Anyone have any good tales or examples of anti-heros or the concept of the anti-villian?

[BearBear]

If an anti-hero is the protagonist conspicuously lacking in heroic qualities, then the anti-villian is the antagonist who means well?

I don't believe in absolute good or evil. In my reckoning no good deed is righteous from every angle, thus there is no realistic hero that is completely without sin and so you could consider no villian without redemptive qualities.

Thanos was by every act portrayed as criminally insane and without morals or remorse but ultimately his main motivation was to help the universe. I think he's more like an anti-villian from certain angles.

I like to mentally try to consider the Empire in Star Wars as a peacekeeper, setting aside their methods, those worlds out of their reach are wretched places of depravity and hardship, oppressed not by imperial forces but gangland pirates who are both unscrupulous and remorseless. So even Darth Vador could be thought of as an anti-hero from the perspective of those protected from thieves and the worst horrors of the universe.

Who are your favorite anti-heros or do you consider any so called villians to be redeemable in some light?

 

[pmmg]

I generally don't have any admiration for anti-heros, but there are plenty of good ones. Conan is the first one that comes to mind, and I feel he has been an influence on my writing. Most of the Clint Eastwood characters are as well, I think it is the rider with no name. Elric was another, he also influences my writing.

 

[BearBear]

Clint Eastwood

I really want to go watch those old westerns again now.

 

[pmmg]

For those who dont know, those are Fistful of Dollars, a few dollars more, the good the bad and the ugly, and you can probably throw unforgiven in there, as Eastwoods character never really has a solid name. If you start with the outlaw Jose wales, you could even call that the start...they may all be jose wales under different names. Who knows. Just good movies.

 

[Rosemary Tea]

The definition of an anti-hero is a protagonist who isn't a good guy. If he's seen as a good guy from whoever's viewpoint is central to the story, he isn't an anti-hero. Darth Vader would not be an anti-hero to the people he's protecting from thieves. He would simply be a hero.

For it to be an anti-hero story, there has to be no realistic way anyone can think, "But wait, he's really a good guy!" Even if the character has clear motivations.

Tom Ripley in The Talented Mr. Ripley is a perfect example of an anti-hero. He has no redeeming qualities. Even before he starts killing, he's shown to be a sociopath (more obviously in the book than in the movie). But he's the protagonist of the story. The police who are on his trail are his antagonists, but they're the ones who are doing the right thing.

 

[BearBear]

Oh I see. What if the "hero" to some is a villian to others? Where the some and the others are not directly at odds in general? Like put a rebel and a imperial citizen in the same room, where the citizen has the propaganda backed brainwashing that Vador is a hero and the rebel is, well you know. They may have wildly varying viewpoints on Vador but perhaps neither would even have a purpose or civilized existence without him. I'm not sure how clear this is, sorry about that if it's not.

One idea I'm always mulling over in my head is the bubling hero that actually causes more trouble then they're worth and the misunderstood villian that may be universally hated but is actually helping. This comes back to the notion that a good deed is never universally good. It goes along with neutral alignment in D&D where you may save a kingdom from orcs, then help the orcs protect their homeland from that same kingdom. Clearly you could be seen as a hero and a villian from different viewpoints, but you're just on a moral level that's hard to parse.

 

[Rosemary Tea]

Oh I see. What if the "hero" to some is a villian to others? Where the some and the others are not directly at odds in general? Like put a rebel and a imperial citizen in the same room, where the citizen has the propaganda backed brainwashing that Vador is a hero and the rebel is, well you know. They may have wildly varying viewpoints on Vador but perhaps neither would even have a purpose or civilized existence without him. I'm not sure how clear this is, sorry about that if it's not.

One idea I'm always mulling over in my head is the bubling hero that actually causes more trouble then they're worth and the misunderstood villian that may be universally hated but is actually helping. This comes back to the notion that a good deed is never universally good. It goes along with neutral alignment in D&D where you may save a kingdom from orcs, then help the orcs protect their homeland from that same kingdom. Clearly you could be seen as a hero and a villian from different viewpoints, but you're just on a moral level that's hard to parse.

That's a case of complex characters, not anti-heroes.

Truly good characterization is complex. The villain isn't all bad. The hero isn't all good. Both of them have mixed motives. Both of them get mixed results.

A true anti-hero is someone like Tom Ripley, who has no motivation beyond his own emotions and self preservation. His first murder is a crime of passion, the others are to cover up his previous crimes. In the book, he's also committing other crimes--before he even thinks of murder, he's running a mail scam bilking people out of their life savings. Not a good guy by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[ThinkerX]

I get into this a bit in my 'Empire' series. The second book mostly takes place in the imperial palace, whose halls are roamed by bands of raucous knights.

On the one hand, these knights are Bonafide heroes of the Traag War - they went toe to toe with demons and unholy abominations and (somehow) came out on top, or at least survived.

On the other hand, the behavior of these knights is atrocious. Bullying, drunken duels, casual rape, schemes for power - most of them do all that and more. (Despite this, they are pursued by multiple wealthy women of common origins seeking to marry into the nobility.

 

[pmmg]

The definition of an anti-hero is a protagonist who isn't a good guy.

