| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
 Posted - 07 Mar 2006 : 19:26:07
|
OK, maybe this is in the wrong section, if so would a moderator please move it to the proper section...
Now to the topic:
Basically I know that the stories are about heroes and heroic deeds etc. But I was wondering if there are/will be any novels that actually let the bad guys win. It would make the political 'climate' in Farūn much more interesting. E.g. a bad guy similar to Thrawn in Timothy Zahn's "Heir to the Empire" trilogy.
Yes, we hear a lot about atrocities committed by Zhentarim and other groups, and no I do not want to read about an elf or human being flayed, skinned or otherwise mutilated, but I would want to read about a cool bad guy as the 'hero'
I know this is far fetched, but one can hope...
|
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
Winterfox
Senior Scribe
895 Posts |
Posted - 07 Mar 2006 : 19:38:55
|
| Well, there's the Sellswords books, which feature Artemis Entreri and Jarlaxle, but they're rather watered-down as "villains" go. |
 |
|
|
Faraer
Great Reader
3308 Posts |
Posted - 07 Mar 2006 : 20:12:17
|
I think 'cool bad guys' are a blight in modern fiction. Like cool heels in pro wrestling, they're rarely a draw.
In the Star Wars EU I find the glamorization, whether by authors or fans, of murderers like Thrawn and Boba Fett tedious and at times reprehensible. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36877 Posts |
Posted - 07 Mar 2006 : 21:24:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
I think 'cool bad guys' are a blight in modern fiction. Like cool heels in pro wrestling, they're rarely a draw.
In the Star Wars EU I find the glamorization, whether by authors or fans, of murderers like Thrawn and Boba Fett tedious and at times reprehensible.
Well, while I do appreciate a villain like Thrawn, I do acknowledge that his methods were evil. Still, an interesting villain like Thrawn is far better than Generic Villain Overlord #3. I'd rather have a villain that was an interesting (if evil) character than the pure evil guy that came out of some mold and who can be tweaked to fit any setting with minimal effort. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 07 Mar 2006 : 22:17:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
I think 'cool bad guys' are a blight in modern fiction. Like cool heels in pro wrestling, they're rarely a draw.
In the Star Wars EU I find the glamorization, whether by authors or fans, of murderers like Thrawn and Boba Fett tedious and at times reprehensible.
I quite agree, Faraer, these guys are 'evil'. The ironic part about it is, without a 'good' villain the 'best' hero cannot shine. As for the murderer part... well, a group of heroes 'invading' some 'monster's' lair and killing them is 'right'?
I know it gets very philosophical ... or cynical, after all you might call wiping out a tribe of orcs a 'preemptive strike' as they probably would have at some later point raided a town. Thus the would-be raiders are killed before they actually commited a crime, whilst defending their homes.
The point of my original post was, as I thought would be obvious, *not* a glorification of evil (whatever that may be as the above example shows), but a 'good' bad guy who actually gets the chance to win.
If you look at the Realms you have an abundance of bad guys, whole nations that do nothing but plot and scheme, only to be put out of their misery in either a direct response to a threat or as a victim of circumstance because they just happened to 'be in the way'.
To really make heroes shine you need villains that are 'understandable', and behave not like the cookie cutter bad guy jumping straight at ya from the MM...
IMO it would be nice to actually read such a guy's story and understand why he does the things he does.
In "Prince of Lies" the gods of Faerūn are portrayed not necessarily as good or evil, but as concepts. To come back to Star Wars...Thrawn believed in his concept, he was *not* happy to kill lots of people. In D&D alignment I would probably rank him as LN, he did what he had to do. Or what he thought he had to do because he believed in a concept and he didn't enjoy it. At least I never saw him cackling maniacally (sp?) or enjoy the mayhem he created.
I know this is very philosophical, to a certain point, and no I do not think the end justify the means in any way, BUT there are always two sides to each story and the child of a villager who saw his parents killed by Paladins because they worshipped ... say ... um... Auril, is probably convinced that the Paladins are evil, murdering bastards.
