# How much are you willing to forgive to the hero?



## fantastic (May 25, 2015)

In a world that is quite harsh, how much can hero do and you will still consider him a hero?

By that I mean, what actions would make you not like the character anymore, stop cheering for him, stop caring about him, not wanting him to win, start hating him, or simply like him less.

What would you be willing to forgive?

Swearing
Threatening
Stealing

Beating someone
Killing someone
Raping someone
Torturing someone

Assuming he did it to someone evil?

What if he did this to an innocent person?

What do you think would be too much for you to continue genuinely liking the character and still consider him a good or at least, likable?


----------



## Russ (May 25, 2015)

fantastic said:


> In a world that is quite harsh, how much can hero do and you will still consider him a hero?
> 
> By that I mean, what actions would make you not like the character anymore, stop cheering for him, stop caring about him, not wanting him to win, start hating him, or simply like him less.
> 
> ...



I can get past all of those quite easily with the exception of raping someone.  I struggle to imagine a justification for that act in my worldview.


----------



## Philster401 (May 25, 2015)

I think the answer to this question is it depends on the story, the character, and the reader.

First this depends on your definition of a hero and morals. I also have to ask do you mean hero or protagonist? Because if you mean hero raping a person that to most people would not fit their definition of a hero. Also the murdering of innocents could most likely be forgiven depending on the situation. 

Here area a few examples of a hero torturing someone. In Supernatural Dean Winchester tortures demons and in Inheritance Murtagh tortures Nasuada because he is forced to so it all depends on the situation 

Then there is Deathnote where the main character goes around "cleansing" the world by killing criminals and the occasional bystander.


----------



## Philster401 (May 25, 2015)

Russ said:


> I can get past all of those quite easily with the exception of raping someone.  I struggle to imagine a justification for that act in my worldview.



I agree completely.


----------



## MineOwnKing (May 25, 2015)

One of the basic rules is to not write about a developed character doing something inconsistent with his/her arc.

Now, if you write about a character that consistently does bad things but makes a self sacrifice within a scene which is redeeming, does that make him a hero also? 

Depends on the novel.


----------



## fantastic (May 25, 2015)

Russ said:


> I can get past all of those quite easily with the exception of raping someone.  I struggle to imagine a justification for that act in my worldview.



Well, if torturing can have a justification, I assume most other things could have some sort of reason. But I wonder, do you need a justification for any of those things? What if these things are not unusual in their world or the hero does it for no special reason?



Philster401 said:


> I think the answer to this question is it depends on the story, the character, and the reader.
> 
> First this depends on your definition of a hero and morals. I also have to ask do you mean hero or protagonist? Because if you mean hero raping a person that to most people would not fit their definition of a hero. Also the murdering of innocents could most likely be forgiven depending on the situation.
> 
> ...



I mean the protagonist. But I use the word hero to make it clear that he is the good guy or at least on the side of the good or less evil.

Well, if one is forced to do so you might not blame him. But what if he does this of his own will?



MineOwnKing said:


> One of the basic rules is to not write about a developed character doing something inconsistent with his/her arc.
> 
> Now, if you write about a character that consistently does bad things but makes a self sacrifice within a scene which is redeeming, does that make him a hero also?
> 
> Depends on the novel.



Yes, but the point is would you still like someone, if he does this?

Would you like a character who kills, rapes and tortures but at the same time is heroic and saves many people risking his own life?


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (May 25, 2015)

fantastic said:


> ...what actions would make you not like the character anymore, stop cheering for him, stop caring about him, not wanting him to win, start hating him, or simply like him less.
> 
> What would you be willing to forgive?....
> 
> What do you think would be too much for you to continue genuinely liking the character and still consider him a good or at least, likable?


I'm going to take your question and head down a different road with my answer, because it really just depends on how you write the story...how well you handle the events and characters.

The issues I have with your question lies within the premise that your reader must like the protagonist. You used the word hero, I know, but I'm assuming you mean your "hero" to be the protagonist of your story.

Truth is, the reader doesn't necessarily need to like the character. Yes, I know, many people will tell you they won't read about characters they don't like, and that's fine for them. However, many readers, and I am one of them, only require that your characters are _interesting_. Yes, even the protagonist.

