Call me over analytical, but I thought the true antagonists explored in that story were the humans. T'was the humans were flawed, and it was their fault that all the destruction had happened. Sauron is like the Ring. He's merely a personification. The villain was the first human to become weak to power. Again note the emotional subtext and thematic exploration. "That's deep sh*t, dude!"
Couldn't help but smile at this. You're right though. Gaston? Top notch antagonist, with bonus points for turning the good-looking-macho-man-hero-cliche and turning it on its head. This is actually a very good point, as it made me remember something. Antagonist and protagonists aren't necessarily opposites, but should be approached with a yin-yang philosophy. Not that they're both the same, but that one can't exist without the other. It makes for a boring story. The best approach I've heard was to take their creation as, "an unstoppable force meets an immovable object".
Sauron is a lot of things, one of which is a Shadow. That's why you never see him but he can see you. A Shadow is an archetype and the first rule of using it successfully is to never put the spotlight on it. If you do, all fear it creates will vanish immediately. Another example of the Shadow is Hannibal Lecter in The Silence of the Lambs. He is rated as one of the scariest characters every. That's because he is a Shadow. It is also why the prequel Hannibal failed. In it, Hannibal Lecter is the protagonist and the spotlight is always on the protagonist. Not a Shadow and not scary.
They should have some reason. Because they want power, because they want money. Because they believe they are doing the world a service. Of course then there are the Jokers. Some people just want to see the world burn. Not exact quote, but good enough. When a villian has a reason and motive they become more interesting. They do not need to be some giant complex thing.
Well, now we're finally making the distinctions. I would refer to them as Villain-as-symbols. An embodyment of ideas - but Shadow works quite well Does the shadow require a reason to evil...probably not. These characters are limited to being enigmatic, and merely embody a concept or set of ideas. The Devil... Rarely has a personality - he simply is, and embodying ideas - these characters simply drawn on the unknown, and our cultural fears. Other examples are Sauron, IT from...IT, and Alien. They're never really developed, but they can work - but be beware that they are just symbols. An archetypcal characture, The Shadow if you will. However, for the rest of other genres besides horror, and good-vs-evil epics...An antogonist is merely an opponent. I prefer to refer to the antagonist as the opponent. And villain instantly sums up bad connotations for me.
The polar opposite is antagonist as character. And I only need to cite Shakespeare to highlight the difference. Iago, Macbeth, and even Caliban. Caliban from the Tempest is considered by many to be the most complex character Shakespeare has ever written. He's depicted as a monster, but also a child. A foul creature, but a creature of nature, harmonising with the forest. As a savage, or as simply mistreated, and misunderstood. It's fascinating how Caliban's interpretation varies wildly from age to age from Colonial times, to modern day. His motivation to destroy Prospero is rooted in revenge, self defence, and even desire for power and a better life other than chains. I love little old Caliban. Is he evil...maybe? But then that questions the protagonist, Prospero - who condemns Caliban without a second chance, and tortures him throughout his life. Very interesting... On the note of Macbeth - one could argue the Witches and Duncan are the antagonists of the story. But in hindsight, this is an Achilles story, and the only true villain is himself - or maybe even his mad wife! . The Witches are simply symbols, in that sense, inciting an event. But the true enemy is his own lust for power, and his ultimate undoing. (Scarface = Macbeth with guns ).
It seems to me it would be a very one dimensional, possibly two, character that is evil without any reasoning to make that decision. I suppose technically evil doesn't need a reason, but in my opinion the best literary villains are those that have had their "humanity" stripped away and found reason to be evil.
I think there is a reason for every evil. Every action a person commits has a direct root. Cause/effect. I think not revealing her reasoning is a very good technique. You know a certain character is bad, evil, jealous, whatever the case may be, but readers don't get an immediate understanding of it. Over time the author purposely drops tid bits until the point where there is a final reveal. In other books you know exactly the reason a person does something horrid. But in still others, you never find out why that character did this or that. I think that her reason for acting that way will develop in your mind eventually. Or at least you will get an understanding of her, and that understanding will follow through in the writing so that readers understand too. I think you do want to have a reason in the end, but you don't necessarily have to come out and tell the readers. They might figure it out themselves.
That explains the events leading up to Sauron's reign, but not his motivation. Does he want power? Revenge? Sadism?
But I really don't think that they'd ever say that. Even if you think they would, I'd argue you probably aren't bein honest. Even my most cartoon of villains had a reason. I just don't believe knowing their motivation creates sympathy or empathy too much at all. I am not arguing against making them complex; I just don't really it when reasons start turning into an excuse. And I've found that this happens a lot; villains' motivations start turning into excuses. I guess this can be worked to; I've probably done it myself to a point. But when I hear "reasons," I think excuses for a villain, because I still believe it's harder to really have a reasonless villain. I think if you just write the villain, the reasons why he is the way he is will come. If you try to force some reason for him to be evil, it can easily turn into just giving him an excuse. (Whether anyone buys it or not is irrelevant)
No I don't get the impression she does overly enjoy it or not enjoy it. It is like she is compelled to be the way she is. She simply seems to have no reason beyond that is the way she is. She can't blame her upbringing she didn't have one. She wasn't treated badly, never knew poverty, no one treated her badly. All I can blame is nature.
