# The Perfect Enemy



## Nihilium 7th (Apr 22, 2013)

There is no great story without a great antagnonist. Be it a man, woman, deity, empire or ideal; every story has a great "evil". What do you guys believe makes a good antagonist? Is it power, dialog, beliefs, charisma or something "special".


----------



## Shockley (Apr 22, 2013)

I think they have to be the best possible foil for the protagonist. They could have whatever combination of traits, characteristics, lines, etc. and it wouldn't matter if they aren't a great counter to the hero.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Apr 22, 2013)

One of my favorites, yet difficult to write well:

The Unwitting Villain


----------



## wordwalker (Apr 22, 2013)

It could be a lot of ways: 

he's the perfect obstacle for the hero, able to beat the hero at his strengths, or else can sidestep them. 
he _represents_ a larger kind of obstacle: what the hero might become or what he fears the world can be seduced into.

Or it could just be how it's placed within the story. If you've seen the film _Blue Velvet_, the villain isn't especially smart or capable, but he's nasty (Dennis Hopper, after all) and the movie works hard to give the hero a lot of close looks to how much damage he can do on a whim.


----------



## Rob P (Apr 23, 2013)

The best villain is the one that sits in the shadows just beyond the immediate world of our hero so he/she struggles with understanding the reasons for his/her misfortune, the obstacles that are placed to hinder and the people persuaded to betray.

The hero's discovery and sorrow is the unmasking of this villain bringing them into the full glare of his/her focus with the realisation that so much more needs to be overcome.


----------



## kayd_mon (Apr 23, 2013)

The best villain is one that you can actually sympathize with. The villainy is then heartbreaking rather than expected.


----------



## MadMadys (Apr 23, 2013)

The villain, for me, is the one that you can almost relate to; the one that if the story were a little different, you'd probably root for them.  Makes them far more realistic and more threatening, the way I see it.


----------



## Mindfire (Apr 23, 2013)

A villain really only needs four things: 
-Power
-Competence 
-Style 
-A meaningful connection to the hero

I personally prefer not to relate to villains, but whether you can has less impact on a villain being memorable than the above four things.


----------



## skip.knox (Apr 23, 2013)

There are as many different kinds of villains as there are heroes. In War and Peace, the great villain would appear to be Napoleon but in fact he's more of a natural force and the real villains are elsewhere. One of my favorite villains is the one in the movie Unbreakable. 

And it's always worth remembering that from the villain's point of view, it's the hero who is the villain.


----------



## Ireth (Apr 23, 2013)

skip.knox said:


> And it's always worth remembering that from the villain's point of view, it's the hero who is the villain.



Unless your villain is someone like Dr. Horrible, who knows he's the villain and likes it that way. XD Why else would he apply for the Evil League of Evil or get a Ph.D in Horribleness?


----------



## Firekeeper (Apr 24, 2013)

I've never much enjoyed one dimensional villains. Of course, some of my favorites have been just that, but that is more a product of the overall story than anything else. Like Sauron was pretty one dimensional, but he had to be or otherwise LOTR would not have had the same feel. So sometimes one dimensional is the only way to go. 

But for me, I want my villains to be complex. I want them to have fears and regrets, enjoyments and even things they may love and cherish. I want them to be conflicted, like their path into evil either isn't fully their own choice or perhaps they don't feel 100% good about it. When/if they are finally taken down by the hero, I want my readers to grieve for them, I want the reader to wish the villain had found redemption rather than celebrate his/her demise. 

I like blurring the lines between heroes and villains. I want there to be times that the reader hates the hero and loves the bad guy, without the feeling of good vs. bad being undermined.


----------



## Amanita (Apr 24, 2013)

To me, there's a difference between a mere antagonist and a villain.
Given that most earlier posters have written about the latter, I'm going to do so too. If the villain is human, I like set-ups where he or she has made the wrong choices at some point of their lives. What this person is doing now, is clearly wrong but he could have chosen a different path if he had wanted to and if circumstances had been different. I like stories where there are similarities between hero and villain in character traits, talents, interests and so on and where there's a real danger that the protagonist might fall to the same temptations during the course of the story.
I actually dislike set-ups where a villain is considered absolutely evil by the author and his mouth-piece characters but an objective evaluation of facts gives a different picture. It can be very interesting if this is done on purpose of course. In these cases, I tend to speak about antagonists rather than villains. 
Villains that aren't human but more like a natural force of evil such as Sauron can work well too of course as many stories using them have shown.


----------



## HabeasCorpus (Apr 24, 2013)

A villian can be all sorts of bad-dudery, but if he cannot force the hero to be, well a hero, then more is required...


