Hi Everyone, I have recently finished a first draft for a children novel, but something is missing. The story doesn't have a antagonist that's appears through out the entire novel. The plot takes place in two time periods featuring the same protagonist, each time period has its own "Villain" characters. Does a story need a central antagonist to really work ? Also, has anyone ever read a novel that doesn't have a central antagonist? Thank you for reading, I hope my question made sense. Look forward to hearing your thoughts.
Having different antagonists in different parts (time periods) of your novel shouldn't be a problem. Just make sure there is a reason for the transition. For ex. The story (no matter how many parts) has one narrative and not two separate/disjointed ideas that just so happen to share the same protagonist (ex. protagonist's arch doesn't connect or transition from one to the other part). Or else it might as well be two novels or stories. The reason is because your story is about your PROTAGONIST, not the ANTAGONIST. It's the PROGATONIST that needs to hold it together. Sometimes having the same ANTAGONIST helps, but it's not always necessary for the story to work.
Thank you very much. Your answer makes a lot of sense. There is a reason for having two time periods, so I don't feel too bad about for not having a central antagonist.
@StoryForest is correct, I reckon. If you focus on the development of your protagonist, you should be fine. An antagonist doesn't have to actually be another 'person.' It can be an attitude, or a situation. For example, if your progagonist is focused on defeating bullies, you could have the protagonist being hassled by a bully. The protagonist faces down the bully, defeats him—but then has to deal with the bully's angry father—then maybe an entire school system that backs the angry father. The antagonist isn't just one person, but a whole slew of them. At the end of it all, we hope the protagonist defeats the real antagonist, which is bullying at his school.
Thanks. I feel slightly more confident that my first draft is heading in the right direction. (Protagonist travels into the future, he is confronted by first antagonist , needs to get back home, A mistake is made and he ends up in the future, where a second antagonist gets in the way. final chapters have the two time periods mix. )
Hello, friend. The antagonist doesn't need to be a person, can be something paranormal, or even force of nature (eruption of a volcano), or your protagonist insecurities. But to answer your question, you need to ask yourself several questions about the protagonist (the child). You have to know more about him/her. Write aside and see if you can find a potential antagonist. Just remember antagonist is what will oppose your MC. I hope this helps. Keep on good work and have fun.
I disagree with most writers in this thread. Story is about conflict between protagonist and antagonist. Antagonist does not need to be human. It can be animal, ideology, spirit... But it needs to be. If you have a story with chain of antagonists, you have a chain of stories, not one. Or... It can be one story if there is a "meta-antagonist" and meta story which binds all the stories together.
Perhaps we are all on the same page but there is a misunderstanding in terminology? There definitely needs to be some form of conflict. But conflict and antagonist are not the same things. An antagonist is the manifestation of the conflict but not the conflict itself. Meaning the conflict can manifest itself in many different forms = more than one antagonist. It sounded like Spurs06 is wondering if more than one antagonist is possible in one story. It should be as long as there is a constant narrative followed throughout. Like in Jan’s example: CONFLICT = Bullying ANTAGONIST = School Bully, School Bully’s father, the School itself There is more than one ANTAGONIST, but the CONFLICT still exists throughout the story.
My question was can a story work without a central antagonist ? Eg: A Terminator type character, chasing the protagonist through the entire story. My plot outline Two children find a stamp that allows them to Travel to whatever destination is written on the envelope. First they travel into the past were they are captured. (first antagonist) They escape, but make a mistake, which see them sent too far into the future where they meet a second antagonist. The two time periods are linked towards the end. Characters from the past cross into the future to help defeat the second antagonist. (This plot sounds really silly now I’ve written here to explain. )
1. It's possible but risky. If you have separate antagonists it is like having separate stories. 2. It sounds like you had two story arches. First one ends to escaping. Mistake is the inciting incident of second.