That may be an acceptable definition, but I suspect there would be some alternate ones that go with it. An Anti-Hero is just a hero who lacks heroic qualities, such as willing to engage in immoral behavior, or choosing not to follow the rules. Many Anti-Hero's may not exactly be good guys, but they are not precluded from being such. Most anti-hero's I can think of, do pursue things for the greater good, though maybe for selfish or less than noble reasons.

 

[Queshire]

Anti-heroes as protagonists who are not good guys might be the most common take on the trope it's not the only one. Bilbo Baggins is an antihero as is Rincewind from Discworld.

 

[BearBear]

On the other hand, the behavior of these knights is atrocious. Bullying, drunken duels, casual rape, schemes for power - most of them do all that and more.

Yes, this is a troublesome aspect of knight lore.

 

[pmmg]

Ill never look at Bilbo the same again. He needs a poncho and a cigarillo.

 

[Prince of Spires]

Google has given me the following definition of anti-hero:

a central character in a story, film, or drama who lacks conventional heroic attributes:

I'll stick to that for this topic. With that in mind, Bilbo is definitely not an anti-hero. He's not actively heroic as in charging forward into battle on page one, but he's friendly and kind and helps his friends. He shows pity by not killing Golem, he choses to give up his portion of the treasure (and risk his own life in doing so) to end a war by stealing the arkenstone. He's definitely heroic. Rincewind probably is an anti-hero.

For anti-villains, probably read A Game of Thrones. Pretty much everyone is a good guy from their own perspective, and a horrible person from the other guys perspective.

 

[claimerofheroes]

What about Travis Bickle from Scorsese's Taxi Driver? He's a fairly good example of an anti-hero.

 

[Finchbearer]

If an anti-hero is the protagonist conspicuously lacking in heroic qualities, then the anti-villian is the antagonist who means well?

I don't believe in absolute good or evil. In my reckoning no good deed is righteous from every angle, thus there is no realistic hero that is completely without sin and so you could consider no villian without redemptive qualities.

Thanos was by every act portrayed as criminally insane and without morals or remorse but ultimately his main motivation was to help the universe. I think he's more like an anti-villian from certain angles.

I like to mentally try to consider the Empire in Star Wars as a peacekeeper, setting aside their methods, those worlds out of their reach are wretched places of depravity and hardship, oppressed not by imperial forces but gangland pirates who are both unscrupulous and remorseless. So even Darth Vador could be thought of as an anti-hero from the perspective of those protected from thieves and the worst horrors of the universe.

Who are your favorite anti-heros or do you consider any so called villians to be redeemable in some light?

Not fantasy, but Becky from Vanity Fair is my favourite ‘anti-villain’. She’s complex and interesting, just like we all are, without the black and white ‘good and bad’ thing that so many characters are often made up of. I also think female characters also have really good scope for being an anti-villain, because so often women are perceived as either innocent or evil, with rarely an in between, because maybe it’s difficult to write a likeable female character that has fundamental flaws?! So many authors forget the complexities to female nature *ahem* Charles Dickens I’m looking at you…

I also think that with writing you can choose to gradually introduce more depth to a character as the story progresses, so just as first impressions in real life can lead us to conclude whether we like someone or not, it can be done just the same in writing where maybe you can change the readers mind on a character - make them question whether a character is actually a villain or not. Make the reader question their own moral compass. For fantasy writing looking at ‘the violence paradox’ might be useful.

 

[Finchbearer]

If an anti-hero is the protagonist conspicuously lacking in heroic qualities, then the anti-villian is the antagonist who means well?

I don't believe in absolute good or evil. In my reckoning no good deed is righteous from every angle, thus there is no realistic hero that is completely without sin and so you could consider no villian without redemptive qualities.

Thanos was by every act portrayed as criminally insane and without morals or remorse but ultimately his main motivation was to help the universe. I think he's more like an anti-villian from certain angles.

I like to mentally try to consider the Empire in Star Wars as a peacekeeper, setting aside their methods, those worlds out of their reach are wretched places of depravity and hardship, oppressed not by imperial forces but gangland pirates who are both unscrupulous and remorseless. So even Darth Vador could be thought of as an anti-hero from the perspective of those protected from thieves and the worst horrors of the universe.

Who are your favorite anti-heros or do you consider any so called villians to be redeemable in some light?

In terms of anti-hero’s Bilbo is the OG anti-hero. He’s a 4ft Hobbit from The Shire who likes to eat a lot of apples and such and sit in his little Hobbit hole, and yet he is the answer to everyone’s problem…he is the unlikely hero which to me is the definition of an anti-hero.

 

[BearBear]

I took anti-hero to be more like this, a hero without heroic attributes, not necessarily one that's morally corrupt or otherwise nefarious. Is that overstepping the definition and that just makes them still a hero even without heroic attributes?

 

[Finchbearer]

I took anti-hero to be more like this, a hero without heroic attributes, not necessarily one that's morally corrupt or otherwise nefarious. Is that overstepping the definition and that just makes them still a hero even without heroic attributes?

I don’t think Bilbo has heroic attributes, he lacks (a lot of) courage, willpower (which is why he hands Frodo the ring or else he’d succumb to greed and power), battle prowess and physical strength, so to me he lacks heroic qualities but yet is still our ‘hero’ therefore he’s an anti-hero?