Alright, split this into two posts for ease of reading/writing. Let's continue, shall we?
III. The Third Goal of Writing Villains: Conflict
Ah, the struggle. This is the most important time not to fuck up. This is where the hero and the villain clash, and lightening should strike at every blow. Now please, don't confuse the idea of conflict and struggle with personal physical violence, though that certainly is one of the more prevalent manifestations of conflict (And a good one at that). The conflict between hero and villain doesn't need to be violent. But it cannot, or rather should not, be quick, it should not be one-sided, and it should not be easy. To make the conflict quick, one sided, or easy saps the struggle of all meaning and impact, which is my primary concern here. To make a conflict any of those things, it gives the appearance of the hero getting off easy, it lessens the view of the heroes abilities (Or exaggerates them beyond all reason, thus destroying the audience's suspension of disbelief), and it destroys any impact the end may have had if it was preceded by a weak conflict.
So make the villain formidable. Take up a good deal of the story with the conflict, backstory and resolution don't matter without a good conflict. No one (Scratch that, few people) want a sandwich that's all bread, likewise, few people want a story that's all backstory and resolution and no conflict, no meat. I think writing this before dinner may have been a small mistake. Anyway, the biggest part of a conflict is to make it seem like a struggle. Many stories go for the 'Underdog' aspect, where the hero is significantly weaker than the villain. There's nothing wrong with this, although again, one must be careful when writing the hero's side so that they are not so weak as to make any victory at all seem unbelievable, such as three people against a world-spanning Empire, or one small ship against the galaxy, unless you plan on making them lose in a glorious/inglorious manner.
When the conflict begins in earnest, it's also probably the best time to show your villain's characterization. Particularly if you're writing from a limited 3rd Person or a 1st Person perspective, it gives the opportunity for the hero and the villain to interact, and in doing so, highlight the similarities and differences between the two characters. Preferably not in the narrative, mind, but through dialogue and action.
IV. The Final Goal of Writing Villains: Resolution
The big finale. This is what it's all been building to. Thousands of characters and probably four digits' worth of words as well. Close to two hours of work.
When writing a resolution, make it effective.
...
What, you didn't like that end? Of course not. No one likes lots of build up and little pay off (*Insert sex joke*). The point is that the entire story has been building to the final battle or conflict! You can't skimp here, or you'll end up with your audience unsatisfied and disappointed. You need to make the final fight the climax of the story, to make the final blow against the villain entertaining. You can't just write half a page, or dedicate only half a minute to the destruction or defeat of the villain. You need to make it satisfying, whether through an ironic end (Overused and cliche, perhaps, but better than a half-assed end), through the failure of the villain to defeat the hero and his subsequent downfall, or through the redemption or the regret-fueled turn from his ways (Again, caution, writing redemption or regret for the final resolution of the villain can come off as sappy or cliche if done poorly)
The most important part of the resolution is just that: the resolution. To fail to resolve the conflict between the villain and the hero is either a cheap way to keep the possibility of a sequel open without actually having one planned, or a simple inability to resolve the conflict between hero and villain. Don't leave the audience unsatisfied. Give them a fine finish, make sure they know that the hero and the villain are finished with each other, that their conflict is done. Unless you already have a continuation of the story worked out.
So, to recap...
I: Turn the audience against the villain; make the villain a villain!
II. Make him a well-rounded character. Don't deprive him of reasonable motivation or redeeming qualities.
III. Make the conflict with the villain reasonably unpredictable and even.
IV. FINISH HIM! Or rather, resolve the villain's conflict with the hero.
Friday, June 24, 2011
On Villains (Part One)
For my first little rant, I'll use the subject of villains. It's an easy enough subject, villains are all too often abused, misused, and poorly characterized in storytelling. Let's start with what I think is probably the worst offense...
