How do you write villains?

Linkara · Post by **Linkara** » Sun Sep 23, 2007 7:31 pm

Escushion wrote:Yeah, some people's moral compass is "what I enjoy."

Well, bear in mind, I'm not just talking about murderous psycho-killers here. How about thrill-seekers ala Roxie Rocket?

Princess · Post by **Princess** » Sun Sep 23, 2007 7:44 pm

vulpeslibertas wrote:
NakedElf wrote:
princess wrote:Is there a word for a villain-character that is the protagonist?
ie. Tony Soprano, Hannibal Lecter, Wile -e Coyote
Anti-hero?
I think an anti-hero is still a hero. They're doing the Right Thing, they're just sulking while they do it. I think the word is just "protagonist". With a lower-case "p". ...a very evil lower-case "p".

Yes, I think someone like say, Dr house is an antihero

Laemkral · Post by **Laemkral** » Sun Sep 23, 2007 7:49 pm

It's not always about "What I enjoy" but "I'm right, you're all wrong". Most villains actions stems from a complete belief in what they are doing as the right course of action, regardless of what others say.

At a recent service the rabbi gave a talk on faith in the world, and she said that the problem isn't that there's not enough faith, but too much of it. People aren't willing to doubt, aren't willing to question. Extrapolate this into a literary world and villains are often people not willing to doubt, not willing to question that they are wrong.

I'm using for example my main character, Laemkral (yes, he shares the name). He is a villain, but he's a protagonist. The main goal for him involves killing a lot of people, many of whom have no prior connection to him. In his mind, they simply happen to be guilty through association. Because of his confidence in the righteousness of his actions, he sees no problem with killing them outright and often in cold blood.

Similarly, the antagonist in some of the current and upcoming stories is a secret society so dedicated to upholding their concept of justice they subvert the system itself. Their confidence in their cause, their level of belief, is so strong they see no hypocrisy in breaking the law to uphold it.

Then again, you sometimes get the people who know it IS wrong, but don't care. They're the psychos.

Escushion · Post by **Escushion** » Sun Sep 23, 2007 8:10 pm

Laemkral wrote:It's not always about "What I enjoy" but "I'm right, you're all wrong".

I said some people, not always. And the former is more often than the latter in real life--not so much in fiction. In fiction, we make these big, grandiose figures with delusions of "fixing" the world through the "breaking eggs to make an omelette" method. Most real people are more selfish and, viewing themselves as the heroes of their story, thus believe themselves entitled to what they want.

One of the awesome moments in The Sandman, volume 2, is where, at the gathering of serial killers, pedophiles, rapists, etc; Morpheus's curse on them all is to remove all delusions they have in their heads about what they're doing, to see their actions and themselves for what they really are. Not as the heroes of their stories anymore, but as sociopaths.

Yeahduff · Post by **Yeahduff** » Sun Sep 23, 2007 9:58 pm

vulpeslibertas wrote:
NakedElf wrote:
princess wrote:Is there a word for a villain-character that is the protagonist?
ie. Tony Soprano, Hannibal Lecter, Wile -e Coyote
Anti-hero?
I think an anti-hero is still a hero. They're doing the Right Thing, they're just sulking while they do it. I think the word is just "protagonist". With a lower-case "p". ...a very evil lower-case "p".

Anti-hero is the correct term.

As for villains, sometimes people are just in the wrong. Some people honestly don't care what's right and what's wrong, just what they want. Doesn't necessarily make them the most interesting villains, of course, but it ain't just different perspectives all the time.

NakedElf · Post by **NakedElf** » Mon Sep 24, 2007 12:06 am

Laemkral wrote:At a recent service the rabbi gave a talk on faith in the world, and she said that the problem isn't that there's not enough faith, but too much of it. People aren't willing to doubt, aren't willing to question.

This is one of the major underpinnings of my entire personal philosophy of life.

Which is why I'm such a self-absorbed, egotistical, conceited bitch :P

McDuffies · Post by **McDuffies** » Mon Sep 24, 2007 5:44 am

yeahduff wrote:
vulpeslibertas wrote:
NakedElf wrote: Anti-hero?
I think an anti-hero is still a hero. They're doing the Right Thing, they're just sulking while they do it. I think the word is just "protagonist". With a lower-case "p". ...a very evil lower-case "p".
Anti-hero is the correct term.

No, anti-hero is still a positive character, meaning a good guy. His difference from ordinary hero is that he is primarily driven not by altruistic mothives, preserving the justice, etc, but by selfish mothives, self-preservation, etc. But in the final score, he is still a good guy. Like, a noirish understanding of a hero.

Escushion · Post by **Escushion** » Mon Sep 24, 2007 5:58 am

mcDuffies wrote:
yeahduff wrote:
vulpeslibertas wrote: I think an anti-hero is still a hero. They're doing the Right Thing, they're just sulking while they do it. I think the word is just "protagonist". With a lower-case "p". ...a very evil lower-case "p".
Anti-hero is the correct term.
No, anti-hero is still a positive character, meaning a good guy. His difference from ordinary hero is that he is primarily driven not by altruistic mothives, preserving the justice, etc, but by selfish mothives, self-preservation, etc. But in the final score, he is still a good guy. Like, a noirish understanding of a hero.

McDuffies is correct.

Yeahduff · Post by **Yeahduff** » Mon Sep 24, 2007 6:11 am

What you're describing is indeed an anti-hero, but the term is broader than that. Tony Soprano is definitely an anti-hero.