So it is not glorification I look for in a villain but a person you can understand. A murdering sociopath is not frightening because he is such a bad person but because of his deeds. An enemy warleader is scary because of who he is, because he knows how to play the game and he knows it better so to speak.
That's what I would like to see, not some bad guy who is wiped out at the end of book 3 or 4 or 6 but someone who is a threat, not because he flays people alive and all the other 'nice' stuff bad guys do, but because he is so 'good' at what he does.
~too much thinking for one night...cheers |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
|
Winterfox
Senior Scribe
895 Posts |
Posted - 07 Mar 2006 : 23:05:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
I think 'cool bad guys' are a blight in modern fiction. Like cool heels in pro wrestling, they're rarely a draw.
Really? How modern do you consider, say, Paradise Lost?
quote:
In the Star Wars EU I find the glamorization, whether by authors or fans, of murderers like Thrawn and Boba Fett tedious and at times reprehensible.
Oh, I don't know, maybe those fans and authors can... seperate fiction from reality? I can't help but find terming the admiration of amoral/immoral fictional characters "reprehensible" just a leeetle bit melodramatic. ("Zomg, how dare you admire people who aren't paragons of virtue! Because fictional genocide and homicide are serious business, yo.") I, for one, don't read fiction to have my moral standpoint affirmed; after all, it can't possibly be so shaky that it'll be affected by sheer entertainment, can it?
Now, please excuse me while I go back to indulging my fascination with Elric, Milton's Satan/Lucifer, Peter Wiggin, Humbert Humbert, and the incestuous, almost child-murdering Jaime Lannister. And then roll my eyes at the tediousness of Elminster, Drizzt and Eragon. |
Edited by - Winterfox on 07 Mar 2006 23:05:48 |
|
|
|
Faraer
Great Reader
3308 Posts |
Posted - 07 Mar 2006 : 23:35:26
|
Mace, I think what you're asking for could work, but it could easily backfire in a work-for-hire environment unless handled very carefully. Personally, I don't like villains too understandable: I think such characters belong in realist fiction, not fantasy.
Winterfox, you don't need to deploy that sarcasm quite so often. Milton's Satan is both heroic and a villain because the Christian Devil is a composite of Lucifer and the Jewish Satan. Elric is an antihero, Humbert Humbert is a protagonist. I'm not talking about them, but the specific trend of making villains [i.e. antagonists] 'cool'. The relationship of fiction and reality is generally poorly understood, and far more complex than a simple separation. There's no such thing as 'sheer entertainment': our understanding of the world is mediated through cultural forms, as the terrible 20th-century success of advertising and propaganda proved. |
Edited by - Faraer on 08 Mar 2006 01:02:36 |
|
|
|
Ignorance Personified
Seeker
USA
78 Posts |
Posted - 07 Mar 2006 : 23:37:17
|
quote:
Originally Posted by Mace Hammerhand:
But I was wondering if there are/will be any novels that actually let the bad guys win.
Two Possibilities:
1. The Watercourse Trilogy by Philip Athans: Due to the prologue of Book I, it seems that the "bad guys" will triumph in the end of the series, but as Mr. Athans has chosen to make his protagonist the personification of Objectivism (Ayn Rand's philosophy) I do not know if those individuals are trully evil as the philsophy seems to advocate moral relativism--although the author is certainly protraying them as through they will become far more "immoral" as the trilogy progresses.
2. The Sellswords by RA Salvatore: Jarlaxle certainly seems to be evil as he is manipulating his partner, is willing to sacrfice and murder when necessary, and is generally willing to create utter chaos in order to gain his desires.
Warning: If you think you are a person possessing an above average mental capacity then you will not enjoy RAS's work. For example, if Martin is the fantasy genre's equivalent to Socrates (constantly making the audience ponder the ramifications of each decision) then Salvatore is the Cicero and is merely giving the ignorant majority (such as myself) their "fix." Sorry to all for the horrible classical comparisons, but I could not think of a more effective way of conveying my perspective.
quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfox:
I, for one, don't read fiction to have my moral standpoint affirmed; after all, it can't possibly be so shaky that it'll be affected by sheer entertainment, can it?