I. The First Goal of Writing Villains: Opposition
Villains often seem to have a problem with characterization. While (Thankfully) the "I am a villain because I am evil." cardboard cutout is rare outside of children's stories and bad fantasy novels, villains often suffer from the weakest characterization in stories. This is not a good thing. While it is certainly tempting to spend the least amount of time on the character who is not the protagonist or the hero, it is important to pay attention to the villain's character. Normally, after all, the villain is the second most important character in a story, it is the conflict between the hero and the villain that drives the story. If the villain is poorly characterized, the hero's victory over him (Or defeat by him, depending on the story) lacks any sort of push. Even if it was a struggle, at the end of the day, the hero just defeated a cardboard cutout.
It's easier to explain this with a few examples from modern media. Let's go with something like the first Assassin's Creed game. The first game displays good villain characterization, whatever the quality of the other elements of the story. I'll stray away from commenting on the terribly characterized second game.
In the first game, the game shows what it takes to make a good villain with each of it's assassination targets. The first goal is to turn your audience against them, or else they're not a villain in their eyes. This is usually the easiest part, the one that few storytellers seem to mess up on. A common method is to show them doing something unsympathetic. It is important to not overdo this, lest they come off as cartoonishly evil instead of as a serious threat. In the first Assassin's Creed game, to continue with my example, this is done with Garnier De Naplouse, the Knight Hospitallier, by having him order his crusader goons to break a patient's legs so he can't run away.
The first goal is comparatively easily. Violence against the innocent or at least those who don't deserve it, unnecessarily harsh punishment or rule, or a callous attitude to the loss of human life all work, though that is by no means an exhaustive list. It is important, however, to have something of that nature happen. If you fail to successfully pull off this first goal, then you fall into the trap of having the villain the villain for no other reason than the hero opposes him. This either means that your villain is poorly characterized, and you run into the aforementioned problem of having his actions carry little weight, or his status as a villain is called into question. Your readers will start to question whose side they should be on, particularly if your hero has shades of gray. Now, if this is what you're going for, by all means, do so. There's nothing wrong with a story with just protagonists and antagonists instead of heroes and villains, but don't try to sell a villain as evil simply because the hero opposes him.
II. The Second Goal of Writing Villains: Motive
The second goal in villain characterization is to give him motive, to turn him from a one-dimensional villain into a more human figure. This is where some stories run into trouble. Oftentimes a simplistic motive, such as power or revenge, is chosen. There is nothing wrong with these motives when done well. If the villain is out for power, have him actually be out for power. Have him fight and conquer, cheat and backstab, but don't use it as a catch-all excuse. Being out for power does not automatically mean heartless mass-murderer, keep the villain's goals in mind at all times.
Don't have him catapult children for shits and giggles, random wanton cruelty is not his motivation. If you must have him catapult children (Quick way to #1), explain why, and have him reflect on the decision. Perhaps the children are from a town he's sieging and he wants to speed up their surrender. Perhaps he views it as a necessary evil, or perhaps he's simply become callous to the kind of suffering that effective methods of intimidation often create. Perhaps he views the children as a possible (Future) threat to his rule, and thus just as guilty as the soldiers defending the town, though that reasoning would likely sap even more sympathy from him. Maybe he even views actually catapulting the children as going too far, as crossing his own personal line for cruelty and violence. Villains are characters, they too have limits, or at least should have.
Returning to my original example, in the first Assassin's Creed with the Knight Hospitallier assassination, Garnier explains his motivations quite well. He believed that his experiments on the helpless patients is helping them in the long run, he believed that his patients were better off than they were when he took them. He was, first and foremost, a doctor, a healer, a man who believed in helping those under his care. Whether or not he actually did help them, or whether his methods were necessary is another story entirely, of course, but the presence of benevolent motives and cruel but in-character actions allow the character to be understood and sympathetic while still being unsavory enough to turn the audience against him.
