%%USERNAME%%    %%ACCWORDS%% %%ONOFF%% |
 |  This is a continuation of my blogging here at WdC |
| Antagonists This is going to be quick, following on from the discussion of antagonists and protagonists ("20241208 Protagonist and Antagonist"  ).To reiterate: an antagonist is something or someone that stands in the way of the protagonist (hero, whatever). They can be a character, or a group of characters, a creature, a system, natural phenomena, a philosophy (e.g. slavery), whatever – so long as it goes against the protagonist and stops the protagonist from reaching they goal, they are the antagonist. A simple, non-proactive victim of the protagonist is not an antagonist. In general an antagonist drives the story on. Most are written as proactive, while the protagonist is reactive, responding to the situation. The protagonist needs to complete a task and the antagonist stands in their way; maybe the protagonist getting rid of the antagonist is the task. It depends on the story you are writing. The antagonist is often simply put forth as “the bad guy”. But is that fair? An antagonist that is a living creature who is just bad for the sake of being bad is unrealistic and makes for a very 2-dimensional character. Also, a very boring character. The idea is the reader wants to see the protagonist overcome the antagonist, and there needs to be reasons for that, but just because the bad guy is “bad” does not a good story make. Part of the reason is that “good” and “bad” are concepts that do not have the same ideas to all people. What one person thinks is bad another might see as good. This brings me to the idea of this: for an antagonist to be a more believable, more relatable character, and for them to be more complete as a character, they need to not see they are the bad guy. They need to think they are the good guy. In their own story, they are the hero. Okay, first, I do not believe in “good” or “evil.” Asking “why?” can often make the so-called “evil” people seem a little more human. We, as a society, have very rarely asked, “Why?” So, this is coming from that perspective. But making a character just evil for the sake of evil is boring and really hard to write well. They need to believe what they are doing is the right thing for them. A creature is easy – they are just finding food or doing what comes naturally, or defending themselves or their young. They are not just hunting humans for “reasons.” Think of the well-developed creatures – the shark in Jaws was hungry and developed a taste for human; the giant snake in Megaconda was defending its home; the bigfoot creatures in Devolution were defending their home while also terrified following a volcanic eruption. It makes the stories so much easier to get lost in, even a bad film like Megaconda. With people, there should be a reason why the person is bad. Or, again, they might not see themselves as bad. They need the same sort of motivation as the protagonist, and a motivation maybe just as strong (sometimes stronger). Exaggerated portrayals of evil are more a parody than anything else. A desire for power is fine. Why? Is it because they were told they were useless? Or is it because they honestly think they are the best thing to happen to a place? While these might not come up in the story, they do need to be there in the characterisation. About the only thing that does not do this is a demonic supernatural/spiritual entity. They can be pure evil. But I don’t believe in them in the real world, either, so they are fine and dandy. Still, they need to be summoned to this plane of existence… Anyway, that’s my brief overview of the antagonist of a story. |
View Portfolio
Visit Notebook
Send Gift Points
Awards
Badges
Send Email
Community Newsfeed
General Discussion
Sponsored Items
Book of Trinkets
Static Items
Books
Groups
Interactive Stories
Audio
Campfire Creatives
Community Notes
Crossword Puzzles
Documents
Folders
Images
In & Outs
Madlibs
Photo Albums
Polls
Product Reviews
Quizzes
Survey Forms
Web Pages
Word Searches
