Anti-heroes vs. Villains
I know what you’re thinking. It’s the same thing I’m thinking: there are only 107 days, give or take some hours (I’m writing this from bed and having to calculate the math in my head so you’ll forgive the disclaimer) until Harry Potter’s 6th movie installment finally, finally is in theaters.
Okay, you’re possibly thinking at a 107 days, it’s a little soon to be getting this excited. That’s like 15 weeks away. (Here I am, trying to do math again.) Perhaps you’re right, but it’s not entirely my fault.
Last week, Warner Brothers debuted the newest movie posters, 6 of them to be exact, each featuring a prominent HP figure. Harry, Ron, Hermione, Draco, Dumbledore, and my favorite, Snape. My standard Jack Sparrow pic has now been replaced on my desktop.
Okay, so probably half my fascination with Snape is the fact that Alan Rickman is the actor who plays him; and I’ve always had a horrible, horrible crush on Al. From the moment he prowled onto the movie screen in black leather, sporting that long layered mullet-esque 1990 hairstyle for Robin Hood and making us all gloriously aware he was the only one with a credible English accent, I have adored him.
His voice—I could write odes to that man’s voice—and that handsome, rugged wrinkle in his brow, that lends him both an air that makes him look fierce and tough, and tragic and romantic. Alan Rickman admits he likes playing villains; and what’s best about Severus Snape is that he’s not the typical two-dimensional villain Al normally plays. (Remember Die Hard? Quigley Down Under?) No, Snape is more complicated. Snape is less villain than anti-hero.
What’s interesting to me about anti-heroes is that, well, I like to believe with enough time, they eventually would get their own happy ending. They could be brought from the Dark Side into the light. Their need as characters is redemption; and they know deep down they’ll never be worthy of it. I’ve always had a weak spot for those sorts of bad boys. (Unfortunately those bad boys know it, too. *LOL*)
My friend, who is also a big HP fan, also has a crush on an anti-hero, Lucius Malfoy. I think she falls into the same trap I do: her fascination has much to do with the actor as the character in the book. Patrick Isaacs does bring a certain something to the character; and admittedly, the kid who plays Draco is going to be beating off girls with a stick at this last movie. (Okay, I’m pretty sure he was beating them away as it was, but his poster *whistles through her teeth*, damn, he’s one pretty anti-hero. The suit, the haughty expression, the stance…he’s going to have as many cougars as cubs prowling after him this year.)
Harry Potter isn’t the only series littered with anti-heroes. Lisa Kleypas is great at writing heroes who appear rather anti-heroic at first. Hardy Cates, anyone? Several of her rakes, even. And yet by the end, we’re all purring as loudly as the heroine, content with their happily ever after. Boys Next Door and the bashful nerd turned hunk always make great heroes, but there is something about the fantasy in being the girl who saves an anti-hero from his own self-destruction that just makes the story so much more worthwhile. Almost like you earned the happily ever after.
Okay, okay, I know we’re always talking about anti-heroes a lot. (I can’t help it that half this ship has a weakness for Bad Boys.) Clearly the way to turn a two-dimensional villain into a hunky anti-hero is deepening your character. Elizabeth Lyon’s writing book: A Writer’s Guide to Fiction has an excellent chapter about this. (Actually all the chapters have been really excellent. I recommend this book highly if you’re wanting a reference book but are unsure which would be most useful to you. This is the book, no question.)
The key is that each character should have a meaningful past, in that there should be an event in the character’s past that wounded him so deeply that it left him with a need so intense he is driven to fulfill it (pg. 87). This wound would also leave the character with a weakness; and also possibly a strength.
Let’s take Snape. From the get-go of meeting Snape, you can pretty much determine his weakness is Harry Potter. Snape is flawed by his inability to view Harry without seeing Harry’s father, James, who we figure out soon enough Snape loathed even more than Harry. We don’t figure out why, though. Snape’s villainy towards Harry is downright petty and brattish; and you can almost laugh at Snape in book 3, when Snape is this close to having one of his childhood enemies, Sirius Black, exterminated—and Sirius mysteriously escapes. He all but stomps his foot and starts blaming Harry. But then in book 5, we get our first glimpse that there might be more to Snape’s irrational behavior than meets the eyes. After all, nobody’s perfect—not even Harry’s dad—though it is easy to forget that when the person in question is dead. You never speak ill of the dead.