May I ask. Are the two separate antagonists similar? what I mean is, do they both help the protagonist address their core problem. Hmmm I have explained that badly - let me give an example. Suppose you have a time travel story with a young adult protagonist. They have a bully antagonist at the start of the story. They go back in time and have a Viking warlord as an antagonist and learn to stand up to bullies. Then when they return home, they stand up to the bully. so both Antagonists address the primary problem the protagonist has. So if your two antagonists are not "related" to the same problem that the protag has, then I would say it might be a problem. Even if struggling against the first antag sets up the second (ie stage 1 learn to stand up to a bully. stage, find out that he has become a bully himself)
The two antagonists arne't related. The first antagonist wants a problem to be solved before he'll let the protagonist leave. The second antagonist wants the stamp for his own personal gain. Really, that's why I felt something was missing from the story, an antagonist that stays with the protagonist through out. But I didn't want to insert a charterer just to fill the gap. From the comments both arguments make sense, but I think it would help the novel to write a central antagonist . The more I think about it the more the plot lacks conflict, as Alan Aspie said.
Then you have two stories. You can do it without inserting characters to fill the gap. If two different antagonist are one character in some meta level, then it's possible that it works. It's more different than having just one antagonist and his/her pack, but if you can make it working, it might be very rewarding. Mink hinted one way to do it: Or you could have two personifications of one kind of evilness. Or you can have same culture or ideology behind both antagonists or... If you think that story with one antagonist is like juggling with 4 balls then story with two antagonists is like juggling with 16 balls. It's possible, but there are hidden traps.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odyssey I corrrect a bit. I said: Usually/often stories have: - Character arch - Plot arch - Thematic arch - Story world arch (normal world, ideal world and underworl - ideal and under can be nonmaterial) Writer weaves these arches to one fabric and does not leave loose ends. Plot arch is usually series of conflicts between protagonist and antagonist + resolution of these conflicts. That means that by changing antagonist you either leave loose ends or change a story. It can be done without loose ends or changing story. Like... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gulag_Archipelago But... It really is like juggling 16 balls compared to juggling just 4. (In Gulag Archipelago communist ideology and the inner dark side of everyone was a kind off meta-antagonist and all the other antagonists were representations of that meta-antagonist.) If - and only if - you are Nobel prize level writer you can do it. But if you were you would be writing it, not asking us about it.
Thanks for putting so much effort into your reply. Its really helpful. Ha, I will never be a Nobel prize level author. But even if I was, good advice is always appreciated.
I apologize, it was not my intention to offend you with caps. The caps were not meant to indicate loudness but to highlight the “term” being used to describe the concept. I respect your opinion and was only trying to clear up any possible misunderstandings. The reason I thought it may have been a terminology issue is because of this quote: “It can be one story if there is a "meta-antagonist" and meta story which binds all the stories together.” You then recently further elaborated: “If two different antagonist are one character in some meta level, then it's possible that it works.” This sounded very similar to what I and some of the other posters said earlier which is: “The antagonist isn't just one person, but a whole slew of them. At the end of it all, we hope the protagonist defeats the real antagonist, which is bullying at his school.” - Jan “Meaning the conflict can manifest itself in many different forms = more than one antagonist…There is more than one ANTAGONIST, but the CONFLICT still exists throughout the story.” - Me It’s just that we used the term “conflict” instead of “meta-antagonist” in our description. Again, not trying to start an argument or anything, just wanted to point out the similarities in both our points.
