TheCrystallineEntity
Istar
^Indeed. I'll be readily looking for it. Perspective flips often intrigue me.
Well, having read the amount of HP fanfiction that I have, if that was her motivation it certainly did not reach everyone. But really, Voldemort is who he is because Harry Potter is a children's book series at heart. Yes, the latter books were a bit more mature as the readers grew a bit more mature but it started as a children's book series and the characters basically remained as children's book characters. That's why they're all one-dimensional. Except Ron.
^like what's happened with Snape and Draco, you mean? But I think that's more because they were played by attractive actors in the movies...^Maybe J K Rowling was worried about rabid fans going on about how 'Tom' is not a villain and not to blame for his actions'?
Snape was not a villain. A terrible teacher, a jealous berk, an unlikable dillyweed, yes. Villain, no. I'd say he even falls into the line of hero more than anti-hero. Snape was pretty complex, actually. Probably the other exception, together with Ron. But for the most part, the characters of Harry Potter do not have much depth. Dumbledore falls deep (heh) within that category.^like what's happened with Snape and Draco, you mean? But I think that's more because they were played by attractive actors in the movies...
Sincere question: Have you read the books yourself?
Whenever I see people characterize children's books as cardboard and simplistic due to being childrens books, I die a little inside.
I remember watching He-Man when I was a kid and liking the Merman character. I don't know why I liked him. It had something to do with him sometimes helping Skeletor and sometimes helping He-Man. I don't know why that appealed to me. I guess I liked that Merman did what was best for Merman. He was manipulated by both sides really.
In the case of this Redcloak character, perhaps it's an instance of the readers and writer suggesting that it's a matter of perspective if a character is good or evil. If a character is getting any sort of positive reaction, then I think the writer is doing their job. And from what I gathered Order of the Stick is a comedic parody so it's not really intended to be serious.
In this case I'd say, yeah, feel free to hate him. But if other readers like him, then more power to them.
I don't so much mind sympathetic villains as long as they are not cast as the main villain. I usually like to have a villain I can love to hate.
I didn't mean to say we can't hate the villains, I was trying to point out a difference between being sympathetic - that is, having a feeling of rooting for the villain versus simply understanding their motivation as being something other than "a will to evil". The genius of GOT is close to Breaking Bad's genius, where we slowly descend into an ambivalent sympathy with the protagonist. So yes, your point is right on, that it can become difficult to identify with the protagonist if they seem too "dirty" by their past actions.Hi Scribble,
I disagree slightly with your idea that in grimdark where all the guys have stories / reasons for being who they are, we can't still hate the villains. I can still loathe and despise them and want them to come to a sticky end. That's not the danger of grimdark in my view. The actual danger is you might not be able to support the hero. GOT has come perilously close to this with every "good guy" either killed off or contaminated in some way and I don't really want any of them to win. I'm fairly much at the stage of shouting "A plague on both your houses" and going elsewhere.
Cheers, Greg.
Hi Scribble,
I disagree slightly with your idea that in grimdark where all the guys have stories / reasons for being who they are, we can't still hate the villains. I can still loathe and despise them and want them to come to a sticky end. That's not the danger of grimdark in my view. The actual danger is you might not be able to support the hero. GOT has come perilously close to this with every "good guy" either killed off or contaminated in some way and I don't really want any of them to win. I'm fairly much at the stage of shouting "A plague on both your houses" and going elsewhere.
Cheers, Greg.
Am I the only one who's always found SoIaF to be pretty clear-cut on its good guys and its bad guys? The bad guys are well fleshed out and humanised, but they're still straight-up selfish users. The good guys are far from perfect paragons, but they're still clearly the people who care and try to be good. There's a handful of people genuinely travelling between the two but I'd say they're a minority, and a few faked shots aside, everyone set up as a protagonist in book 1 remains one and vice-versa.
At least, that's how I see it.
"This is the situation and now you can like or dislike whatever characters that applies to you in a positive or negative way. I'm not going to force it down your throat. You decide for yourself who are your heroes and why."