Well, if you believe the current generation of American politicians (i.e. the preposed violent video game act) then yes. But, why would anyone believe them? |
Carthago delenda est. |
Edited by - Ignorance Personified on 07 Mar 2006 23:38:43 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36877 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2006 : 00:32:36
|
I can see this one getting ugly... So I'll say it now: keep it nice, people.  |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Beezy
Learned Scribe
USA
280 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2006 : 00:44:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Winterfox
Well, there's the Sellswords books, which feature Artemis Entreri and Jarlaxle, but they're rather watered-down as "villains" go.
I agree. |
|
|
|
Sarta
Senior Scribe
USA
505 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2006 : 01:56:07
|
Frankly, I think things have improved quite a bit:
Lisa Smedman's Venom series' opened a lot of eyes with its more mature subject matter. To my knowledge, it hasn't generated litigation, protests, or poor sales.
Elaine Cunningham's work with Elaith Craulnober has remained true to his character, while at the same time allowing his heroism to peek out.
Ed's given us Mirt and shed a brighter light on the workings and mindsets of Halaster and Larloch.
Erevis Cale (former assassin, now priest and champion of a Neutral Evil God), Walker (one who's entire existence has been channeled into the pursuit of revenge above all else), and even Taegan Nightwind (a self-centered hedonist who loathes his own race) have all been "heros" in recent novels. None of these characters are lantern-jawed paragons of virtue questing out to do bold deeds.
I'd like to see WotC lighten up a bit on the whole, "No novel should end with a villain winning" rule -- even if it is book one or two of a trilogy. However, I'd say that things have been pretty good and the trend is even better.
Sarta |
|
|
|
scererar
Master of Realmslore
USA
1618 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2006 : 02:29:29
|
| I don't know the specific alignment of Cale and friends, but they are at least dark heroes. |
Edited by - scererar on 08 Mar 2006 02:30:12 |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2006 : 03:21:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sarta
Lisa Smedman's Venom series' opened a lot of eyes with its more mature subject matter. To my knowledge, it hasn't generated litigation, protests, or poor sales.
Agreed--the "mature" subject matter is one reason why I like that series so much.
As far as portrayals of Satan go, I like the one in the Book of Job. He is basically the ultimate cynic, and while he does do some bad things in his very short time "on stage", he only does what a certain other character allows him to do... |
"Instead of asking why we sleep, it might make sense to ask why we wake. Perchance we live to dream. From that perspective, the sea of troubles we navigate in the workaday world might be the price we pay for admission to another night in the world of dreams."
--Richard Greene (letter to Time) |
Edited by - Rinonalyrna Fathomlin on 08 Mar 2006 03:22:43 |
|
|
|
Ethriel
Learned Scribe
USA
272 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2006 : 04:19:32
|
Most off of the people you mentioned are pretty much morally ambiguous, Jaime for example is hardly evil and in the last book or two, he's certainly grown into a hero. Hell, Humbert was able to release Lolita and decide to help her...
And one doesn't have to be a villain to be interesting, there are plenty interesting heroes. Erevis Cale for one, Dorne Graybrook, Arilyn Moonblade and Danilo Thann, Liriel Baenre, just as there are inane villains. (Mwahahaha, I sit and cackle)
And as for the other subject: Yeah, murder and genocide don't make a character cool, or likeable or sexy. Some people do get annoyed when these characters are suddenly seen as cool and fictional or not, their moral compass is not doing so good. Kind of like Anne Rice's books..."Waaah, waaah, I'm so alone! Why does noone love me! *Bites out the throat of a girl/man/whatever.* Why must we hide?!"
And people seem to think that is sexy and cool? There're certainly likeable villains, such as Azriim or Pharaun Mizzrym, but they have te benefit of personality and can do some things besides kick kittens and kill babies. |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2006 : 07:10:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I can see this one getting ugly... So I'll say it now: keep it nice, people.