----------



## Nameback (Apr 25, 2013)

Two kinds of villains that are especially favorites of mine:

(1) Believably monstrous. This is someone who is not conflicted, who does not have motives that are relatable, who does not act in a way consistent with the vast majority of human beings, and yet is still _believable_. Good examples tend to be various kinds of psychopaths/sociopaths. Hannibal Lecter is not a relatable villain (unless you're a sadist and you have a desire to eat people), but he is a believable one, in the sense that people have done things in real life that are similar to what he does in fiction. Those kinds of sadists and monsters really do exist. King Joffery in GoT (especially as played on the show by the FANTASTIC Gleeson) is another great example. Kid's definitely evil, pure and simple. He's not sympathetic or even particularly complex, but you believe that he would do the things he does. And boy do you love to hate him! It's so satisfying to see villains like this die!

I find these sort of villains work best in a more restricted setting (e.g. killer vs cop) or as minor antagonists in a grander setting (e.g. not the Big Bad in an epic fantasy novel). 

(2) Uncomfortably persuasive. Now, this is not the same thing as sympathetic--you may not like the villain _personally_, but you find their logic and philosophy compelling enough to be unsettled. You can almost feel the persuasive tug of their beliefs on your mind, even as you disagree with their actions. A good example of this, IMO, is the Joker in The Dark Knight. In many of his scenes, he's an astute observer of human behavior, and makes insightful and accurate claims--you can see the way his philosophy fits together and there's enough in there that's appealing or insightful that it's unsettling. When a villain can get close to you, that's truly scary! I find these sort of villains make for great primary antagonists.


----------



## brokethepoint (Apr 26, 2013)

Man vs Self, I think that would be a good one.


----------



## Malik (Apr 26, 2013)

I mentioned this in another thread but it's relevant here: I was about halfway through writing _Dragon's Trail _when I realized that the protagonist was actually the bad guy, and the villain that I'd introduced to counter him had more redeeming qualities and was far more fun to write. I switched the perspective to make the original villain appear to be the hero and vice versa, and in so doing I cut out a huge chunk of the story. It took more work but it has made a lot more sense ever since. 

As a bonus, I ended up with a cynical, high-functioning alcoholic hero with a vigilante complex and a streak of suicidal abandon. Huge fun.

What makes a good antagonist is when you can find yourself rooting for his side, if only he'd stop being such a jerk about it.


----------



## Poe Prodigy (May 26, 2013)

Amanita said:


> I actually dislike set-ups where a villain is considered absolutely evil by the author and his mouth-piece characters but an objective evaluation of facts gives a different picture. It can be very interesting if this is done on purpose of course. In these cases, I tend to speak about antagonists rather than villains.



I'm curious; what do you mean by "objective evaluation of facts"?? Any examples of this kind of villain?


----------



## Mindfire (May 26, 2013)

Poe Prodigy said:


> I'm curious; what do you mean by "objective evaluation of facts"?? Any examples of this kind of villain?



I think Amanita is referring to one of these tropes or a combination thereof:

Designated Villain - Television Tropes & Idioms
Villain Has A Point - Television Tropes & Idioms
Strawman Has a Point - Television Tropes & Idioms


----------



## Addison (May 27, 2013)

There are layers to conflict (internal, external, interpersonal and antagonist) 

There are also many shapes the evil conflict can come in. They're in three categories:

Human vs. Human: This is the type we see in almost every book. Apprentice wizard vs. Evil Sorcerer. England vs. Germany (Just an example!) Genius vs. Bully, Brother vs. Sister, the list is endless. 

Human vs. Nature: These conflicts have become a reality TV show. "I Shouldn't Be Alive". This is man/woman vs hurricanes, blizzard, desert, arctic tundra, ghost town, abandoned mine. It's them against the elements. 

Human vs. Self: This isn't restricted to serial killers or people with multiple personalities, a guilty conscience about eating the last cookie or some weird thing like that. This can just be inner obstacles which block them from achieving their goal. Sweet guy has a huge crush on the girl next door but he's so shy she can't get up the nerve to say more than "Good morning...how are you?...have a good day." He wants to at least have coffee with her before she accepts a job out of town but how's he going to do it?

Like all conflicts are layered and founded on something, so are these good vs. bad situations. The setting can get in the way of lover guy, a swarm of shoppers at the mall drowns out his voice calling her, or the gamer geek from work surprises him before he can talk to her. They can all work together in different ways but you can choose one to be the Solid Villain. What is the story really about? What is the real goal and what is really in the way opposed to a side-show warlock.


----------



## Feo Takahari (May 27, 2013)

And occasionally, Human vs. Human and Human Vs. Self overlap.


