Preventing people from liking my villain.

And he was responsible for the rise of Justin Bieber, SpongeBob, Twilight, and the continued running of The Simpsons and Family Guy.

 

If you make your villain kill a young boy or girl solely out of malice, you probably won't have to worry about anybody liking him.

 

I do believe that overdoing it (like I believe you are) would create just just the opposite reaction with your reader.

First, an unmotivated character who is just plain villaneous? I'd read it like a complete, utter farce. And a farcical character is just someone to laugh at. And ultimately like. Which you don't want, right?

Also, what's so absolutely bad about any of those things you mentioned? I mean, what's evil about these acts when you completely decontextualize them?
He abuses a bunch of prostitutes? The Magdalene Institutes existed for centuries and nobody questioned the morality of them. So a society that would allow for asylums for the moraly "fallen" women to exist in the first place would have a certain understanding for any "abuse" that may happen there, wouldn't it? Which tells us something about the society - so you'd just need to provide a context for it!
He "tames" a girl?... Pigmalion anyone?
He beats up women? Now that's just EVIL... like 85% of heterosexual relationships through history... Again, if there is a context, then you make it a social commentary - if there is no context, then it's just evil per se?
Uses magick on someone? Because... it is wrong?
Shoots a kid? Well, that's just so evil nobody would ever see it as being deliberately there just to make him look bad!
And burning down the house? Because, I guess, she plays hard to get? That just makes him look petty and sad...


No, I'd say - if you want to make a commentary on the character/pop-icon you hate so much, just write an honest, tongue-in-cheek parody and let your readers connect the dots. You want people to realize how ridiculous the concept of a sparkling vampiroid Mary Sue character is? Show how ridiculous it can get by exaggerating the character's traits, thus showing where they come from (the lowest of psychological and social complexes) and where they lead to (even lower)...

 

OK, time for me to get serious. You want people to absolutely hate your villain? And I mean hate him to the point where they want to dive in and brutally murder him for your protagonists?

Have him be charming. Charming, sweet, and in a position of authority. Paint him as someone you'd think you could trust the most. Maybe even give him a dark past and act like he's on a personal redemption quest. Just when you think he's likeable, just when you think you feel like he's totally on the path of good, have him stab your readers in the back. No, his sob story of guilt and redemption? Pure lies. Destroy that overly-used 'redemption plot' by having him still do the things he said he would never do again, but in secret. Said he'd stop hurting people? Maybe he's systematically killing off all the 'undesirables' in secret. The undesirables in this instance being people with sparkly magic. Said he'd care for the orphans? Shut down the orphanage and force them to grueling manual labor with minimum pay. Dog lover? He decides to kill off dog breeds he dislikes. Same if he were a cat lover. Says he's the beacon of justice? Beacon of his own personal justice, that is. He'll put the perp and the perp's entire family behind bars saying that because nurture raised the perp, they're all guilty of the crime because they allowed the perp to commit the crime. Inflate his ego, make him think he's a god among mortals. Make him charismatic and woo thousands into his spell. Make him convince them that what he's doing is right, and they should all follow his example. He's doing this because he's rich, because he's got power. He's doing this because he feels he deserves this power. That without him, the world would crumble. He knows what he's doing, he may even know it's the wrong thing. He doesn't give a single ounce of a crap. He loves this. He's an egotistical, selfish, bigoted, maniacal control freak. And he'll disguise it under the pretext of a compassionate, caring man who wants nothing more than peace and justice for his people.

I can't believe I'm typing this but...look at Hitler and Stalin for examples. No one's about to say they like these two men, or they had some dark, trouble past that got them to become the monsters of the 20th century. Speaking of dark, troubled past: whatever you do, don't give him a sob story. Do not give your readers anything to go, "Damn, it's just tragic how it all ended up this way..." Don't give them a reason to think that there's any chance of redemption for this sick, evil pup.

 

Just use Joffrey Baratheon, it's so much easier. No-one likes a psychopathic brat. Have him kill a kitten at age eight. There's no sympathy for that, even abusing vulnerable women pales in comparison to murdering a cute kitten.