Fabio Ciccone · Post by **Fabio Ciccone** » Mon Sep 24, 2007 10:17 am

I haven't got the time to read all this discussion (although it seems vary interesting), so I have no idea if someone already said this, but here it goes anyway. One thing I like to consider about the subject:

The protagonists don't need to be 100% good, thus the antagonists don't need to be 100% bad. I tend to think things might be a lot more interesting if the conflict is a conflict of interests rather than a conflict of morals.

That leaves the "hero" and "villain" or "good" and "evil" concepts off the table and expand the possibilities of your story.

Nothing against the good vs. evil approach, though... I'm a big fan of superheroes too

Black Sparrow · Post by **Black Sparrow** » Mon Sep 24, 2007 12:01 pm

Not that all superheros are unswervingly good...

Swimmingtrunks · Post by **Swimmingtrunks** » Mon Sep 24, 2007 3:06 pm

I think I'm partially self-obligated to make an appearance in this thread. >_>

Part of the reason I began writing Antagonist was my own frustrations with villains in fiction (and, to some extent the vilification of people in society?) who just fell flat. No driving motives, no real explanation for why they are who they are, etc. Given, at this point in the story, K is pretty much still that kind of villain- even if he sucks at it. But that's because I'm slow.

I find the whole good vs evil problematic in the first place, which is probably why in the past my characters have either had to deal with the antagonisms life throws at them, or I just plain have trouble coming up with something to oppose my "hero." I think the best antagonist character is primarily a character first, and an antagonist second- which I think has already been brought up. It's more interesting to me to see people work alternatively with and against each other as the situation dictates.

Of course, that depends a lot on the nature of the story- as the villain does. There is they time and place for every kind of villain- it depends on what kind of story you want to tell, and what kind of point you want to make. Every protagonist is only as good as- er, slightly better than?- what he/she is up against.

And there is my superfluous two cents without spoiling my comic.

Pimpette · Post by **Pimpette** » Mon Sep 24, 2007 3:12 pm

K-Dawg wrote:I haven't really done a villain yet.

THAT IS A DIRTY DIRTY LIE

K-Dawg · Post by **K-Dawg** » Mon Sep 24, 2007 3:31 pm

Pimpette wrote:
K-Dawg wrote:I haven't really done a villain yet.
THAT IS A DIRTY DIRTY LIE

YOU'RE A DIRTY DIRTY LIE!

McDuffies · Post by **McDuffies** » Mon Sep 24, 2007 11:45 pm

I AM DIRTY DIRTY MAN

ArcoJawa · Post by **ArcoJawa** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 7:32 am

(Long thread, I think I'm content to respond to the first post)

I'd talk about how my antagonist acts, but I don't want to give anything away I think, seeing as I'm really just starting up.

I've kinda been having trouble deciding on how to represent my antagonist physically. In the context of the story he's not actually there but I'd like to have him represented in some way or another. Normally I would assume this would be some kind of leader in his place but I was thinking more-so a corporeal manifestation of him. Everyones done the whole "don't reveal the true enemy till the end" thing and furthermore currently his "minions" consist of drones, nothing you'd leave in command in your stead~

Alschroeder · Post by **Alschroeder** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 10:13 am

Mindmistress has acquired quite a few opponents by now (I like that term better than "villains"---MM can sometimes be a little morally ambigious) and I flatter myself they're pretty varied.

As for my other character, Flickerflame, he's very MUCH an anti-hero.

---Al

Sortelli · Post by **Sortelli** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:40 pm

A villain is someone who says "Only a Sith thinks in absolutes!"

Liddell · Post by **Liddell** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 9:15 am

I haven't introduced any villains yet (but you might get one in the next couple of comics--I've started up production again, what with school and finances squared away for the time being). However, while I have some roles that need to be filled by characters who are less than heroic, I don't really have people to fill most of those roles yet. I need to think a bit more about what sort of person would do these kinds of things and WHY before I can introduce anyone too sinister.

Except for one particular character. I have one antagonist (not really evil, but definitely trouble for my main cast) completely and utterly fleshed out. I haven't settled on a physical appearance for him yet because he's my favorite of the main six characters and I want him to look good. I need to design him quickly, though; he's going to be a major player in Chapter 2 (which starts in a week).

Essentially, he's got a good heart and good intentions, but he's not terribly good at looking into consequences before acting. As a result, he's going to open a few cans of worms that will be a major headache for the main cast.

I've hinted at some of the things he's already done in the comics I have drawn thus far, but I have not said anything explicit, and there aren't really enough clues to know what he's up to just yet.

But oh, I can't wait to bring him in to mix things up.

Jekkal · Post by **Jekkal** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 11:39 am

I have several different 'ranges' of villains, and a lot of this is because a lot of the characters oppose each other in various ways:

The self-righteous prick who would be the good guy (and hell, is a bit of a celebrity hero already) but has his own selfish reasons for targeting one particular villain (an old woman) for special punishment out of some patriotic vengeance,
The psychopathic artist who seeks to preserve the beauty he sees 'for all time' by turning his victims into stone, killing them in the process but preserving their bodies,
The 'blessed' angel who finds it his duty to drive out 'demonic influences' in the world by killing those who gain powers which counter his own...

And that's only a few of 'em, 'cause I can only reveal so much at this point.

Because there's never just ONE guy who's ruining your day, it's a whole host of people who could have their own agenda against you, for their own reasons...