In book 6, any empathy you might have had for Snape is destroyed after that moment at the top of the Tower. Even in re-reading the book, you wonder, “How could he possibly be remotely redeemable after this?” And in book 7, you wonder, “How could I not have suspected this all along? It’s so obvious.” J.K. Rowling picked her meaningful past events carefully. We get a fuller picture of the book 5 reveal; and Severus Snape has very clear reason to hate Harry’s dad. And even more reason to hate himself, after just one moment of thoughtless speech. Everybody has a story. Everybody has a point of view, even villains.
Snape’s need is REDEMPTION. He would, after all, do anything for Lily; and after being a part of her demise, he will do whatever is required of him to save her son. His weakness is his inability to look at Harry without seeing his childhood nemesis. His hatred is a definite handicap. I would hazard a guess Snape’s strength is his love for Lily.
I think it is the meaningful past that separates anti-heroes from run-of-the-mill villains. We do find out about Voldemort’s past as well, but at no point is he anything but evil. His childhood is just as tragic as Snape’s is, but the two outcomes are so clearly different. Why and how?
What do you think? Why is it anti-heroes are redeemable but villains are not? Do you think to some degree, villains have to be more two-dimensional (black and white, emphasis on the black) to tell an effective story? Who is your favorite anti-hero who has been redeemed (movie, TV or book)? Can you identify the NEED, WEAKNESS, and STRENGTH in that character?
Books by the Crew
46 comments:
You know the scene where I was convinced Snape was on the side of light was when he killed Dumbledore. Since I never believed D would plead for his life, I believed he had to be pleading for his death, although at that time I though his death was not permanent.
The villain who can be redeemed must be capable of loving someone or something beyond himself. That's what separates Snape from Voldemort. I also think readers have to see the villain as a tormented, driven soul who suffers for his wrongs. He has a conscience, although it may be muted.
Lisa Kleypas' St. Vincent comes immediately to mind. She did a superb job with his transformation from villain in It Happened One Autumn to hero in Devil in Winter. Mary Jo Putney did it before Kleypas. Reggie Davenport, the hero of MJP's The Rake, was first a villain in The Diabolical Baron. Before MJP, there was Roland Mathieson in Patricia Veryan's Golden Chronicles. Over several books, readers see his villainy clearly, but they also see that he loves his horse Rumpelstiltskin, he feels shame over some of his actions, he has friends and a sense of humor. They learn of his brutal childhood. They believe then in his transformation in The Dedicated Villain. I think Veryan's villain/hero is the classic example.
Wow, this is a great post, Hellie! :)
I *heart* HP. I can't wait for the new movie. I think it's going to be great. :) And I want to see the rest of these posters. I checked all over the internet but I can't find them.
Favorite anti-heroes, huh? Darth Vader, I think, is a good one. I think it was interesting that they made the movies after he was bad and then gave the backstory. I know there are books out there, but I never read them. So, I was more sympathetic after watching the latest movie.
http://mugglenet.com/viewer/?image_location=/hbpfilm/harryhbpbanner.jpg
http://mugglenet.com/viewer/?image_location=/hbpfilm/dumbledorehbpbanner.jpg
http://mugglenet.com/viewer/?image_location=/hbpfilm/ronhbpbanner.jpg
http://mugglenet.com/viewer/?image_location=/hbpfilm/hermionehbpbanner.jpg
http://mugglenet.com/viewer/?image_location=/hbpfilm/dracohbpbanner.jpg
Oh, wow, those are great! :)
Janga! St. Vincent! He was who I was thinking of, but I couldn't remember his name. (I love Kleypas' historicals, but the Wallflowers aren't exactly my favorite series--so I've sorta blocked them.) I think Lisa does excellent rakes or "anti-heroes" turned hero. Julie Garwood does the hero who's "stoic" and "broody"--and grunts a lot. But Lisa has definitely got the vibe running through her heroes that you're never quite sure if they're going to protect you or put you in danger.
I love your example of Patricia Veryan's Roland. (Who couldn't love a horse named Rumplestiltskin?) You're right. I think it is proof that the "villain" love something/someone beyond himself that separates him from true villainy and makes him more an anti-hero. Stryker in the Dark-Hunter series is an *sshole--I mean utterly--and you can't imagine when you meet him that he'd ever be heroic material, but Sherrilyn Kenyon pulled it off. Granted we met him like in book 1 or 2, and we're now on book 20, so it was a SLOW metamorphasis, but she did it.