I hope it doesn't get 'ugly', when I started this thread it was not my intention...
I want a mature and objective discussion...hope it works out |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
|
Winterfox
Senior Scribe
895 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2006 : 11:57:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
Winterfox, you don't need to deploy that sarcasm quite so often. Milton's Satan is both heroic and a villain because the Christian Devil is a composite of Lucifer and the Jewish Satan.
But, by making Satan heroic, isn't that the very glamourization you were protesting about?
quote:
I'm not talking about them, but the specific trend of making villains [i.e. antagonists] 'cool'.
Define villains and antagonists. Do they cease to be murderers, rapists, or child-molesters if they are given a viewpoint and/or the story's told from their perspective?
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
As far as portrayals of Satan go, I like the one in the Book of Job. He is basically the ultimate cynic, and while he does do some bad things in his very short time "on stage", he only does what a certain other character allows him to do...
 Isn't God such a manipulative jerk? |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2006 : 12:36:56
|
| If you look at the novel "The Poet" (author escapes me at the moment) the villain's point of view is made plain. Or take Dread (if I remember the name correctly) from Tad William's Otherland series; he is one of the most frightening people I ever read about. A psychopath, true, but he is very compelling and I doubt that anyone would iconize him... |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
|
Faraer
Great Reader
3308 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2006 : 13:24:32
|
We've got some different things here: protagonism, cool and glamourization aren't identical, and a character is not one thing only. I think:
The debased notion of cool is antithetical to drama, so 'cool' villains are dramatically ineffective antagonists.
Admiring villains for non-heroic qualities is sinister. Admiring the heroic qualities of, say, Milton's Satan, is fundamentally different, but still morally ambiguous (which is not the worst thing).
Anti-, conflicted and compromised heroes: A protagonist needs heroic qualities. They can also have nonheroic and even evil qualities; one of the greatest modern protagonists, Severian in The Book of the New Sun, is a professional torturer. But if the evil qualities are shown to bring success and aren't learned from in some way, that is a valorization of evil, and dramatic nonsense within the structure of story. The labelling of 'flawed' characters as more 'human' is very peculiar, and current fiction has a surplus of pointless, superficial moral ambiguity attached to give credibility by authors afraid of heroism.
Heroic fantasy is a fictional mode mediated by violence; to some extent, its violence doesn't represent literal violence but actualizes thematic conflict, the way dialogue does in courtroom dramas. Heroes killing orcs is not morally equivalent to orcs killing humans, or to heroes killing foreigners in realist fiction. One of the central themes of the Realms is how adventurers must deal with their violent world, and how that changes them.
(And Elminster, from your comment in another thread, is not 'Chosen of Greenwood', but of TSR and of WotC, as has been repeatedly made clear.) |
Edited by - Faraer on 08 Mar 2006 13:26:39 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36877 Posts |
|
|
Winterfox
Senior Scribe
895 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2006 : 14:15:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
The debased notion of cool is antithetical to drama, so 'cool' villains are dramatically ineffective antagonists.
Unfortunately, "cool" has not yet become a literary academic term, so for clarification... define. Is it "cool" as in "it's obvious the villain is the author's darling" or "it's obvious the villain's created to appeal to the great unwashed" or what?
quote:
But if the evil qualities are shown to bring success and aren't learned from in some way, that is a valorization of evil, and dramatic nonsense within the structure of story.
So all fiction must be moral tales? Uh, no thanks.
quote:
The labelling of 'flawed' characters as more 'human' is very peculiar
Why so? |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2006 : 14:22:09
|
Why should fantasy fiction not deal with such things? I do not mean glorified gore...
Why is the ethnic cleansing of a tribe of orcs 'right', while the same from the orcs point of view is 'wrong'?
Of course by orcish nature they are rather violent, but any intrusion into someone's homeregion is an invasion, be the invader human, orc, elf or pink-gnarled wombats...
