I mentioned in my recent talk about European starlings that I wanted to create an unwitting villain..I’ve always preferred antagonism to be nuanced because classic villains can be… well… boring. Plus, nuanced antagonism lends to a depth of character that I personally appreciate.
I looked to build this level of depth into my Drifting Amalgams series. My challenge? How does one believably portray an ordinary person doing a reasonable thing that could end the world?
Rather watch a video?
Check out the YouTube version of this blog post.
Make the Villain Sympathetic
In my experience, if an antagonist is sympathetic, I’m much more likely to perceive them as being an ordinary person doing an unfortunate thing vs. being a bad person. However, in the traditional narratives I’ve been exposed to, the protagonist is in the spotlight, and their perspective becomes gospel.
While it makes sense for the protagonist to be the focus, this approach leads to the audience perceiving the narrative from the protagonist’s point of view only. If the protagonist perceives an event as being bad, the audience will too. If the adversary is presented in terms of their “evil” deed and how it affects the protagonist, how can the audience think of the evildoer as a good person?
My solution for this is to write from the perspective of the person causing the main conflict. I try to make their spotlight shine just as brightly as the would-be protagonist.
To be clear, I don’t focus on explaining why the “bad” thing is being done; instead, I present the antagonist as a fully realized character with needs, wants, and purpose. An everyday person with everyday life choices. Giving them dimension and the ability to be liked or disliked for who they are–rather than one activity they participate in–means that I can create a story that lets the reader decide who they’re rooting for.
Create Character Witnesses for the Villain
I like to use this approach to support the previous point of creating a sympathetic character. As a narrator, I can share a character’s point of view relentlessly but still not convince the reader that they are a complex individual who is neither all good nor all bad.
But, maybe another, trusted, character could convince the reader. A character witness, if you will. Like in US courts, the character witnesses in my novels attest to the moral nature and mindset of the antagonist in question. As part of my writing process, I think about what everyday kindnesses other characters could experience during their interactions with the antagonist and stay mindful to include references to those kindnesses throughout the narrative.
Consequently, even when I’m not considered to be the most trustworthy narrator, a trusted character within the novel can still speak to the antagonist’s mentality.
Make the Protagonist Complicit in Villain’s Deeds
Sometimes, when creating a non-evil villain, writers will envisage an evildoer who isn’t responsible for their evil actions. I can appreciate that approach, but it doesn’t feel aligned with what I want to do with the sturnovula.
I didn’t want to fully remove the sturnovula’s agency by creating a situation where they couldn’t possibly avoid their fate. However, I did still want them to be unwitting antagonists, so I opted to make the protagonists complicit in creating their own problem.
While the antagonist has a choice, the protagonist created the situation that forces a choice to be made. This method protects the antagonist from villainy status because they would never have become a villain if not put in an untenable situation by the hero of the story.
Show That the Villain’s Survival is at Stake
This is a simple one. As I mentioned when discussing fictionalizing species, survival is one of the strongest instincts for most living creatures. My ability to show that the sturnovula chose conflict in order to survive means that I don’t have to justify their choice. Our own innate desire to survive justifies their choice for me.
Make the Villain Ignorant of the Full Situation
“Ignorance is no excuse”
Fair.
Normally, I’d say ignorance is an easy out for creating a non-evil villain.
But… What if there is no possible way the antagonist could have known what they were doing? What if their intelligence or maturity were such that they were incapable of understanding? What if, for instance, they were a child?
If we lived in a world that had many types of peoples who interact with one another on multiple planets, I imagine that diversity of thought and civilization would abound. So,.I built a world where people are at different levels of development. Some are stone age. Some are beyond our current technological age.
And in this world that doesn’t bother with Star Trek “prime directive” rules, I think it’s reasonable to have a less advanced civilization blunder into conflict.
The sturnovula build was ripe for stumbling into conflict in this world, so, when we first meet them, they are transitioning from a Mesolithic to a Neolithic age. And when they encounter space-faring peoples, calamity ensues.
And that, in the nutshell, is the sturnovula as a non-evil villain.
Until next time, keep creating.
Note from Casey: While I do not reference this resource in my blog post, I did find the following tips for creating antagonists who are not villains interesting. If you’re still looking for thoughts on this topic, you may find this post helpful.
Comentários