I did think it was weird D was pleading for his life, but I think I was too stricken at the time by what was happening to think hard. When I read it the second time--and had read a couple of "articles" about Snape being a double-agent--I decided that made more sense. (Besides it appealed to my anti-hero love. *LOL*)
Wow, that picture of Ron is pretty good. But I still don't see the attraction of Draco. LOL!
I remember watching the 5th movie with kiddo and seeing when Snape remembered James torturing him when they were kids. And Harry seeing what he saw. Or did he not? I just remember realizing that Harry's dad wasn't perfect and feeling bad for the younger Snape.
Kleypas redeemed Hardy Cates well, but by the time she made him a villainy character, we knew so much about his past that I think she had less work to do to turn him around. Then there's Mayne. *pause for sighs*
Eloisa James turned a villain that I don't think was ever intended to even appear again into one of her greatest and most anticipated heroes. And though he's more secondary, I think she did a great job redeeming Darlington as well. Grissie was one lucky lady.
I think all the posters look really cool--Dumbledore looks very impressive (as does everyone else.)
Marn: I haven't seen the new Stars Wars. (I think I've only seen the old Star Wars only once or twice. I remember liking the Ewoks when I was a kid, but that was about it.) I do like the idea that Darth Vadar had a reason for being the big baddie he was. :)
Yeah, I thought the pic of Ron was good. (He looks so much better without the helmet.) Draco's eyes are a bit...spooky looking, but I was more impressed by the way he was dressed. He's got the dressing skills of Lucius, I think. Snazzy dresser. Haughty look. Very Malfoy.
The pic I saw of Narcissa was so WRONG though. Has anyone else seen a pic of Narcissa? Ugh! Her hair!
I'll grant you, considering all we know of Hardy from before, it was less of a leap. Actually I was more impressed with how she made me fall in love with Gage, who was *such a jerk*--I remember listening to the book on CD (first) and sitting in my car, gripping the steering wheel, thinking "I hate this guy"--and I swear like two chapters later, my feelings for him completely changed. Now that is magic.
Hm, anti-heroes. St. Vincent is one of my favs. So is Hardy Cates. Z from BDB. Ranger from JE. Al from KH (though it can be argued that he is the villain, but I see through that killer exterior). I love that anti-heroes are firmly in the grey area. I don't like black and white characters. You need to step into the grey to make it interesting.
I sometimes wonder how I'd have felt if I didn't know before reading Sugar Daddy how the hero thing played out. If I'd read it as soon as it was released before seeing the spoilers online, I might have thrown that book. I was SO in love with Hardy in that book.
I think I knew from the get-go that Hardy wasn't going to be the hero. I mean, I think it says on the back of the book it's going to be Gage Travis who gets the girl. But it was WORK to convince me.
Another Lisa Kleypas anti-hero is Derek Craven. When I read about him in Then Came You I thought he was a real jerk. And I had the exact same reaction to Gage, Hellion! I couldn't stand him.
I handed my sister a bunch of Eloisa James books but I warned her that everyone she read about wasn't going to get their relationships resolved in the first book. She said if I didn't warn her about that it would have been a huge wallbanger. I know the same held true with me and Sugar Daddy. If I hadn't known ahead of time about it being Gage instead of Hardy, I think it would have altered my enjoyment of the book.
Sin, I have trouble thinking of Ranger as an anti-hero. *LOL* I think of Morelli as an anti-hero because he's so much harder to like as a person.
Ranger just makes living in the grey area cool.
Okay, is it only me, or is that Draco poster not seriously creepy. He looks very dangerous and not in a "ooh he's sexy" dangerous, but in a "oh no, he's a psychotic killer" dangerous.
However, since I've read the books several times, I know he's not actually psycho. He is supposed to look like a killer though. But it doesn't work out.
No, Irish, I'm sure Terri will be the first embracing you gratefully and going, "Yes, yes, I thought he looked psycho too, but I didn't want to say so to Hellion because of her anger issues."
Oh, and Irish, I'm with you, I'd rather be informed ahead of time WHO the hero is supposed to be. I *loathe* getting all involved (Hardy Cates being an exception) with one hero, only to have it stolen by some new guy. Drives. Me. Crazy. And it does alter the enjoyment of the book if they do it without warning.
Don't make me mention the Book That Shall Not Be Named.
Wow, those kids have sure grown up! But I still miss Richard Harris' Dumbledore.
I'm with you, Irish. Draco could be an illustration for some of these demon books that are so popular now. Definitely creepy IMO.