I think herein lies the main problem with alignment. There is Ao's rule (law) of balance. If this balance was to be enforced there would be as many 'bad' heroes ad there are 'good' heroes. It is, however, a different problem of actually portraying 'evil' people. Truly evil in terms of alignment, like chaotic evil, is kinda difficult to explain and even the tome of vile darkness 'dodges' the matter, for a specific reason of course, but if we talk about evil we talk about evil.
Thus a paladin order wiping out a family because they worship an entity that is inherently 'evil' to the paladins' faith is a 'good' act, while we later learn that this being was not really hurting any of them, instead it gave the family the fortune (in whatever) they thought they deserved. That in return they may have traded off their firstborn daughter in a gruesome ritual could be called collateral. If this daughter went to the sacrificial table willingly it changes the entire good evil thingy...
The bad guys should if not as than at least have some presence of note in the Realms.
King Obould is a good start in that... cheers |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
|
Faraer
Great Reader
3308 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2006 : 15:09:31
|
Winterfox,
'Cool' is hard to define, but I basically mean a superficial flashy magnetic appeal, whether by authorial intent or not.
Fiction is inherently moral: it takes place in a symbolically heightened moral (as opposed to non-moral) universe and deals with how people should live their lives, and ultimately with the mythic repetition of the cosmogony. Nothing we can do about it.
'Flaws' are human, but so are the positive qualities they're defined in contrast to. Associating humanity with disfunctional qualities and not with functional qualities is to fetishize them, which is what some books -- those where you can almost hear the author stage-whisper 'Look, it's a complex character flaw!' -- certainly do.
Mace, for instance, Tolkien's orcs aren't people, and they aren't a race in the sense of a human ethnic group. They're a fictional construct with a symbolic function in telling stories. Fantasy ranges from being very like dream, in which symbolism is direct and outright, to very like real life, in which things have literal, realistic meanings and the symbolic meanings are submerged. The basic characteristic of fantasy is that it tends toward the former, but it can be close to the latter. Moral relativism of the 'goblins are people too' kind belongs in fiction, but I prefer it out of the Realms. |
|
|
|
Ethriel
Learned Scribe
USA
272 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2006 : 16:29:54
|
Should all fantasies and stories be moral tales? No. Should there be strict lines drawn in morality so massive genocide and nightly butchery isn't cool or sexy or makes for such 'badass' characters and show these characters are the bastards they're supposed to be? Yes.
I don't recall Martin ever sugar coating Gregor, Ramsay Snow or Jaime Lannister. |
|
|
|
Winterfox
Senior Scribe
895 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2006 : 17:05:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ethriel
I don't recall Martin ever sugar coating Gregor, Ramsay Snow or Jaime Lannister.
Uh, yeah, and? As far as I'm concerned, sugar-coating has nothing to do with it; the characters I mentioned have gained fans by being exactly what they are, be it murderous, cruel, brutal or ruthless. I haven't been in touch with the ASoIaF fandom, but I understand that Jaime and Gregor are fairly well-liked among fans, at that, and after all Faraer was bringing up fans as well as authors. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36877 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2006 : 17:38:45
|
You know, when I sit down to read a book, all I'm looking for is to be entertained. That's it. I don't believe that the majority of fantasy fiction is written for any other purpose, nor do I believe it is utilized for any other purpose.
For a character to be interesting, they need to have a personality that is worth exploring. Generic characters, be they good, evil, amoral, or something else, are not interesting if they are flat and 2-dimensional.
Giving a character goals, motivations, interests, idiosyncrasies, habits and desires is what gives the character depth. A well-rounded character, either good or evil, will have these things. And they will be far more interesting than the character who doesn't have those things.
When most people decide a villain is cool, it's not because of his evil acts. It's because of the way the villain accomplishes his goals. Since we keep mentioning Thrawn, no one admired him for conquering some planet. He was admired for the way he figured out how to scare the populace into surrendering, and then pulled it off with a grand act of sleight of hand. It wasn't the act itself, it was the way it was accomplished.
