Some Tips for Creating Well-Rounded Villains

Yesterday I talked about characters in general. Today, I'm going to expand on what makes a villain work.
By the way, for anyone who didn't read the last post (I don't know why you didn't; you should!), the characters, Kinlar and Keldrin, that I reference, are from an old story that I wrote about six years ago.


So, what makes a good villain?


1. Motivation. No one does anything for nothing. Keldrin joined the sorcerer, and the only reason he did so was because he was ... evil. 
There was very little motivation. He would most likely have done it whether Kinlar had been around or not. There should always, always be some reason villains do what they do.


2. A range of human emotions. Keldrin had jealousy, fear, and hatred. He had no emotions besides these; no remorse, uncertainty, or longing.


3. He (or she) must believe that what he is doing is right for either himself or everyone. Either your villain must believe that he is above the law and can do whatever he wants; or else he thinks that what he is doing is best for everyone. 
And I don't mean in that annoying, patronizing way that authors will do where they sort of do the sarcastic aside: 
'Of course he was doing it for the greater benefit! Greg was firmly convinced that poisoning all the dogs would be best for everyone. Why couldn't anyone see that?'
I mean where he firmly believes that whatever it is, he is in the right. 
He has to have reasons (of course the wrong reasons) that he's thought out and convictions that he holds to.


4. He must believe that the ends justify the means, but he shouldn't necessarily like the means. I don't know about you, but I'm tired of villains who get kicks out of evil. I'm not saying that they should dislike being cruel, but it really is boring when villains seem to forget their goal and instead focus on being nasty for no reason.


5. He should have at least one moment of almost choosing right over wrong. Perhaps I should say that he has to have an inner struggle. Especially if he sees the protagonist doing the right thing despite the trouble it causes him. He should wonder, at least for a little while, what it is that motivates the hero. He should maybe remember back when he himself wasn't evil. Then, the next time the chance presents itself, he should struggle against doing the right thing.
Now, the way he goes will depend on your villain. If you intend to redeem him by the end, then perhaps he should choose the right thing ... just this once. Not necessarily, but possibly. Even if it's not a positive act, such as helping a beggar; maybe it's just not doing something wrong. Maybe he decides not to poison the king, or he lets one of his enemies go free.
If he's going to be evil to the end, then he will probably end up choosing evil over good, sending him on a further downward spiral that will result in his destruction at the end. Or he might choose the right thing, but when the consequences are negative he quickly goes back to the security of his evil.


6. They should be at least of average intelligence. One thing that gets my goat is how overtly stupid villains usually are. 
How in the world (that they plan to utterly dominate) did they ever get in the position they're in if everything they do is obviously calculated to overthrow their own regime? Never mind the hero destroying them; they should have destroyed themselves long ago. Cackling evilly and revealing your evil plans will never get you to the place you want to be. Here's an example of a typical villain's List of Things to Do: 1. Conquer the world. 2. Destroy the good guys. 3. Enjoy it.
Conquer the world. Yep, that's a pretty broad category. They don't even have an idea of how they're going to do that. I guess they just figure that being fearsome and treating their own henchmen bad will cause everything to fall into place.
Your villain should have a set and definite plan for how he's going to get what he wants, and it should either be a plan that would probably work out if the hero didn't throw a wrench into it, or it should be the 'perfect crime' sort of scenario, where everything should have worked, but, because of the very nature of evil, no matter how perfect it is it's doomed to failure.



So, I hope this was helpful and entertaining! If there's anything I missed, please let me know in the comments box :)

Don't Tell Me He's Smart!