To be continued
I. The First Goal of Writing Villains: Opposition
Villains often seem to have a problem with characterization. While (Thankfully) the "I am a villain because I am evil." cardboard cutout is rare outside of children's stories and bad fantasy novels, villains often suffer from the weakest characterization in stories. This is not a good thing. While it is certainly tempting to spend the least amount of time on the character who is not the protagonist or the hero, it is important to pay attention to the villain's character. Normally, after all, the villain is the second most important character in a story, it is the conflict between the hero and the villain that drives the story. If the villain is poorly characterized, the hero's victory over him (Or defeat by him, depending on the story) lacks any sort of push. Even if it was a struggle, at the end of the day, the hero just defeated a cardboard cutout.
It's easier to explain this with a few examples from modern media. Let's go with something like the first Assassin's Creed game. The first game displays good villain characterization, whatever the quality of the other elements of the story. I'll stray away from commenting on the terribly characterized second game.
In the first game, the game shows what it takes to make a good villain with each of it's assassination targets. The first goal is to turn your audience against them, or else they're not a villain in their eyes. This is usually the easiest part, the one that few storytellers seem to mess up on. A common method is to show them doing something unsympathetic. It is important to not overdo this, lest they come off as cartoonishly evil instead of as a serious threat. In the first Assassin's Creed game, to continue with my example, this is done with Garnier De Naplouse, the Knight Hospitallier, by having him order his crusader goons to break a patient's legs so he can't run away.
The first goal is comparatively easily. Violence against the innocent or at least those who don't deserve it, unnecessarily harsh punishment or rule, or a callous attitude to the loss of human life all work, though that is by no means an exhaustive list. It is important, however, to have something of that nature happen. If you fail to successfully pull off this first goal, then you fall into the trap of having the villain the villain for no other reason than the hero opposes him. This either means that your villain is poorly characterized, and you run into the aforementioned problem of having his actions carry little weight, or his status as a villain is called into question. Your readers will start to question whose side they should be on, particularly if your hero has shades of gray. Now, if this is what you're going for, by all means, do so. There's nothing wrong with a story with just protagonists and antagonists instead of heroes and villains, but don't try to sell a villain as evil simply because the hero opposes him.
II. The Second Goal of Writing Villains: Motive
The second goal in villain characterization is to give him motive, to turn him from a one-dimensional villain into a more human figure. This is where some stories run into trouble. Oftentimes a simplistic motive, such as power or revenge, is chosen. There is nothing wrong with these motives when done well. If the villain is out for power, have him actually be out for power. Have him fight and conquer, cheat and backstab, but don't use it as a catch-all excuse. Being out for power does not automatically mean heartless mass-murderer, keep the villain's goals in mind at all times.
Don't have him catapult children for shits and giggles, random wanton cruelty is not his motivation. If you must have him catapult children (Quick way to #1), explain why, and have him reflect on the decision. Perhaps the children are from a town he's sieging and he wants to speed up their surrender. Perhaps he views it as a necessary evil, or perhaps he's simply become callous to the kind of suffering that effective methods of intimidation often create. Perhaps he views the children as a possible (Future) threat to his rule, and thus just as guilty as the soldiers defending the town, though that reasoning would likely sap even more sympathy from him. Maybe he even views actually catapulting the children as going too far, as crossing his own personal line for cruelty and violence. Villains are characters, they too have limits, or at least should have.
Returning to my original example, in the first Assassin's Creed with the Knight Hospitallier assassination, Garnier explains his motivations quite well. He believed that his experiments on the helpless patients is helping them in the long run, he believed that his patients were better off than they were when he took them. He was, first and foremost, a doctor, a healer, a man who believed in helping those under his care. Whether or not he actually did help them, or whether his methods were necessary is another story entirely, of course, but the presence of benevolent motives and cruel but in-character actions allow the character to be understood and sympathetic while still being unsavory enough to turn the audience against him.
To be continued
An Introduction
Well, I'm no good at introductions, so I'll just cut to the chase. I plan on using this blog to vent my feelings about storytelling and it's various aspects, such as characterization, setting, etc. I hope that if you're reading this (If anyone is reading this, really), you'll enjoy some of these posts. If not, well, I suppose that makes this blog simply a place to put some notes. Either way, someone wins.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)