There are real 'functioning' people who get off on the pain and suffering of others. That's pretty much evil for the sake of evil, because you enjoy it.
You'll be hard pressed to find a more evil person than a torturer who takes pride or joy in his work. Nihilistic sadism...pretty much the end of Evil Lane. But are these people interesting villains? Are the most fascinating villains not those we can see a bit of ourselves in?
I'd argue that a torture still has a reason why they do the things they do. There is still a story behind their actions that is hidden and waiting to be exposed.
Well, it depends on the story. Sometimes a story calls for that kind of bad guy. And I actually find such evil people to be the most interesting. I also enjoy a good "see yourself in them" bad guy sometimes, but some stories just would suffer by trying to make the bad guy somebody people can see themselves in. I think the end of Evil lane can be very interesting villains if written right.
I've never really liked writing big villains... I can't get the motivation right, and then I think it is villains doing it for almost no reason at all - the same way I get up and browse the internet when I'm bored and tired in the morning. They just seem to do it because it's on their routine. No one ends up evil that way. The darkest characters I write are usually the ones who are having fun, when it seems perverse that they should - sadism with good humour and even a care and affection for the people they hurt, but just doing it anyway. You know, the sort of person who encourages you to break a diet by offering cookies, or something like that. Not really a monster, even if they understand what they do is bad... They just find it interesting to see what happens if they do it anyway. So I guess the theme of evil in my stories is really actually curiosity. Not that I find that a bad thing in real life.
There are always two sides to every conflict. Both sides believe themselves to be right. As a writer, whichever side you choose to support becomes your protagonists. The opponent then automatically becomes the villain. There is often no greater distinction between good and evil than the author's standpoint.
except in my case evil = destruction of the universe (including my character) good = everyone lives. Because for my story is inside god - it gets destroyed he goes too - the planet works like his internal organs. There are shades of it but my character is the first and original evil there was none before her. She was the second being ever created (her sister the first) her charge was to care for everything - she was given a trusted important role as almost the universes white blood cells she is the immune system. She has done the opposite to the role she was created to do. She didn't fight the disease she created it. What she is doing is against her nature - she has no nurture reasons for it. All she gets out of it is being in control, but she is doing that knowing it is her own destruction. See what I mean - no reason other than she chose to be like that? She is a fully rounded character and stands out, but for her personality not her actions.
You have answered your own question by by saying she wants control whatever the cost - this is a prime reason to kill. This from a book on Forensics and serial killers. Visionary Visionary serial killers suffer from breaks with reality, sometimes believing they are another person or are compelled to murder by entities The two most common subgroups are "demon mandated" and "God mandated Mission-oriented Mission-oriented killers typically justify their acts as "ridding the world" of a certain type of person they perceive as undesirable, Hedonistic This type of serial killer seeks thrills and derives pleasure from killing, seeing people as expendable means to this goal - three subtypes of the hedonistic killer: "lust", "thrill" and "comfort, Lust - Sex is the primary motive of whether or not the victims are dead, and fantasy plays a large role in their killings. Thrill The primary motive of a thrill killer is to induce pain or create terror in their victims, which provides stimulation and excitement for the killer. They seek the rush provided by hunting and killing victims. Comfort (profit) Material gain and a comfortable lifestyle are the primary motives of comfort killers. Usually, the victims are family members and close acquaintances. Power/control The main objective for this type of serial killer is to gain and exert power over their victim. Such killers are sometimes abused as children, leaving them with feelings of powerlessness and inadequacy as adults – Think - Ted Bundy traveled around the United States seeking women to control. Theories Some theorists believe the reasons are biological, suggesting serial killers are born, not made, and that their violent behavior is a result of abnormal brain activity. The theory I think most interesting is - The FIS suggests a social event, or series of events, during one's childhood or adolescence results in a fracturing of the personality of the serial killer. The term "fracture" is defined as a small breakage of the personality which is often not visible to the outside world and is only felt by the killer. That the reason for someone to kill could possibly be so inconsequentual that it was part of everyone's normal life, but the man/woman saw it as something huge [threat to his well being.] that it shapes his personality, makes a nonsense of their must be a proper reason [- abuse as a child is the most popular] A runny egg, cooked by your mother, when you prefer them hard boiled, and being told you can't leave the table until you finish it - might fester and turn a child into a serial killer. [Naturally I made my eggs the way the kids liked them! ]
Again not even sure she has that motivation - she just doesn't seem to have motivation to be good or evil she just exists - however maybe you are right that is what she was created for to have control over the health of all. There really does seem to be no real reason best one I came up with was she got bored and decided to test her powers to see what she could do.
In danger of sounding lame, I'm gonna use a quote from a movie I was watching tonight.... "Some men just want to watch the world burn." -The Dark Knight. I think that some people, those who are truly evil, do so for the mere pleasure of seeing others suffer.