 

1. Not many people questioned the morality of the magdalene laundries... when they were in operation. Now they are turning up bodies of the poor inmates and tales of horrific abuse. I admit this institute was more for the readers to show disgust rather than my Dystopian society (Which many people do abhor but are not free to say so under penalty of death). When I first learned of these places I was absolutely disgusted. I feel that more people need to be aware of this situation so it may never happen again.

2. By taming I meant "beat into sexual servitude". Not make a properly lady out of her. Oh, and his target is already married to another man who actually treats her okay.

3. Yes there is context, I don't show any of the actual abuse on his Fiancee, but rather her gradual realization that he treated her wrong and eventually thanking my MC for helping her see the light.

4. Would graphic and lurid details of the psychic abuse make things any better?

5. Shooting the kid is supposed to be the big "moral event horizon" to show he is irredeemably evil, but I admit his actions so far may have blunted the effect I was going for.

6. By this point my MC has proven time and time again that he cannot control her. This is the finial "If I can't have you, nobody can!" moment.

 

This guy sounds alright I'd like to get a beer with him.

Or, more seriously: I think your goal in this hinges upon your contention that some people are inherently and fundamentally evil, which may or may not be true, but it is not something that all readers will necessarily agree with. In other words, no matter what you do, someone out there will wonder why he is so terrible and feel sorry for him. I think it's pretty inevitable.

Although, I think people will dislike him a lot more if he gets away way with the horrible things he does. Also, it seems that people tend to feel a lot more positive or ambivalent about immoral characters when they are clever and uncommonly skilled at manipulation, rather than just willing to use it. Examples would be like Frank Underwood in House of Cards or Cersei Lannister; obviously they are sociopaths, but some are inclined to admire the skill with which they "play the game", so to speak. So, if you can make whatever status or success he has totally undeserved -- like Joffrey, as someone suggested -- that will make him less likable, I think.

Oh, this thought just hit me: What if some of your readers are evil? Then they will like the evil character no matter what. No way around that.

 

@stormcat as I didn't have an opportunity to actually read any of your stuff, my comment was based solely on what I did read, and that was your post

And this is where the main problem with relativization and bipolarization of morality becomes obvious, to me. You see, you propose that "shooting a kid" event should be observed as a "moral event horizon" (I'd call it a threshold ) You also seem to center a lot of your narrative around exploitation and abuse of a single person (protagonist) by your absolute baddy. However, personally, I find the systematic, long-term exploitation of a whole group of people, based only on their common (im)moral background, to be quite enough to make the villain absolutely irredeemable!

Imagine if you were to write about a historical Nazi figure. Would you really need to show how he mistreats his servants, after he actively participates in the Final Solution? Would that really make him any more unsympathetic? Not only does he send a few thousand innocents to death, he also slaps his butler for not cleaning his shoes?

Of course, it's your story, and your story alone. But you asked for an opinion

 

fair enough, I can make someone else be in charge of the institute, like his Dad or somebody. I still have him abuse servants later in the story, but I didn't put that up there because it seemed petty.

 

And there goes the Godwin counter. That's three times in a month. writingforums.org I thought you were better than that.

 

Maybe he's a gentle soul like Junior Angel from Judge Dredd who, in the comics, was detailed as having kicked a man to death while wearing slipper so's it wouldn't hurt so much...

 

@Jack Asher: I had to google it but the Third Reich analogies have been grating on my nerves too, I have to say.

 

Well, what other tyrannical, mass-murdering, genocidal dictator can we list off when talking about evil guys? I mean, there's only Stalin, Mao, Pol-Pot, Mussolini, Ghadaffi, and that's not to mention the scores of such rulers of the past.

But I'll stop with the Hitler parallels, it's aggravating to be sure. Hitler wasn't the only tyrannical mass-murdering leader to have graced the Earth. And sadly, he wasn't the last. But let's not get too political here, let's resume the topic.

 

I don't think this particular villain will be a mass-murderer (He's only done several attempted murders) Just an all-around asshole. He's well aware that there is a genocide going on, but he does noting about it. He doesn't even care.