Recently I re-read the first long fantasy I ever wrote, The War for Erasthinia. It was probably around twenty thousand words. I was ... fifteen, I think.
One thing I noticed about it was my main character. Throughout the entire book we're being told that he's really smart. He's put in charge of the army at the age of seventeen, the king listens to him, etc, etc. He's also incredibly humble and brave and the best sword-fighter ever (except for his uncle who taught him how to sword fight, of course).
But, despite all the telling of how smart he is, what I actually showed was that he was pretty stupid. He did quite a few things that make you wonder how he even made it to the age of seventeen, much less became the commander of the whole bloomin' army.
So I was wondering, why is that? How come you can say something in a story until you're blue in the face, yet be contradicting yourself all along?
I think it's because I wasn't really interested in the character; I was just interested in the story. Kinlar had to become the commander, and to do so he had to be so smart, skilled, brave, and just generally amazing, that everyone else who might have been qualified were passed over in favor of him.
But then I made him act stupid in order for him to be captured. Of course, I didn't realize he was being stupid; I wasn't even paying attention! All that mattered was that The Plot went the way I wanted it to. The characters weren't part of the plot; they were just along for the ride.

I can't say that I've learned to master character completely over the years, but I have learned a few things.

1. Show, show, show! We've all heard this a million times, but showing really is better than telling; and most especially (I would say) when it comes to characters.
It can be difficult to understand what showing means; to me, I have to really take the time, because whenever I just think about showing instead of laying everything out for the reader I have a hard time imagining how to do it. I have to actually be writing.
I often catch myself describing something that I should be showing through a character's actions, and then I'll either change it or leave myself a note and come back to it later.

2. Know your characters strengths and weaknesses. In The War for Erasthinia, Kinlar didn't have any weaknesses whatsoever in my own mind. He was pretty much perfect.
When he got angry, it was at the man who betrayed his soldiers; he was so humble that all the adulation heaped on him did nothing to affect him; he was such an amazing sword fighter that even after being in prison for a month or more he was able to defeat a guy who had the sorcerer's magic sword fighting power in him. He had absolutely no flaws whatsoever.
And so he ended up being super boring. He needed a balance of both good and bad; if he was brave, he needed to be hot headed. If he was smart, and everyone was always telling him so, he needed to become over-confident and make a stupid mistake. If he was kind to his men, he needed to be too lenient to someone who deserved a heavy hand to keep him in line.
Every strength must be balanced by a weakness. Which brings me to my next point.

3. Know your villain's strengths and weaknesses, too. In my novel, Kinlar only had one enemy (besides the sorcerer). Everyone just loved his socks off except for this one guy, Keldrin. Keldrin was bad, through and through. I made sure to let everyone reading the novel know that he was a no account, nasty, selfish, jealous dude.
Throughout the book, he sneers at Kinlar, threatens him, ignores him, and then goes off and betrays him. He has absolutely no remorse; no moments when he wavers between right and wrong; and no qualms about bringing his whole country down to the ground, even if he gets very little or nothing out of it. Not only that, but he stinks at just about everything. He's no good at sword fighting, he's not very smart, he's a coward who stays as far away from the fighting as possible, and he's only tolerably good at archery (despite having trained under the same tutors as the prince).
And guess what? His being so obvious made him just as boring as Kinlar.
The things that make a villain really work are,

• 1) Motivation. 
• 2) A range of human emotions. 
• 3) He (or she) must believe that what he is doing is right for either himself or everyone. 
• 4) He must believe that the ends justify the means, but he shouldn't necessarily like the means. 
• 5) He should have at least one moment of almost choosing right over wrong. 
• 6) He should be at least of average intelligence.

In my next post, we'll look at these points in detail.

4. Make your plot and characters work together. If something is a convenient coincidence, it probably shouldn't be there. Coincidences are evidence of characters serving the plot. In my current novel, the main character and the villain meet for the first time in a seemingly random way; but in reality, the villain had set it up on purpose.
If something happens, it should be something in character for the characters, and it should be something that makes sense plotwise.
In The War for Erasthinia, Kinlar somehow escapes from the sorcerer's island on one of the sorcerer's ships. The explanation given is very weak; but I needed him to escape at that time, because the story was more important than the story making sense.