----------



## Ireth (May 27, 2013)

My latest WIP has a main conflict that's Human vs. Human, and a subplot with Human vs. Society. The MC, Cadell, is primarily focused with doing his part along with the other good guys to vanquish the evil black-elves; at the same time he struggles with his choice to reject the selfish and often violent ways of his kind in favor of peace and friendship with the humans they typically see only as playthings. The other Fae he associates with are largely unhappy with him because of this.


----------



## SineNomine (May 27, 2013)

I think that the prime reason Sauron works in the LotR is that the conflict is more man vs nature than man vs man.  In a genre where both "nature" and "man" can be incredibly broad, the prime differentiator in my mind is that of motivation.

Nature opponents don't have any motivations.  They serve simply as a near insurmountable obstacle that the hero must beat with tenacity and resourcefulness.  Man opponents have to have motivations, and ones the reader can understand and, on some level, sympathize with.

So good villains always need to be multifaceted and the only ones who aren't and we still enjoy pull it off by simply being a "force of nature".


----------



## Canz (May 27, 2013)

The perfect enemy, at least for me, is that one I really LOVED when he was a good guy, so much I relate to his suffering and understand his decitions. I don't agree, but understand.


----------



## Justin Cary (May 27, 2013)

I think an antagonist should be as well written as a protagonist. Some people are drawn to the bad guy and some to the good. If you commit to both characters with equal diligence you can capture the minds of either type of reader.


----------



## Addison (May 27, 2013)

Canz said:


> The perfect enemy, at least for me, is that one I really LOVED when he was a good guy, so much I relate to his suffering and understand his decitions. I don't agree, but understand.



Like Regina or Mr. Gold in "Once Upon a Time". In a way, in that story, magic is also an antagonist. It taunts and it has a high cost.


----------



## Tom (May 29, 2013)

I just realized that my villain needs some work. 

For my WIP I gave my villain a similiar personality to my hero, so often my hero finds himself sympathizing with the villain, who took the wrong path and is regreting it but wants revenge so much he tells himself he can't turn back. Being a Christian, I believe in redemption, and I allow my villain to realize his mistake before the end. However, sometimes you gotta face the music, so he also dies.


----------



## Mindfire (May 29, 2013)

Tom Nimenai said:


> I just realized that my villain needs some work.
> 
> For my WIP I gave my villain a similiar personality to my hero, so often my hero finds himself sympathizing with the villain, who took the wrong path and is regreting it but wants revenge so much he tells himself he can't turn back. Being a Christian, I believe in redemption, and I allow my villain to realize his mistake before the end. However, sometimes you gotta face the music, so he also dies.



So what exactly needs work?


----------



## Mythopoet (May 29, 2013)

SineNomine said:


> I think that the prime reason Sauron works in the LotR is that the conflict is more man vs nature than man vs man.  In a genre where both "nature" and "man" can be incredibly broad, the prime differentiator in my mind is that of motivation.
> 
> Nature opponents don't have any motivations.  They serve simply as a near insurmountable obstacle that the hero must beat with tenacity and resourcefulness.  Man opponents have to have motivations, and ones the reader can understand and, on some level, sympathize with.
> 
> So good villains always need to be multifaceted and the only ones who aren't and we still enjoy pull it off by simply being a "force of nature".



Except that Sauron is a sentient being, not a part of "nature" as we moderns tend to use that word and he has plenty of motivation. Tolkien just doesn't go into it because Sauron isn't really the main antagonist of the story, the Ring is. That's what people don't seem to understand. And the Ring as an antagonist mostly manifests its power as a Man vs. Himself type conflict. Sauron and Saruman and their armies are secondary sources of conflict. The main story is always Frodo and Sam and the Ring.


----------



## Tom (Jun 1, 2013)

@Mindfire:

I realized he needs more good points and fears so he won't seem like a completely inhuman monster. I also want to give him interests other than "making war on the good guys!" 

So yesterday I went through and edited him a bit. Now he's interested in art, music, and literature as well as "making war on the good guys!", and I developed his personality so he's  evil, but still human and therefore sympathetic to the reader.


----------



## Tom (Jun 1, 2013)

Mythopoet said:


> Except that Sauron is a sentient being, not a part of "nature" as we moderns tend to use that word and he has plenty of motivation. Tolkien just doesn't go into it because Sauron isn't really the main antagonist of the story, the Ring is. That's what people don't seem to understand. And the Ring as an antagonist mostly manifests its power as a Man vs. Himself type conflict. Sauron and Saruman and their armies are secondary sources of conflict. The main story is always Frodo and Sam and the Ring.



I never thought about it that way. But now I see you're right--the Ring is the source of the conflict.


----------



## Addison (Jun 3, 2013)

Tom Nimenai said:


> ...the Ring is the source of the conflict.



That's the point. Conflict, like all things, is in many shapes and sizes.


----------