 

Hm, I don't think this counts, except in the broadest of possible interpretation's of Godwin's. @Link the Writer and I didn't mention Hitler by name - any stock Nazi would do. (And I think that the reason why a stock Nazi (including Hitler) is so much easier to use than, say, Mao or Stalin, is the fact that nazism as an ideology has proven to be irredeemable, unlike communism. You see, class enemies and political enemies come and go, you kill thousands and you can still find more. But Jewish people - once you kill them all, there won't be any left...)

And I actually wanted to mention the Henebeau family from Germinal, but then, who reads Zola nowadays...

 

You misunderstand the law
Godwin's law (or Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies): As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1.

You could have compared anything to anything. But you chose Nazis, and the law was proven.

 

I did the same, so that's two Godwin's Law down in this thread.

But seriously, back to topic, OP, your villain seems interesting to me. I don't like him that much, but he's interesting.

 

this is good. Now I just need to make you really, really hate him.You can still find him interesting, but you've gotta hate him.

 

Erm... OP, do you want people to actually read your story?

Do you intend on publishing this?

Because if you want people to read it and *not* give you a rubbish rating, you need a story. And it sounds like the ONLY character you've developed truly *is* your villain, which automatically means if people are not utterly fascinated by him, you're gonna have one hell of a flop.

You want people to hate your villain like there's no tomorrow - stop focusing so damn hard on him. Focus on your MC's emotional turmoil, and the fiance's emotional turmoil. You give the victim's perspective on their suffering, we're bound to sympathise and therefore hate the villain.

You give the villain's POV, he'll become fascinating. And truth is, people rarely hate people that fascinate them. You may not like them, but you wouldn't hate them. You'd view them as a mystery to be solved and in fact, your reader will probably think more about your villain than they would your MC. If this is hate-fiction (as opposed to fan-fiction haha), then I'm not sure getting your readers to obsess over your villain is the goal.

If you're writing this just to deal with your hatred of Twilight, as you admit, then just write to your heart's content and then put the story on a shelf and keep it to yourself. It honestly doesn't sound like you're out to tell a story you want or need to tell, and thus I see it as pretty pointless and a waste of a reader's time. You wanna rant about Twilight, write an essay that's actually gonna make people think and bear some fruit.

 

This story isn't from the villain's perspective! There's a reason he's not the MC!

My story so far is over 200 pages long and this particular villain is only in the most recent 40 or so pages. It's told from MC's perspective and it's about how she's overcoming numerous obstacles such as a kidnapping, forced marriage, forced vampiric conversion, a despotic government, and a general lack of medical supplies for anyone. This Villain is one of such obstacles and will eventually be killed. I've already written a synopsis, but even that's three pages long even with me trying to reduce it. care to read the synopsis?

 

Off topic, but... @Jack Asher not comparison of anything with anything, but comparison of "posters or their ideas" with Nazism. Mentioning Nazis or using them as an example, an illustration or a metaphor is not part of that particular meme, so you should reset your counter...

On topic... @stormcat does that mean you've covered all of the events you mention as defining your villain in 40 pages? Or are you going to stretch it a bit? There's enough material there to cover a trilogy

 

Well, MC's interaction with the villain and the effects of his power over her. How long do novels typically go?

 

Oh, sorry, an example, an illustration, and a metaphor are comparisons. You must have skipped that class. You are comparing whatever you happen to be talking about to the example. That's how examples work.

The bold show that place where you compare his current piece to a piece about Nazi's. You then compare his character to a Nazi.

The counter is still tipped.

 

hmm... no? That particular class must have been something I ignored because the teacher who taught it was just speaking nonsense.

No, I couldn't compare his current piece to anything because I don't know what his current piece looks like...And I didn't--oh, just read the bloody thing before blinking the Nazi alarm, will ya!? Look, the whole point of Godwin's Law was to acknowledge how easy it comes down to offending people you disagree with by comparing them, or their ideas with Nazism because - and that's the one reason this is not off topic - Nazism is "just plain evil", so you don't need to explain further then just speaking the bloody name. So: context. And: tone.

 

Nope, that nonsense is actually the English language.
Here, take a look

I'd like to know how you use examples if you don't compare them to anything. Even a dictionary example compares the use of the word to every other word and word use.