5. Your story will be much better if you just tell it. There are plenty of Christian books that I've read that I'd never read again.
There are other Christian books that I've liked enough to read again, but have skipped large portions in the re-read.
The first group are just sermons disguised as story; the second group is comprised of books where the author has a good story and good characters, but once in a while lets the message overwhelm them.
I once read a series of books where each one was called A Journey in ... where it was basically a theology book with a bit of story to give it more interest. The theology was good, and these weren't exactly supposed to be novels. The characters had conversations and debates on whatever the theme of that book was, and at the end came to a conclusion; and that was fine (though definitely not 'read again' material).
But it seems like a lot of books that claim to be exciting novels are really about the same as that series; the story comes second to the agenda, the characters are not developed, and both plot and characters serve the ultimate purpose of bringing us to whatever point the author wants to make.
People don't like being lectured. They like reading a good story where the message isn't in their face. So just tell the story. Your readers will thank you.

6. Don't be obvious.
I'm not telling you to be obscure. That's just as bad. But don't throw the villain's nastiness or the hero's awesomeness in our faces. Let us figure it out from the story.
In cowboy movies, everyone knows immediately who the bad guy is because the music turns sinister, we see a close up shot of a nasty smile and cold eyes, and he starts making trouble the second he's on screen. We know the hero because there's a beautiful girl who smiles at him, and he's handsome, and right away he starts being amazing.
Not every hero/heroine should be the epitome of beauty, and the villain shouldn't right off the bat repulse everyone except for the other equally evil (but less important) bad guys who work for him.
Also, if someone dislikes your main character, that shouldn't automatically put him/her on the bad guy's side. Maybe he has a legitimate reason for not liking your amazing, perfect hero; or maybe he's been lied to. There are a lot of possibilities, so why just stick with the boring one?

7. Don't flaunt your idea's uniqueness. If there's one thing that annoys me, it's this: in the middle of a book, typically fantasy, the author will either break in with narration or have one of the characters say something about how different this book is. Something like, "Now fairies are often regarded as cute little pixies with wings; but in reality, they are far more dangerous than the tales would have us believe."
For me, that destroys the credibility of a book. That's just as bad as any other kind of telling. Why do they feel the need to jerk us out of the story, just to point out that fairies aren't really like we think they are? How about you show us that? And don't show it by having a character yell,
"Wow! I always thought that fairies were cute little pixies with wings! Apparently they're far more dangerous than the tales would have us believe! RUN!"
Show it by being subtle. Or maybe don't call them fairies, since the word has so many connotations that you might not want to have attached to your totally unique dangerous beings.
Nothing will drive me further away from a book than being told that it's breaking the mold and that (by implication) all the books where fairies are cute little pixies with wings are boring and not worth my time. Maybe they are, but I don't need to be hit over the head with the author's opinion on that.
The best stories are those that are focused, unassuming, and self-confident enough to trust the reader to figure things out. If your story is unique, then we'll be happy to acknowledge that. But if you tell us it is, then we might just put the book down and go read something better.
Plus, it just makes you look desperate. "My story is amazing! I have ideas in here that no one's ever thought of before! I'm really thinking out of the box on this one! Please read it! It's so unique!"
Now, of course, if it's a comedy then that might be different. In the 'Ella Enchanted' movie, there are some genuinely funny references to well known fairy tales that are sort of turned on their heads.
But don't do it if you're trying to be serious.

Well, I hope that you enjoyed this! Now go write a unique story where Hansel and Gretel aren't the shivering, scared children that we've always heard about, but are instead fearsome warriors ...