To use a parallel given in one of the D&D books: If your swashbuckler needs to get from this balcony to the ground level, which is the more interesting option? Walking down the stairs or jumping onto the chandelier, cutting the rope supporting it, and then riding it down? Both accomplish the same goal -- but it's not the goal that's the focus. It's the way the goal is reached.
People that are idolizing bad guys in fictional novels are not idolizing the things the bad guys do, the focus is on how the bad guys do them. It's the same with good guys. No one admires Drizzt for killing orcs, people admire him for being able to dance on a footstool while holding off the orcs until he drops them.
People read fiction to be entertained. Good or evil, they want the characters to entertain them. And the character has to be interesting to do this. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
SheriffJoe
Seeker
USA
54 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2006 : 17:44:55
|
No doubt the Lannister's are "well-liked" because they are complex characters that the author has provided choices for. As readers, the most wonderful thing that ANY author can do is to give us characters that have the ability to choose, to make decisions. By giving us that and presenting it in a way that allows us to see the character thinking about that impending choice, said author allows US, his/her readers, to connect with that character. We can then agree or disagree with that character's choice, argue amongst ourselves over why the choice was made and so forth and so on. It the mark of an excellent writer when, after finishing a book, we can discuss the choices that characters made throughout.
Also, just as a point of defintion, the antagonist of a story is not necessarily the villian of the story. The antagonist of a story is the character who opposes the protagonist. So, if the protagonist, the character attempting to achieve the main goal of the story, is morally corrupt or "evil," then the antagonist is simply the character attempting to keep the protagonist from achieving that goal, be that character "good" or another "evil" one attempting to stop the protagonist for his own personal benefit.
Does that make sense?
A story, ANY story, is only as good as the characters that inhabit it. And a powerful story is only as good as its antagonist. Who cares about a story where the good guy has it easy? As consumers of good stories, we NEED for our heroes to feel threatened, to be challenged and there MUST be a risk of failure in order for the victory to be sweet. It is in our nature as human beings to overcome obstacles. The greater the obstacle, the more spectacular the success when overcoming it.
As a writer myself, that is my main goal and my greatest obstacle...to create a story with characters that are worthwhile, interesting, and get the crap kicked out of them repeatedly. :) |
Edited by - SheriffJoe on 08 Mar 2006 17:47:13 |
|
|
|
Richard Lee Byers
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
1814 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2006 : 18:44:32
|
I don't see any intrinsic reason why orcs must be treated as a fundamentally tainted and irredeemable race. Their behavior as depicted in most fantasy novels, FR books included, is no worse than behavior humans have often displayed in real-world history.
But if a writer wants to roll with the idea that orcs are born bad to the bone because it serves the purposes of the story, I also don't see anything wrong with that approach. What the heck, it worked for Tolkien. |
|
|
|
Winterfox
Senior Scribe
895 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2006 : 21:49:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
You know, when I sit down to read a book, all I'm looking for is to be entertained. That's it. I don't believe that the majority of fantasy fiction is written for any other purpose, nor do I believe it is utilized for any other purpose.
For a character to be interesting, they need to have a personality that is worth exploring. Generic characters, be they good, evil, amoral, or something else, are not interesting if they are flat and 2-dimensional.
Giving a character goals, motivations, interests, idiosyncrasies, habits and desires is what gives the character depth. A well-rounded character, either good or evil, will have these things. And they will be far more interesting than the character who doesn't have those things.
When most people decide a villain is cool, it's not because of his evil acts. It's because of the way the villain accomplishes his goals. Since we keep mentioning Thrawn, no one admired him for conquering some planet. He was admired for the way he figured out how to scare the populace into surrendering, and then pulled it off with a grand act of sleight of hand. It wasn't the act itself, it was the way it was accomplished.
To use a parallel given in one of the D&D books: If your swashbuckler needs to get from this balcony to the ground level, which is the more interesting option? Walking down the stairs or jumping onto the chandelier, cutting the rope supporting it, and then riding it down? Both accomplish the same goal -- but it's not the goal that's the focus. It's the way the goal is reached.
