hero ?
--- Quote --- 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,
--- End quote ---
How about, due to genuine, deep, intractable and real philosophical differences ?
superpsycho:
There is a large range between due diligence and criminal negligence in decision making as well as motivation. There are those who have no problem doing others harm if they gain from it. And there are those who actually enjoy hurting others for a range of reasons. An author can choose from any of them and give any level of caring they please.
But an author has to decide who their audience is. Knowing what their audience expects and wants in their villains and heroes should be central in an author’s thinking, unless of course they’re writing just to have something to do. An author also has to decide, how much explanation and justification their audience can deal with before they’re bored silly.
gatordave96:
I think the latest version of the Joker worked so well because we were never really sure what motivated the guy. He told several stories about how he got his "smile," and each one of them pretty grim. But he gave a different story seemingly at the drop of the hat.
I think we can all relate to someone who has gone "bad" because of unusual or tragic circumstances in their life, but the Joker kept us guessing as to what that might be. That was unique.
Also, I think some of the greatest villains aren't necessarily ones who think they're right, but know that they're wrong and relish in believing that they're above or beyond the normal morals. For example, Hannibal Lechter worked as a villain because he knew he was a killer, but thought himself beyond the rules of society -- "I ate his liver with some fava beans and a nice Chianti." The same was true of the Joker.
Other villains are memorable simply because they are a complete badass -- like Darth Vader in the "A New Hope." Or Agent Smith in "The Matrix." Definitely not people to mess with.
Aminar:
--- Quote from: the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh on August 17, 2012, 01:08:14 AM ---If you're neither arguing for intent nor for results here, that seems to me to leave an interestingly narrow window for actually analysing, or justifying the morality your stories explore.
Not unto the end of the universe, no. But, to take an example that should be familiar to all of us, if your protagonist has a choice between saving his girlfriend and starting a war, and he picks starting a war knowing full well it will happen, that's a consequence he can foresee and be held responsible for.
You think every possible hero is by definition capable of compromising with every other possible hero ?
How about, due to genuine, deep, intractable and real philosophical differences ?
--- End quote ---
There aren't logical philosophical differences too deep to compromise in an altruistic morality. Compromise can always be made if everyone works towards the concept of compromise. There are cultural ones, but not cultural ones based in rationality. Nobody should be so ingrained in a tradition so deeply they cannot bypass it. (Now, most people are, but I find irredeemable cultural differences to be an obnoxious plot device. It encourages closed mindedness. Shouldn't stories be about making things better, not stagnating and giving in to the same problems we deal with every day? Shouldn't they be a pathway to making people think past and through problems?
And you will never see me defending Harry's actions in Grave Peril. He should have been much much sneakier. She deserved to die, but the blame should have been pinned on somebody else. Perhaps Mavra. Or whoever the real villain of the story is. I can however forgive him for doing it because I understand the anger he felt. That doesn't mean he did the right thing.(I'd rather not go into the morality of lying here, but I will say that lying is appropriate to manipulate outcomes for the best. Don't tell the kids I work with that I said that though.)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version