Emotions in Fiction

First off, thanks to Mary for this post, which inspired me to write my own post about the emotions we give our characters.
I've read very few stories, short or novel-length, where emotions are realistic and make you empathize with the character. Either you've got the super-dramatic stories, where you're surprised the book doesn't come with it's own waterproof jacket to protect it from the tears (of the characters), or else they swing over to the left and the characters are unrealistically mature and level-headed, even in the midst of terrible tragedy.
So, how are we to make our characters have emotions that actually make the reader sympathize with them? Obviously, the old adage 'Write what you know', won't work in situations where you're writing about someone whose whole family has just been killed. Most of us haven't gone through that (I hope!). So, where do we look to find how our character would respond?
I think, first of all, we have to kind of get a feel for the character. Is he usually very quiet and reserved? Or is he constantly in the middle of the action, giving brave speeches and fighting valiantly? Does he say a whole lot in a few words, or is he dramatic and overblown? Even Aragorn wept when Boromir died, and Aragorn is a stern, fairly silent man.
Also, we can be fairly certain that the emotions portrayed in novels and TV shows are unrealistic in the extreme. Take the Little House on the Prairie episodes. I've seen very few that don't make me feel like I've just been spoon fed a whole bottle of over-sweetened syrup. Everything is calculated to manipulate the viewer into sympathizing, but usually I just go, "Oh, good grief! Give me a break! That is so unrealistic!"
In one of the episodes, Laura gives birth to a boy. Not long afterwards, the baby becomes sick, and Doc Baker (one of my favorite characters on the show usually) tries to save him. When the baby dies, Laura becomes angry with the Doc, and the Doc begins to believe that he's of no use and packs his bag to leave Walnut Grove. All the angst and silly overacting is just too much. And then, of course, the Doc is convinced to stay after he saves the life of some other person. Deus ex machina is all well and good at times, but in Little House, it's done just about every time. And another thing is the theme music, which is perfectly fine at the beginning of the episode, but just when it comes to the most 'intense and joyful' moment, that moment when tears of joy come into the character's eyes and they run dramatically (it should be in slow motion to heighten the drama) towards someone else, and the orchestra is playing the variation of the theme music, you just kind of groan like you've eaten too much candy.
I certainly don't want my characters to imitate movie characters.
I think the safest way to do emotions are to kind of think a while about what it would be like if such-and-such happened to you that is happening to so-and-so in your story. Of course, it makes a difference if the character is male or female. A woman is more likely to cry, while a man gives vent to his grief in words or silence perhaps. But that doesn't mean none of your men can cry, or that none of your women can sort of keep it in and shed only a few tears. But you have to make sure that the reader knows how deep the sorrow is through the thoughts of the character. I hate referencing my own work, since it makes me feel as though I'm holding it up as the greatest thing ever, but I will anyways.
I just wrote short story called 'Amira', and it was one of those stories that I like a whole lot. You can read it here. There are spoilers in the next paragraph, just to warn you.

 I have told it from the first person point of view, and as much as possible I've tried to keep it from getting sappy.
So, how did I do it? First, I had been mulling over the story in my mind for several days. I know a lot of people work better by putting it in an outline, but I think about things for a long time before I actually start writing it. It was one of those stories that seemed to spring almost fully written from my fingers to the computer screen.
But how do I write the emotions of someone whose husband is dying, whose parents have died (one in a terrible way), and who is about to die herself? I've never experienced any of those things myself, so I basically had to try to experience them through the MC. So there are flashbacks and a lot of her thoughts.
Another thing I was able to draw on was a book I'd read: 'Lords of the Earth'. It was a missionary story about these tribes in Papua New Guinea, I believe, where the women were treated horribly. They were not allowed to participate in the religion of the tribes, and their husbands were basically allowed to just do whatever they wanted to them. There were these temples that a man could run to, and, if he reached one in time, even his enemies would not touch him. But, if a woman tried to escape from her enemies by going there, her own tribesmen would kill her. The suicide rate for women was extremely high because they were so oppressed. So, that gave me a good starting place as well.
You can well imagine that in the place where 'Amira' is set, female suicide is pretty high. Who would want their husband to die first in a place like that?
Bother, I feel like I'm not being very clear here. I hope this isn't a waste of my time and yours, because I wonder if I've actually said anything that's worth reading, or if it's basically been an unintelligible post. If it has been, then I ask pardon in advance.
So, basically, we're back to the starting point, which is: make your characters' emotions realistic. Try to get into their shoes and see how they (or most anybody, really) would respond to something. It's often the character's thoughts, not their words aloud, that speak the most about what they are feeling at the moment. This is all the easier if writing in first person, but there are difficulties with that POV as well. Anyways, hope this helped. The next post will be about something easier for me to write about: the Joy Light.