McAnally's (The Community Pub) > Author Craft
Writing villains
Dresdenus Prime:
What about a villian who is around for a better part of the story?
Take Storm Front for example, (click to show/hide)Victor Sells is the primary villian. He spends the book sending things after Harry. But we only meet him and do battle with him at the end of the book.
I almost want to write mine more like a James Bond film (Haven't read the books) where you meet the Villian early on, but there's no justification to go after him or do battle until later on.
THE_ANGRY_GAMER:
For me, the best villains are not made evil by what they do, or what they want to achieve, but by the way they go about it.
A villain in the sci-fi story I've been writing/revising for several years now is where many heroes would be - he's trying to defend his nation and stamp out terrorism. Problem is, he has absolutely no concept of limiting colatteral damage; at one point, he eradicates a hospital because a suspected resistance sympathiser has gone for treatment there. What TVTropes calls the Well-Intentioned Extremist.
the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh:
One thing that's always bugged me about so many recent fictional examples of a supposed moral dilemma in that general direction is that the question always seems to boil down to "is it right for us to torture X to find out the bit of information needed to save Y when it's the only way to get that information ?". I don't think I've ever seen anything talking to "is it right for us to steal the Hope Diamond and give it to Y" or "is it right for us to have wild monkey sex of the sort Y's always dreamed of" if those are ways of getting the information out of Y, instead.
THE_ANGRY_GAMER:
--- Quote from: the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh on August 17, 2012, 07:04:38 PM ---One thing that's always bugged me about so many recent fictional examples of a supposed moral dilemma in that general direction is that the question always seems to boil down to "is it right for us to torture X to find out the bit of information needed to save Y when it's the only way to get that information ?". I don't think I've ever seen anything talking to "is it right for us to steal the Hope Diamond and give it to Y" or "is it right for us to have wild monkey sex of the sort Y's always dreamed of" if those are ways of getting the information out of Y, instead.
--- End quote ---
Because having wild monkey sex with their kidnappers isn't something that many people want to do? Plus, a lot of these dilemmas happen on a timescale in which stealing the Hope Diamond wouldn't be practicable.
the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh:
--- Quote from: THE_ANGRY_GAMER on August 17, 2012, 07:39:22 PM ---Because having wild monkey sex with their kidnappers isn't something that many people want to do?
--- End quote ---
Which would make it a genuine sacrifice for the characters (well, unless they were An*ta Bl*ke, for whom it would be business as usual in the last eight books or so) and hence more interesting, to my mind.
--- Quote --- Plus, a lot of these dilemmas happen on a timescale in which stealing the Hope Diamond wouldn't be practicable.
--- End quote ---
Fair comment; the more general idea was why the dilemma is so much more often framed as torturing the antagonist rather than bribing or seducing them and I think that stands as a more general point, though.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version