Re: Anti-heroes
I though about Mayne and about Nes from Carla Kelly's Libby's London Merchant/One Good Turn, but I don't ever see either of them as villains, just as flawed, selfish men. I think they both qualify as anti-heroes because their values are certainly not heroic initially, but I don't think of their behavior as villainous. To me a villain is someone who deliberately chooses evil, not just someone who is selfish.
Great blog, Cap'n. Makes me want to go back and read the books I've missed.
Wish I had a good example to post, but with my holey memory, it just isn't there! If someone comes to mind, I'll slip it in later...
Well, wait...there was Quentin in the original Dark Shadows...and Barnabas Collins, for the most part...;)
I didn't think he looked like a psycho. LOL! But he does have the creepy factor in spades. And he's so skinny. I'll give you that he's well dressed, but it's that MOD 60s British look and that's not one of my favs. :)
Though I can see how they were trying to emulate their characters straight from the books and without having read them, that's obviously lost on me.
Janga - So are you saying an anti-hero is only one that is turned from villain to hero? Cause I was just thinking the anti-hero is more Jack Sparrow, his motivations are mostly selfish, but he has his heroic moments. Especially if they ultimately serve his selfish motivations. LOL!
Not that I was to distract from Hellie's awesome blog, but since we're talking so much about Lisa Kleypas, you might want to know she's blogging over on www.romancenovel.tv today. She's talking Smooth Talking Stranger (NO SPOILERS!) and her historicals and pretty much just being her incredibly sweet self.
No,Terri,"that is not what I meant at all" (to quote T. S. Eliot). What I meant is that some villains become anti-heroes, but not all anti-heroes were once villains. St. Vincent was a villain; kidnapping is the act of a villain. He becomes an anti-hero. I'm not sure that he ever becomes a conventional hero in the sense that the hero reflects the highest values of his culture. Mayne, on the other hand, is an anti-hero, but he is never a villain. Seducing willing women may not be noble, but I don't see it as evil in the way that kidnapping, torture, and confidence tricks are. And I'm just expressing my view. I apologize if I came across as Moses descending the mountain.
This is my favorite subject ever! I *love* the anti-heroes and villains. It all started so long ago, specifically Javert from Les Mis. Oh, how I loved his misguided beliefs and his realization in that. Then there was Shakespeare's Hotspur, who was the damn best thing about Henry IV, part I---he was so in love with his wife and was such a strong presence on the page and damn it, I wanted him to kill Hal and not die at the end. Damn history.
I think it was really with Hotspur and Claudius from Hamlet who sparked my interests in the anti-hero and villain. But, then, I find redemption stories more powerful on the whole because that character has so much to lose if he or she doesn't earn it.
And Snape. Sigh. I cried like a baby when it all came out and he died.
It is so why I write romances. My anti-heroes get their HEA.
Chance: oooh, I did like Dark Shadows when I was a kid! :) Good choice!
Sorry, Terri, forgot the skinny factor. That MOD 60s British thing is part of his appeal to me.
Jack Sparrow is a good example of the anti-hero, though there is that whole discussion that he couldn't really be anything but anti-hero. He wouldn't be Jack anymore if he fell in love and got all soppy.
Janga, you are right---there is a huge difference between anti-hero and villain. And they are not interchangeable, or rather, just because a character is an anti-hero does not make him a villain. Villains to me do something really bad; anti-heroes goes against the typical qualities a hero is supposed to possess. Which would make an interesting discussion/topic point---what qualities make a hero as opposed to an anti-hero, and how many of those qualities are things we are taught to value?
*LOL* Janga, you didn't sound remotely Moses off the Mountain. *LOL*
*bouncing up and down with Ely* I know! I love this topic! I swear I could talk about it once a week!
I did cry for Snape. And I did wish he'd had a happier ending...and then I read this:
http://pics.livejournal.com/lizzy333/pic/0002cx7a
And I somehow think Snape thinks he's better off.
Yes, exactly, Hellion! My rock star Aubry is an anti-hero and gets his HEA, but at the end of the story, he still is Aubry with his sarcastic sense of humor. He remains true to his self, but at the same time, becomes a better man due to what he has learned and grown from. I think that is important in an anti-hero or the villain---like with St. Vincent, you know he is cutting, dangerous, and just an all-around bad boy, but with Evie, he's not and softens just for her.
I only used the Villain vs Anti-Hero because I think some of the choices Snape made at the very beginning were more villain than anti-hero--like St. Vincent. It's only later he becomes full fledged anti-hero.
