Heroes vs. Villains

What makes a hero: A matter of perspective

In my last (long ago) post, I discussed how to create well-rounded characters. In that post, I briefly wrote about the moral code of villains. Well now I am going to expand on this idea, in my newest series: Hero vs Villain. In this series, I will examine the nature of the roles and how to create memorable and engaging heroes and villains.

But first a little about heroes and villains in general. The protagonist is not necessarily the hero, nor the antagonist the villain. You might choose to reverse the roles or eliminate them completely. Many successful pieces lack the classic good vs. evil conflict. They play with the line of moral superiority, making the protagonist and antagonist much the same in tone and action just opposing in goals (general fiction commonly does this). Keep in mind, however, if these types of protagonists do not have some morally good characteristics or at least likability, many (not all) readers will be turned off the to the story. Look to the TV show Dexter for an extreme example of a morally reprehensible but likeable character (obviously you walk a line here, not everyone likes him).

Now with that defined, I will be discussing classic good heroes and evil villains from this point out. Anything I say in regards to these roles is specifically about how to write these archetypes. They are not hard and fast by ANY means and can easy be exploited, stretch, subvert or broken as desired, but be aware that you are doing so. Nothing is worse than wanting to create a heroic character, but the audience reads them like they are jerk.

But now to be on topic (finally), in this first post, I am going to be looking the role of villain and hero and what separates them. The key element in this separation is the matter of perspective. From the point of view of each character, they are the protagonist of their own story and, therefore, the “hero”. However, from the reader’s point of view the matter is clear-cut. It is their point of view that determines the characters' placement in these archetypes. To illustrate this, I will first examine the villain role and the actions which define it for the audience, and then the heroic role.

First then, the villain. Every villain has a goal. Their goal can be selfish, it can be something they think will help the greater good or it can be both. Look at Lex Luthor’s motives for trying to destroy superman for example. Heck maybe their ultimate destination would be for the benefit of mankind. So what then separates them from a hero, who can have the same motivations? Well sometimes it’s the goal itself. Other times, however, it is what the villain is willing to do to reach his goal. That means the villain doesn’t have to have some twisted moral code or be a psychopath that thinks killing puppies is fun. What that means is that sometimes they are willing to commit morally evil acts, even things they might know are wrong, because they think it will ultimately serve a greater purpose. In the end the villain thinks they goal must be reached, must be achieved. It doesn’t matter ultimately whether it’s the goal itself or the villain’s methods that are morally wrong. In the end what matters is that from the perspective of your reader and your hero it’s clear that the goal isn’t morally right and/or that the harm isn’t worth any of the possible good that might come.

At this point, you might ask me, hey Fireheart, does that men the hero can never make a mistake, that they can never make the wrong decision? Wouldn’t he then be perfect? Don’t worry, the hero can commit a morally wrong act, but there are a few crucial differences that will separate him from the villain. The hero’s goal must be morally right (for you and the audience) in the end. Their goal doesn’t have to start that way, but it should end that way. Second the hero must feel some repercussion from his action. He should feel bad about what he has done* and be held accountable by his companions. The readers need to know that he can still be held as the moral center for the story. They need to know that both you and the other characters recognized when the hero has crossed the line. And ultimately they need to finish the novel feeling that even with some slip ups (a couple major or a lot of minors one), they were rooting for the right guy. Obviously you can play with this and subvert the reader’s expectations, but be aware of this as I noted earlier. If you meant for your character be superman, but the reader’s sees him as Lex Luther, you clearly have a problem. For an example of a morally complex, but ultimately heroic character check out Steeljack from Astro City’s Tarnished Angel (which is really just an amazing comic overall btw).

In the end though the hero should most often (but not necessarily always) make the morally right choice. Note the more often he does, the more classically heroic he will read. Walk that line carefully, someone who never makes a mistake will read as a Mary Sue (and so will someone who NEVER gets called on bad decisions).

The next two posts I’ll be discussion what makes a good, compelling hero and what makes a memorable, complex villain.

*Note this doesn’t mean that the hero has to angst over a mistake. It just means he should feel some level of shame and regret and ultimately realize what he did was wrong.