Many of my favorite books feature protagonists which are less than admirable, or even likable. They aren't the kind of people I'd want showing up to the family barbecue. However, as fictional characters, the're fascinating to read about. 

So, I recommend you focus your efforts on making the character interesting.

That second part to this, if you wish to create compelling characters, is to make them sympathetic. By "sympathetic" I mean characters with some qualities and traits all readers can relate to. What are some things common to the human condition? Look to those as a starting point. Do we love our children, parents, or significant others? Do we all wish to find love? Do we wish to be valued, respected, or admired? Think about the types of things we all share, regardless of how we may be separated in the world by geography, ethnicity, religion, or any other potential surface differences. Make your characters sympathetic by illustrating qualities the reader sees in themselves and they'll grow to understand the character on a deeper level, if not condone their behavior. 

Think about a character like Dexter, the serial killer. Would you want him showing up at your daughter's birthday party? Probably not, and yet many people find the character fascinating. Why? Because they develop sympathy for him AND he's interesting. Ok, so how does the character generate sympathy & why do people find him interesting?
Sympathetic traits:
1) He has a sister that loves him and, in turn, he shares affection for him in an odd way.
2) He has a son he wishes to protect and nurture. (Though this may not completely fit with psychopathology)
3) He is an expert at his job, an interesting job as a blood splatter crime scene analyst. He is admired and respected for his expertise. 
4) His condition is caused by an early trauma, the loss of his mother in terrible, bloody fashion.

Why is he interesting?
In addition to the above, he lives a double life. He keeps up normal appearances while living a dark, secret existence at night, killing other serial killers. His violent urges are controlled by a code he lives by, which keeps him from harming innocents. What isn't interesting about that? Haven't we all, at one time or another, wished we could inflict some measure of justice on the types of people that would hurt innocents? Well, Dexter acts on those urges, and we find that fascinating.

In the end, focus on making your character interesting & make them relatable by giving them sympathetic traits. That's all that matters.


----------



## MineOwnKing (May 25, 2015)

No, I would not still like the character.


----------



## X Equestris (May 25, 2015)

fantastic said:


> In a world that is quite harsh, how much can hero do and you will still consider him a hero?
> 
> By that I mean, what actions would make you not like the character anymore, stop cheering for him, stop caring about him, not wanting him to win, start hating him, or simply like him less.
> 
> ...



Rape is a deal breaker.  There is no instance where rape is justifiable, no matter how evil the victim is.


----------



## Devor (May 25, 2015)

Rape is always a turn off for many people, especially when it's the MC and if we're expected to in any way sympathize with the character.  I think there's two reasons for that.  The first, it's really hard to imagine any kind of justification for rape.  There's no raping somebody in self-defense.  And the second, it's a little too real and close to home for many people who have related fears and experiences.

Other than that, it depends on the character and whether we're _supposed_ to like and forgive him for these things.  You can have a character who commits murder.  Just don't try and make me think that's okay.


----------



## Tom (May 25, 2015)

I agree with X Equestris. Rape is the cut-off point for me; anything else I can swallow if the hero's actions are justified. But not rape. Any sort of sexual assault turns the main character from hero to villain in my eyes.


----------



## Russ (May 25, 2015)

fantastic said:


> Well, if torturing can have a justification, I assume most other things could have some sort of reason. But I wonder, do you need a justification for any of those things? What if these things are not unusual in their world or the hero does it for no special reason?



But I am a potential reader and you asked me the question as a reader, not as a inhabitant of a world where rape is common place.  I find it almost impossible to imagine a situation where I as a reader will "cheer for" someone who has committed a rape, no matter how shitty the world they inhabit or how many lives they save etc.

As a reader you should not expect me to completely internalize amoral or immoral cultures that make up your world.

I think that there are rare, rare exceptions to this.

The only character that raped someone I ever cheered for was Thomas Covenant, and it was so brilliantly set up I struggle to think how someone could carry that act off so powerfully and regretfully again.

On the other hand I was quite willing to cheer for Elric who both committed incest (with this cousin) and torture.


----------



## fantastic (May 25, 2015)

I can see most people are against rape even if there is a justification.

From what I understand, you don't mind torturing, if it has a justification.