Spurs06 – In your journey to story building, here are some examples of stories that have more than one antagonist (not to be confused with meta-antagonist) but still have the same overall conflict the protagonist is trying to overcome. Beauty and the Beast (Disney Version) – At the beginning of the story, the antagonist is the Beast. In the end, it is Gaston. Sure, Gaston appears in the beginning, but he doesn’t show up 80% of the time until the end fight scene. The antagonist here transitions from one character to the other as the protagonist learns to look beyond one’s outer appearance. Jurassic Park (Movie Version, for simplicity) – Is the antagonist the T-Rex or the Raptors? Is it the dinosaurs in general? On a deeper level, is it the “arrogance of humans” who thought they could control nature in creating such a park? Throughout the movie, the protagonist needs to defeat different “antagonists” that show up in the story at different times. The theme is the same, but it doesn’t have to be constantly hammered into the plot (the audience isn’t wrapped up in deep thought about “human arrogance” while the T-Rex is chasing down the kids). The events of focus in your story can switch around, but the underlining idea remains constant – in the case of action-driven stories like Jurassic Park, it can be in the background. Romeo and Juliet – Things get a little more symbolic here. Who would you say is the antagonist here? Is it the jealous cousin? The rival families? The naivete of young lovers (who didn’t do enough preplanning or at least let each other know about their final escape plan)? Or is it a reflection of the effects that traditional societies have upon their youth? You can take your pick, but the protagonist doesn’t necessarily have to be fighting against one thing, it can be a multitude of things that lead the protagonist down a very defined path. Any Whodunit Story – Here is a classic story trope where the antagonist can switch from one character to the next in a matter of a page (or paragraph). The central conflict they are trying to solve for is the “murderer” but who the person is specifically, doesn’t matter so much. In this example, the antagonist is many but the “real antagonist/conflict/theme/narrative” is the same. Note that in some of these examples, the antagonists don't have to be related "to each other," they just have to be related to the character arc your protagonist is going through.
Those are basic terms. Everybody knows them. They don't need highlighting with caps. I really can't understand your thinking - and specially not what you seem to think me thinking. There is absolutely zero dimension of "instead" between words "conflict" and "meta-antagonist". Read what I wrote about Gulag Archipelago and you get what I meant with meta-antagonist. It has zero similarity with a word conflict. Antagonist and conflict are not the same thing - at all.
Sure, agree to disagree. It would’ve been nice to reach a mutual understanding, but sometimes it’s difficult to do so in a written forum.
Thank you to everyone who has commented so far. I've been re thinking the plot for the novel. I think I'll make my second antagonist the central villain, to me that character has the better background and motivation needed to make an interesting antagonist. Hopefully the second draft will be better for it.
Hmmm, interesting subject. Personally, I disagree with this comment above. Its still one story, its the journey of the two MC's/protags. They could meet 20 different antagonists throughout their time travel adventures and it would still be one story. I don't think the real antagonist here has been identified, it's not a person at all and doesn't need to be.
"You have two antagonist, you have two stories" Uhhh yikes.... Antagonists are not even a mandatory part of a story, let alone a main antagonist. Books that have more loose plot structures are fun, in my book--you can have any string of bizarre, seemingly disconnected situations you want as long as they all tie into the hero's character development and journey well, and it's closed-minded to write such a thing off as inherently messy. Hell, I'd argue it's extremely common for adventure or fantasy novels to either focus on a string of different antagonists or not have a main antagonist at all. However--I will say that one big main threat is an extremely tried and true, effective way of gluing a story together, so the idea of picking out one big one isn't a bad idea if you really don't think a more scattered structure works for your story. When it comes to picking one, I'd recommend just re-examining the ones you already have--there's a fair chance there is something close to a main villain already, they just haven't had that spotlight shined on them yet.
Agree. Spurs06 - Perhaps it would be easier to address your concern specifically if you can elaborate a little more on what you are struggling with - Are you just worried about having 2 bad guy characters or are you missing an overall arc for your protagonist?
The goal for the protagonist is to get back home. Its a simple time travel adventure for children. My original question was, can a story work with two unrelated antagonists? I think, by what people have said, it can, so long as its all part of the protagonists story arc. The plot is still missing the threat of an antagonist who appears throughout the story . My protagonist move from one scene to another without too much trouble. They get captured and put in dangerous situations but the story is lacking that punch you feel when a villain shows up Eg: Darth Vadar. When he appears, the tension shoots up because you don't know what he going to do. Hope that makes sense.