People that are idolizing bad guys in fictional novels are not idolizing the things the bad guys do, the focus is on how the bad guys do them. It's the same with good guys. No one admires Drizzt for killing orcs, people admire him for being able to dance on a footstool while holding off the orcs until he drops them.
People read fiction to be entertained. Good or evil, they want the characters to entertain them. And the character has to be interesting to do this.
Much better spoken than I could have; thank you.
quote:
Originally posted by SheriffJoe
As a writer myself, that is my main goal and my greatest obstacle...to create a story with characters that are worthwhile, interesting, and get the crap kicked out of them repeatedly. :)
Funny you should say that. I find that, the more I enjoy writing a character, the further I want to try and stretch his/her threshold for pain and mental stability. Fun times. |
Edited by - Winterfox on 08 Mar 2006 21:56:27 |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2006 : 22:00:55
|
Wow... I didn't think I'd create such a vivid discussion...yay me *G*
I agree with Richard Lee Byers, if it suits the story let them be the amoral mobs they have been shown by Tolkien and others.
Maybe it is my knack for thinking stories through. As a writer I do not like to merely say "lo and behold this are the bad guys" I want my bad guys to behave thusly for a reason. Same goes for RPG-NPCs.
IMO there should are always two, or more, sides to a story. As Khosh (sp?) in Babylon 5 said, the truth is a three edged sword. Maybe three edges are even too little since the perception of evil is always in the eye of the beholder and this beholder has been raised by ethics that will probably be alien to others.
For example: if I understand Realmslore correctly Waterdeep's policy on slavery is basically that it is banned and thus evil. In Mulhorand, however, slaves are part of daily life. These slaves are being educated and will most likely be on a higher educational level as the average Cormyrian farmer. For a Mulhorandi slavery is good, even for the slaves it is good... far better than toiling day in day out on a farm and not being able to read the king's proclamation. A Mulhorandi slave, who has probably never known anything else in life, sees himself in the 'normal' order of things (in his country) and will probably be astonished about or feel pity for the Cormyrian commoner.
Again the entire thing is a matter of perception...
Do the ends justify the means? I think that is they keyquestion... would I call a person 'evil' be they fictional or real if they employed torture to get a prisoner to talk in order to rescue hostages? Torture is evil. Saving people is not. Is it all right to keep my moral highground for the cost of other people dying so that I can sleep better at night, knowing I have not broken my own moral code?
Maybe, to be good means to sacrifice others in order to not be tainted by evil?
Damn, only one beer and I am getting too philosophical for my own good...
Good night ;-) |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
|
Winterfox
Senior Scribe
895 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2006 : 23:10:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mace Hammerhand
Do the ends justify the means? I think that is they keyquestion... would I call a person 'evil' be they fictional or real if they employed torture to get a prisoner to talk in order to rescue hostages? Torture is evil. Saving people is not.
Strange you should bring this up; recently, on another board, this very scenario was brought up. Do you torture a kidnapper to get the location of the children he abducted? (Referring to the Jakob von Metzler case in Germany.) I mean, do you go tell the parents the next day, "Sorry, guys, but your five-year-old died of suffocation because we had to respect the kidnapper's rights. Better luck next time"? |
|
|
|
Ethriel
Learned Scribe
USA
272 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2006 : 23:35:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by Winterfox
quote:
Originally posted by Ethriel
I don't recall Martin ever sugar coating Gregor, Ramsay Snow or Jaime Lannister.
Uh, yeah, and? As far as I'm concerned, sugar-coating has nothing to do with it; the characters I mentioned have gained fans by being exactly what they are, be it murderous, cruel, brutal or ruthless. I haven't been in touch with the ASoIaF fandom, but I understand that Jaime and Gregor are fairly well-liked among fans, at that, and after all Faraer was bringing up fans as well as authors.
I have never seen a single person like Gregor. Sandor, yes, Gregor, no. When you gleefully laugh about smashing a baby's skull, then raping the mother before doing the same to her....
And could you tone down the sarcasm just a bit? Treating other posters as people in conversations would be rather nice. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Villains in Novels
