The Villain: Part 2

There are however some stories that do well with their villain. Though these are fewer in number they are generally some of the best. There are a couple different approaches that can give you a good villain, and they vary widely between the two. interestingly, there doesn't seem to be much in the way of a bridge between different extremes. Perhaps the issue of time is more important to a good characterization then anything else.

I have found that more than anything these "success stories" could be grouped up into four categories, although there are other villains that work without being  any of these categories, most of the ones that do work are part of one of these four groups.

The Sympathetic/Admirable Villain: (ex: Magneto)
Perhaps the least memorable of the villain types, if only because in your mind they're not really villains. The sympathetic villain will be found opposing your main character, but not generally because they have some evil scheme in mind, generally their motives are benign enough, it is  most often their methods that put them into conflict with the hero. Sometimes the villain's goal is selfish, but nevertheless one that we sympathize with. (the best example for this being Barbosa in Pirates of the Caribbean. Tell me you didn't feel bad for him when the apple rolled out of his sleeve.)

The Unknowable Villain: (ex: Sauron)
The opposite of the sympathetic villain, the Unknowable villain is very much evil. They're just not in the picture. Their perspective is removed and relatively unimportant to the actual meat of the story. Often the characters will not directly interact with this kind of villain, they will encounter the villain's minions, or otherwise feel the villain's influence, but will be unlikely to actually meet the villain face to face. (WARNING: this type of villain only works if he remains removed for the entirety of the story. many villains of this category lose steam once they enter into the actual workings of the plot, as they turn out to be generic evil people.)

The Eccentric Villain: (ex: Cruella De Vil)
A little bit of a strange choice, but some of the best villains are completely crazy. This only works if the villain is overdone and really rather haywire. this kind of villain will not even attempt to be normal and is apt tor get sidetracked at least once during their villainous monologue (oh but that's a story for another time) and is really pretty bonkers. It's hard to have a villain like this in a serious story, but they work quite effectively as comedic villains, and can be if nothing else, Memorable, which is a key trait for determining where they stand.

The Intriguing Villain: (ex: Darth Vader)
Lastly, the Intriguing villain is the most basic, but perhaps the most difficult villain to create. Yes, your villain is evil. Yes they are evil without real reasons. Yes they will treat all their allies like crap and Yes they are never happy.
But they sure are fun. If your villain has enough personality and general "coolness" that they can be a general jerk to everyone, and people will love it. Most Star Wars villains fall (or attempt to fall) into this category, as do the villains of Avatar: the last Airbender or BBC's Sherlock.

The villain is one of the most important parts of a story, and too often they are just another egomaniacal world conqueror. but if you can get it right, your story will often be greatly improved. (although you may get "the villain is more fun than the hero" syndrome, so shape up your main character too.) A Hero is defined by their Villain. and when a villain is special, the whole story benefits for it. a last parting bit of advice, if your ever find your villain saying:

"after I get ABCD, I will be UNSTOPPABLE! HA! HA! HA!" to a hero who may or may not actually be in danger.

You've missed your mark.

NEXT TIME: I actually don't know how long it'll be until I do another one of these posts, I leave for college tomorrow, and have really no idea how much free time I will or won't have. Also topic-wise nothing is currently jumping at me. I will continue to upload comics however (to the whole five people who read them.) so stay tuned!

the Villian: part 1

The Villain of a story is one of (if not THE) most integral parts to formulating a successful tale. Yet at the same time, the villain is also one of the most squandered opportunities that any story represents. Too often the villain of a story opposes the hero for very meaningless or even fake reasons (I'm looking at you pretty much every comic book villain ever.) and this is a prime example of the oversimplification that stories are so prone to doing. If the hero of the story can be a complex and three dimensional character with their own, why should their opposition be any less complex, any less thoughtful. In truth, the best villains are every bit as admirable as the heroes they oppose. some of the most satisfying conflicts occur when both sides have an admirable goal.

The idea of a villain who was still an admirable individual is not a new idea by any sense. even Homer, who's principle audience would have been the descendants of the Greek invaders, painted Hector, eldest son of Priam and the most powerful of the Trojan heroes as an honorable individual, who refuses to sell out his less-than-penitent younger brother, despite the fact that the odds are against both him and his city. Likewise pretty much every pantheon of gods has at least one "evil" deity who is associated with death or strife or mischief, but will still stand by the other gods at various points in the mythology

The other form of ancient story is the kind that has no villain. both The Odyssey and Beowulf, although featuring people and creatures that oppose the hero, do not really have villains. Yes there are foes, (Cersei, and Grendel, Polyphemus and the Dragon) but the actions of these foes do not dictate the course of the story, in the same way that The Joker orchestrates the occurrences of The Dark Knight  or how Darth Vader affects the course of the Star wars trilogy. Ancient stories were focused on the hero, and him alone.

Which is why everything is King Arthur's fault.

King Arthur is the one who started the trend of illogical villainy that plagues some other wise brilliant stories (such as Ronin in Guardians of the Galaxy, and numerous unnecessary characters in Game of Thrones) Morgan le Fay and her sisters will do anything in their power to ensnare and oppose Arthur and his knights, without Arthur himself having done anything to them. (they are venting their rather legitimate frustration at Arthur's father, by opposing his son.)

But King Arthur is not the only legend to have illogical villains. Robin hood also has to regularly deal with Prince John, Guy of Guisborne and the Sheriff of Nottingham, all of whom have really no redeeming characteristics and are just greedy brutes.

And that doesn't mean you can't have a greedy brute who likes hurting people as your villain. But it does mean that no one cares about your villain. If your villain is the generic vileness that is found in so many stories (which is really Disney's fault but...) then it should be the hero that drives the plot, not that villain. Because in truth, the hero of your story is really only as good as the villain(or obstacle) they overcome.

There has been a growing trend in modern stories to have chapters from the villain's perspective, both to change up the points of view AND to establish the villain as dangerous by having him be evil to either some unlucky nobody or an inept minion. this rather generic scene can be found in almost any movie (it even snuck it's way into The Hobbit) and will always end with the villain dispatching whoever is groveling before them.

Oh, aren't they so evil!!!

Next Time: The Villain, part two: the ones that got it right