What if the hero tortures an innocent person simply because he occasionally likes to hurt people but makes up for it by saving many people and otherwise being a hero?


----------



## Tom (May 25, 2015)

fantastic said:


> I can see most people are against rape even if there is a justification.



Listen. There is _no_ justification for rape. It's a cruel, selfish act that forcibly strips a victim of their right to control their own body. Murder is not always intentional, but rape is. I don't care how upright a hero is otherwise, or what circumstances he was under--the moment he commits rape, I am no longer rooting for him. 

I know I may be coming across as somewhat prickly about it, but this issue needs to be stressed. Rape _cannot_ be justified, _ever_, no matter the circumstances.


----------



## fantastic (May 25, 2015)

Tom Nimenai said:


> Listen. There is _no_ justification for rape. It's a cruel, selfish act that forcibly strips a victim of their right to control their own body. Murder is not always intentional, but rape is. I don't care how upright a hero is otherwise, or what circumstances he was under--the moment he commits rape, I am no longer rooting for him.
> 
> I know I may be coming across as somewhat prickly about it, but this issue needs to be stressed. Rape _cannot_ be justified, _ever_, no matter the circumstances.



This was not really my point but what if someone was forced to rape someone?


----------



## X Equestris (May 25, 2015)

fantastic said:


> I can see most people are against rape even if there is a justification.



I challenge you to name one situation where rape is justified.  

As for the scenario you lay out, I find a character that takes pleasure in inflicting suffering on others to be virtually impossible to sympathize with.  It doesn't matter what other supposedly heroic acts this person does, it won't make up for torturing someone just for kicks.


----------



## Laurence (May 25, 2015)

I wonder if a real life torture and rape victim would say torture was more justifiable...

In my opinion torture is as unforgivable as rape (consider that both acts/the physical and psychological effects of both could last a lifetime).


----------



## Tom (May 25, 2015)

@fantastic:

Okay, let's run with that.

So here we've got our hero. Let's call him Hugh. So Hugh has been captured by the Dark Lord...Luther, or whatever. Luther is cruel and sadistic, just like a dark lord should be. He presents Hugh with a choice: either he can rape that poor, terrified, shivering young woman chained up in the corner, or he can die. 

So let's say that Hugh is Very Important to the Plot. If he dies, the whole Side of Good or whatever goes down in flames. And he knows this. Because of that, he chooses to rape the woman instead of being killed.

Is he at fault for raping her? Yes. Did he take away her control over her own body? Yes. Was the choice of rape or death enough to justify his actions? _No._

Rape is wrong, no matter what the circumstances. I don't care if Hugh was going to die if he didn't, I still object to his raping of a helpless woman. That was wrong, even if it was necessary, and I will still stop rooting for him because of it. Even if he can somehow redeem himself in my eyes, I will still harbor some aversion to him because of what he did. Because it can't be justified.


----------



## fantastic (May 25, 2015)

X Equestris said:


> I challenge you to name one situation where rape is justified.
> 
> As for the scenario you lay out, I find a character that takes pleasure in inflicting suffering on others to be virtually impossible to sympathize with.  It doesn't matter what other supposedly heroic acts this person does, it won't make up for torturing someone just for kicks.



Well, someone could be forced to rape someone. Or let say, there is a situation where not raping someone, will prevent saviour of the world from being born.


----------



## Tom (May 25, 2015)

fantastic said:


> Well, someone could be forced to rape someone. Or let say, there is a situation where not raping someone, will prevent saviour of the world from being born.



In that case, I'd rather the savior stay unborn. The world can save itself, as it has many times both in our past, and in the past of various fantasy worlds. 

Still no justification for rape.


----------



## X Equestris (May 25, 2015)

fantastic said:


> Well, someone could be forced to rape someone. Or let say, there is a situation where not raping someone, will prevent saviour of the world from being born.



"A man chooses, a slave obeys." 

No one can ever truly force you to do something, unless they actively take control of your mind or body, at which point you are just as much a victim.


----------



## fantastic (May 25, 2015)

Tom Nimenai said:


> In that case, I'd rather the savior stay unborn. The world can save itself, as it has many times both in our past, and in the past of various fantasy worlds.
> 
> Still no justification for rape.