I think some villains can turn into anti-heroes; and I agree that not all anti-heroes are necessarily villains. On the whole, people are more thoughtlessly selfish than inherently evil.
Hellion, I laughed so hard at that comic strip. LOL.
"what qualities make a hero as opposed to an anti-hero, and how many of those qualities are things we are taught to value?"
Heroes exhibit INTEGRITY, HONESTY, LOYALTY, and a black and white sense of what's right and wrong. I think heroes on the whole have a low tolerance for gray area. You can't play both sides.
I find Anti-Heroes more appealing because I tend to see things more in the gray area. And I like to hang out with people who think as morally murky as me.
Yes, Hellion, I so agree with you about those qualities, and it is exactly why I love the anti-hero so much. I love people who see the gray area and operate in it; it's much more fun to explore as a writer, too.
Janga - I didn't mean to say you sounded like Moses. LOL! I really was curious. You see *looks around for a place to hide* I've never read St. Vincent's story so I didn't know how much a villain he was.
And I think your comment brings us back around to whether you can ever truly redeem a villain. I'm tempted to say a villain is one who is not redeemable and an anti-hero is one who could do the wrong thing at times but was always inherantly good. Do you (I mean anyone here) think a character can be a true villain if they have some kind of goodness in them?
And I don't agree that the hero always sees things black and white. I think he has lots of gray and just leans toward making the right decision at the right time. And puts honor above all.
You can't redeem a villain--not a true one, in my opinion--but that's my concern as a writer. So many villains come off as so two-dimensional than their three-dimensional anti-hero counterparts.
Oh, if you're going to be philosophical, I would argue everyone has a little good in them. Somewhere. Although I'm really racking my brain trying to figure out where it was in Voldemort...or Sauron--or whatever the LOTR's villain(s) were called? I mean Voldy is more a sociopath, which at least explains why he's irredeemable. It's like a mental illness, almost, as well as the nasty choices he made.
"You can’t redeem a villain–not a true one, in my opinion–but that’s my concern as a writer. So many villains come off as so two-dimensional than their three-dimensional anti-hero counterparts."
YES!!!! I get so sick of villains who are cookie cutter versions of what is thought of as a villain. Larissa Ione had a great villain in her 2nd book in the Demonica series---he was the brother to them and had thought to have died in a fire. He was good until the change came over him and he became ruthless, and after he didn't die, he became an outright villain.
But most of the time you will get a throwaway villain in romances, and you will be like please, this villain is just not that bad. LOL.
Actually I get tired of the bad villains who are so...bad they come with bad dialogue, the most obnoxiously selfish and thinly believable motivations...the whole bit.
I think that's why I enjoyed Sherrilyn Kenyon's first Dark-Hunter book--the hero immediately starts getting all sarcastic with the "villain"--making fun of his B-movie horror dialogue and the whole bit. *LOL*
Would you consider Poppy's mother in Affair Before Christmas to be a villain? I know she turned out to be not quite the despicable, toss-her-off-a-cliff kind of villain, but she was the villain of that book.
Yes, I would definitely consider Poppy's mom to be a villain.
OMG, that comic strip is hysterical!! :)
So is there a difference between a villain and a character who plays the villain for the sake of the story?
Maybe I can accept the out and out villain because I believe in evil as a real force. I don't think every heinous action by a human being can be dismissed as mental illness or bad parenting.
Since Harry Potter is part of our discussion today, I'll add two quotes to support my point.
"There is no good or evil: only power and those too weak to seek it." Quirinus Quirrell to Harry, Book 1
"It is our choices...that show what we truly are...." Dumbledore to Harry, Book 2
I'm with Janga. I do believe someone can simply be evil and it has nothing to do with anything other than they just are. I just think some stories have a character who plays the villain in that they work against the protagonist, but they aren't necessarily evil.
Maybe I just don't think about evil as a real force because I enjoy sleeping at night... *LOL*
I don't think bad parenting is always it either. I see perfectly good, perfectly perplexed parents who have kids who are evil. I still think the people who are that way are "sociopathic" which technically can be classified as a mental illness, in a sense. Complete lack of empathy to my mind seems like a mental illness to me.
So true, Cap'n. After reading the comments from my last contest... sociopathic people are everywhere! And I won't blame their parents...
No, not that bad. Though the complete lack of empathy might fit...
I know most are gone, but I'm having a hooha! A big one!
Post a Comment