Very well. I am not trying to change your opinion. I am just wondering what hero can do before you start hating him.


----------



## Laurence (May 25, 2015)

What if the Dr. Evil says 'If you do not rape this woman, I will rape her twice.'?


----------



## fantastic (May 25, 2015)

Laurence said:


> What if the Dr. Evil says 'If you do not rape this woman, I will rape her twice.'?



This is an excellent example that things are not always black and white. By not raping, you may keep your moral code and push the blame onto antagonist. But it doesn't change the fact woman will be raped twice, making her even more of a victim. Would not doing anything truly be the right thing?


----------



## valiant12 (May 25, 2015)

fantastic said:


> This was not really my point but what if someone was forced to rape someone?


He would find a way not to rape the victim, or he will lose my sympathy. I'm also strongly against torture if the victim is innocent or likeable. Also if your character is a rapist and like to torture people for fun im against him killing people, preferably somebody should kill him before the end of the book.


----------



## Tom (May 25, 2015)

fantastic said:


> Very well. I am not trying to change your opinion. I am just wondering what hero can do before you start hating him.



What you're trying to do is raise my blood pressure to dangerously high levels.


----------



## Philster401 (May 25, 2015)

Or Luther will murder his family or massacre citizens.


----------



## X Equestris (May 25, 2015)

Laurence said:


> What if the Dr. Evil says 'If you do not rape this woman, I will rape her twice.'?



Why should I believe anything that comes out of this evil fellow's mouth?  Nothing is stopping him from raping her, anyway.

Think of the ferry scene in The Dark Knight.  Same sort of thing applies to this situation.


----------



## valiant12 (May 25, 2015)

fantastic said:


> This is an excellent example that things are not always black and white. By not raping, you may keep your moral code and push the blame onto antagonist. But it doesn't change the fact woman will be raped twice, making her even more of a victim. Would not doing anything truly be the right thing?



if he want to rape her he will rape her regardless of the choice the protagonist make


----------



## Philster401 (May 25, 2015)

But you could go on and on all day asking what ifs or about if. It wont matter so I'd just suggest not doing/writing it


----------



## fantastic (May 25, 2015)

Tom Nimenai said:


> What you're trying to do is raise my blood pressure to dangerously high levels.



I'm sorry if I upset you. But when you try to come up with ideas and debate about it, it can sometimes offend other people.


----------



## Laurence (May 25, 2015)

valiant12 said:


> He would find a way not to rape the victim, or he will lose my sympathy. I'm also strongly against torture if the victim is innocent or likeable. Also if your character is a rapist and like to torture people for fun im against him killing people, preferably somebody should kill him before the end of the book.



Of course a situation where the protagonist found a way out would be the most refreshing result; refreshing isn't always the best read though. To be honest, it'd be such an emotionally climactic moment that it could well be the pinnacle of woe/elation in your novel, in which case, the protagonist could get out of it and end the story on a happy note or commit the act and die shortly after, ending the novel. 

Either way is good if it's the climax of the story! I can't imagine how the situation would make a comfortable read otherwise.


----------



## Laurence (May 25, 2015)

X Equestris said:


> Why should I believe anything that comes out of this evil fellow's mouth?  Nothing is stopping him from raping her, anyway.
> 
> Think of the ferry scene in The Dark Knight.  Same sort of thing applies to this situation.



Sorry for the double post but this is beside the point. The original question was *if* it was justified. There's always a way to justify anything because there's always a worse alternative to everything bar destroying the universe/sending everyone to 'hell'. So let's assume that the evil man has taken a truth serum before offering the protagonist the ultimatum.

EDIT: But yeah, Philster is right, fantastic, as you can see from the response on this thread (and these are sick and twisted fantasy writers with harder stomachs than most of your readers), it's not worth the trouble.


----------



## Russ (May 25, 2015)

Tom Nimenai said:


> What you're trying to do is raise my blood pressure to dangerously high levels.




You see this is the entire point that fantastic is missing as he modifies his facts to see where the "rape" line must be drawn.  

He thinks that what a reader will or will not accept in a hero is a intellectual/utilitarian argument or exercise.  It is not and that is where the fallacy of his search is rooted.

There are some things, rape amongst them, that are such powerful taboos, that produce such a horrific visceral, gut reaction that you cannot intellectualize them away.  Our reaction to rape is not based on mathematics, it is not a quantitative analysis like an investment, it is a qualitative judgment about human nature and the essence of right and wrong.  It is a heart feeling or a gut reaction.  

The potential reader is not Spock, the potential reader is a human.

Too many people believe (thankfully) that rape is such a heinous, craven, destructive act, that it cannot be justified or calculated away.  

I count myself in that crowd.

The solution, if the plot demands it, is a brilliant emotional reason for the rape to take place, not to calculate consequences.

"Better to die on your feet, than live on your knees."


----------



## Tom (May 25, 2015)

fantastic said:


> I'm sorry if I upset you. But when you try to come up with ideas and debate about it, it can sometimes offend other people.



I'm open to being offended in debates, but not when it's about _rape_. That's an intensely inflammatory and painful subject, and most people don't like it when you throw it around casually and talk about possible ways to justify it. I believe I'm reasonable in my being upset by your ideas.


----------



## Devor (May 25, 2015)

Tom Nimenai said:


> In that case, I'd rather the savior stay unborn. The world can save itself, as it has many times both in our past, and in the past of various fantasy worlds.
> 
> Still no justification for rape.



I have to ask:  In all these situations, would you say the same about torture or murder as you do for rape?

I understand that rape is tangibly different in many ways.  It can't be an accident or self-defense.  But I don't think these extreme, rather forced circumstances hinge on that.

We're purely hypothetical here.  But if there was a woman who was about to conceive a demon, and the guy's choices were:  Rape her so that his seed is already implanted and the demon can't be conceived, or kill her for the same effect, or let the rampaging demon be conceived and born, would one be better than the other?



((edit))

I had this page open a bit and can see this got a little more personal.  I was only asking this as a thought experiment, and I didn't mean to offend anyone.


----------



## X Equestris (May 25, 2015)

Laurence said:


> Sorry for the double post but this is beside the point. The original question was *if* it was justified. There's always a way to justify anything because there's always a worse alternative to everything bar destroying the universe/sending everyone to 'hell'. So let's assume that the evil man has taken a truth serum before offering the protagonist the ultimatum.
> 
> EDIT: But yeah, Philster is right, fantastic, as you can see from the response on this thread (and these are sick and twisted fantasy writers with harder stomachs than most of your readers), it's not worth the trouble.



There are many ways in which one could get around being forced to tell the truth (ex. "I said I wouldn't do it, I didn't say anything about my minions doing it."), but that's beside the point.  The villain makes their choice.  They are responsible for their own actions, whatever those may be.


----------



## fantastic (May 25, 2015)

X Equestris said:


> There are many ways in which one could get around being forced to tell the truth (ex. "I said I wouldn't do it, I didn't say anything about my minions doing it."), but that's beside the point.  The villain makes their choice.  They are responsible for their own actions, whatever those may be.



That is true. They are responsible for their own actions. No matter what he does, you can always: "He did it. It was not my fault."

It is not about you being obliged to help.

The question is, when faced with such situation would you really feel better if you just decided to blame someone else when you potentially could have changed something?


----------



## Tom (May 25, 2015)

@Devor

Murder and torture are like rape--can't be justified. But for me, rape is the threshold, since in my mind it's by far the most brutal, most cruelly intimate act of the three. Murder and torture can be committed in cold blood or in the heat of anger, but there's something about rape that makes it neither of these. It's...insidious. 

A rapist not only takes away a person's consent by violating their body, they take pleasure in taking it away. Rape is so easily tied to murder in that way, because it's essentially the same thing--taking something away from someone. Think of Ted Bundy or the Green River Killer. Both of those men took pleasure in both raping and murdering, because both acts delivered the same kind of emotional payoff.

If the hero had the choice between raping or killing, however, I'd choose killing. It may be the ultimate method of taking away a person's control, but to me it seems far less cruel than rape. Rape leaves you alive, and you have to deal with the fear and anger, and of knowing that another person willingly violated your rights as a human being. In some cases, death is kinder than life.


----------



## X Equestris (May 25, 2015)

fantastic said:


> That is true. They are responsible for their own actions. No matter what he does, you can always: "He did it. It was not my fault."
> 
> It is not about you being obliged to help.
> 
> The question is, when faced with such situation would you really feel better if you just decided to blame someone else when you potentially could have changed something?



It's not about blame.  The villain in this set up the situation, and carried it out.  That's two choices they had to make.  Two chances to turn back.  You have no proof, absolutely none, that they will keep their word.  Why compromise yourself in such a way, for an outcome that is unlikely at best, and outright not going to happen at worst?


----------



## valiant12 (May 25, 2015)

> We're purely hypothetical here. But if there was a woman who was about to conceive a demon, and the guy's choices were: Rape her so that his seed is already implanted and the demon can't be conceived, or kill her for the same effect, or let the rampaging demon be conceived and born, would one be better than the other?


I would let the demon be born. Even if that choice result in most destruction and suffering for the woman, i will feel less guilty.


----------



## fantastic (May 25, 2015)

X Equestris said:


> It's not about blame.  The villain in this set up the situation, and carried it out.  That's two choices they had to make.  Two chances to turn back.  You have no proof, absolutely none, that they will keep their word.  Why compromise yourself in such a way, for an outcome that is unlikely at best, and outright not going to happen at worst?



This is why the one who came up with this example said, let say that you have a guarantee nothing will happen to the woman. The point is not to find some way to evade the choice by using factors not mentioned in hypothetical situation.


----------



## Tom (May 25, 2015)

fantastic said:


> This is why the one who came up with this example said, let say that you have a guarantee nothing will happen to the woman.



Oh my GOD, do you still not get it?! RAPE IS WRONG, NO MATTER WHAT THE CIRCUMSTANCES, AND A TRUE HERO WOULD AVOID COMMITTING IT AT ALL COSTS, UP TO AND INCLUDING LETTING HIMSELF BE KILLED INSTEAD.

Sorry to detonate on you, but why in hell can't you get it? Rape can't be morally justified! It just can't! End of story!


----------



## Laurence (May 25, 2015)

Weeelll it can though can't it? It's fantasy. The whole world could explode if the protagonist didn't rape this woman. The details of how this came to be are not important. But I believe the question has been answered, either way. No, you could not relate to a protagonist after he committed rape even if, by some ridiculous circumstance, it was the lesser of two evils.

EDIT: Not to mention, to achieve such circumstances, the story would probably be shit...


----------



## X Equestris (May 25, 2015)

fantastic said:


> This is why the one who came up with this example said, let say that you have a guarantee nothing will happen to the woman.



There is no guarantee.  Even if such a method existed, verifying that it had been carried out would be nigh impossible in this situation, as you are entirely within said villain's power.  So from the POV of the character, there is no guarantee.

Also, let me note that this "I did it because someone else told me that something worse would happen if I didn't do it." defense is dangerously close to the "I was just following orders" of the Nuremburg defense.  As I said earlier, we are responsible for our own actions.  Nothing more, nothing less.


----------



## Penpilot (May 25, 2015)

fantastic said:


> Well, if torturing can have a justification, I assume most other things could have some sort of reason. But I wonder, do you need a justification for any of those things? What if these things are not unusual in their world or the hero does it for no special reason?



I don't think there are any actions that are done without reason.

As for characters that people follow that have done despicable things. I haven't read the books, but the character Thomas Covenant raped someone and he spawned 10 books published from 1977 to 2013 spanning a period of 36 years.

To echo a bit of what T.A.S. said, characters don't have to be liked. It's not what your character's do, it's how you write and the skill with which you write them that matters. A perfect hero that does nothing but good can be boring as heck to read about. A character that does despicable things can be interesting to read about. I mean think about all those biographies of serial killers that people read.

IMHO part of the reason people read about such people is to gain understanding about someone and some things that are completely foreign to them. It's like reading about things you've never experienced. Yes, it can be icky and give you the creepy-crawlies, but knowledge and understanding isn't gained by shying away from everything that makes you uncomfortable.

BTW. there's one thing that, to me, is worse that any of those thing mentioned, killing a child. Anything with that in it, would take a Herculean effort to get through.


----------



## Reaver (May 25, 2015)

I'm locking this thread before it gets further out of hand. The subject of rape is too inflammatory and hits too close to home to a lot of people.


----------

