Any good strategies for writing evil characters?

[Amber Eyes]

So, My character right now is basically...me with magic powers. Her reactions are mine, her apperance is based on mine, and she's tempermental and a big freakin baby just like me. Since this is my first try at writing anything other than monologues for theatre class, I figured starting out with a character I understood would be easy.

Here's the problem. I'm getting bored with it. I'm wanting to play with an evil side for a while (once I get her story to that point). I've got up to the point that she kinda flips out and goes rogue figured out. I'm just a bit worried that I won't be able to write the characer well once she makes the switch. Any tips or tricks for creating an alternate personality? What strategies do you use when you first create a new character (more specifically one that is completely your opposite)? Thanks in advance for any suggestions!

[Visla Eraclaire]

I think the most important part of writing an "evil" character is establishing their moral framework. People who are just incurably insane or complete monsters rarely make for compelling villains. The best sort of evil doesn't see itself as such.

First, establish a goal, something your character wants enough to commit acts that other people would consider unthinkable. Think as your character and justify this to yourself. Your character needs to be able to look in the mirror and say that what they're doing may not be "right" but it's justified. Don't worry if it's a little strained, because these sorts of justifications usually are. Just make sure there's enough pathos behind it that you could buy into it over time.

Second, establish some standards. Even evil has standards, at least the interesting kind. What are you not willing to do? What normal moral beliefs does your character still hold? This doesn't mean you have to be the sort of honor-bound antagonist that never lies or respects people even as he kills them, but there should at least be something decent left that your reader can continue to identify with.

Finally, and I think most importantly, don't plan too far ahead. When you're experimenting with a new personality, you need to let yourself internalize it. Don't plot out threads from beginning to end like you do with a character you're certain of. Let reactions surprise you. Set up situations and then genuinely question how your character would react to them. You're going to have to design things at some level just to keep the narrative moving, but don't rule out taking a thread in an unexpected direction if you get the sense your character might derail your plan.

Another thing that occurs to me is that you shouldn't try to go for a complete opposite, unless you're really set on that idea. Visla and I have a few things in common, but others very different. I think it strikes a good balance. Common mannerisms and speaking style help me identify with her, but opposed alignments (Visla is Chaotic Neutral/Evil and I'm Lawful Neutral/Good) keep things fresh.

[Esmerelda]

Well, for Calbrena, my Alt, I'm developing it as I go. She's really my only true evil character at the moment. If there's a certain type of evil that's been researched really well, then get a few books on the subject and read. That's what I'm doing for Nightstalker, I actually found a book that documents the mind control techniques, both modern and ancient, that the Japanese Ninja use, have used, and are likely to use in the future.

For Destrudo's father, Shadowlord, he's basically the bogeyman on steroids, feeding off your emotions and thoughts, turning all that you are against you.

The Seven Deadly Sins, Calbrena's brothers and sisters, their easy, just play up the nature of their powers. As for their father, he's a tactician, planning several moves into the future, manipulating and controlling events to his favor.

At least, that's how I do evil characters.

[Amber Eyes]

Thanks guys! Still a bit worried about the execution, but this will definatly help me get started. I gues you could say she's going to be the crazy kind of evil, but not a full on nutcase. She's kind of going from the innocent little girl in the background, to seeing firsthand what cruelty even the "good" guys are capable of. That mixed with losing someone very close to her at the hands of one of her own is going to put her over the edge.

[Esmerelda]

I believe a good strategy would be to do as I am with Calbrena and do it over several threads, but using your own path (situations, reasons for falling, ETC).

Heck, I'd be willing to help using Calbrena.

[Caden Law]

I think the most important part of writing an "evil" character is establishing their moral framework. People who are just incurably insane or complete monsters rarely make for compelling villains. The best sort of evil doesn't see itself as such.Not entirely true. A complete monster can actually be the most compelling of all villains, and they're the ones we tend to remember the most. Hannibal Lecter, anyone? Howsabout Heath Ledger's Joker? So on and so forth.

Just remember: Motive, action, response.

What drives the character? If anything drives them at all.

What do they actually do? The best answer is: Something plausible physically, but morally horrifying.

How do they respond to the things that they do? Are they at all horrified, is this just business as usual?

You say...
So, My character right now is basically...me with magic powers. Her reactions are mine, her apperance is based on mine, and she's tempermental and a big freakin baby just like me.Then the simplest thing to do is ask yourself, "If I were a serial killer, what would I do?" Take into account that people are going to try to stop you. Don't bother trying to think hard on justifying it -- some of the best villains are the ones who don't justify anything they do, who don't even consider their own motives until confronted with them by someone else.

Judging off of your character profile, Kyla is a character full of contradictions. She wears a Happy Mask™ to hide the fact that she's seen (and maybe done) some pretty awful things. She also has an odd case of amnesia where she seems to know things without remembering how she learned them, or even if she learned them at all. She likes to think of herself as a pacifist, but she'll never back down from a challenge and, probably, enjoys the thrill of actually fighting someone. She's lived off the pity of other people for years.

The villainous version of that would simply throw out the restraining bolts. Instead of being pacifistic, she'd like to fight and would always seek to make those fights unfair in her advantage; not necessarily lethal, but certainly humiliating for the other fighter. She wouldn't think of herself as amnesiac so much as she would think herself Just Plain Better™. Her achilles heel would be pride: She probably wouldn't accept any offer of help, but she would steal from anyone -- anyone -- in a heartbeat. Especially money, because she'd like to actually buy things instead of being given them out of pity.

Incidentally: She'd probably try to dress better than Goody Kyla. Not all that differently (no Villainous Corsets or Fanservice Thigh-Highs), just better. Maybe her hygiene would even improve. Her magic might also be a little more combat oriented, though not necessarily any better.

[Amber Eyes]

I may take you up on that. I just finished the trapmaster thread, and I've got the nine starting soon, but other than that I'm pretty much free. I've really only done treads with Sei so far, mostly because I'm scared that if I write with someone else they'll be like "You suck" and drop out or something. Refer to the "big baby" comment in my first post.

[Esmerelda]

No fears of me being insulting or dropping out. Any ideas, or would you care to hear the one idea that popped to mind so far?

[Amber Eyes]

I'd like to hear what you've thought of.

[Visla Eraclaire]

Hannibal Lecter, anyone?

Not a complete monster. I would argue he follows the pattern I lay out.


Howsabout Heath Ledger's Joker?

I was just discussing this example yesterday. It's brilliant and noteworthy simply because he manages to make someone who is pure chaos an effective villain. Of course, if he tried to do it for more than the length of a feature film I wonder if it would still be compelling. We'll never know.

The point is, these people rarely make compelling villains. I didn't say never for a reason. It's a much more difficult formula to follow and the examples given are a result of masterful writing and acting. I don't think it's advisable for someone who's looking to experiment on something new.

[Christoph]

Not entirely true. A complete monster can actually be the most compelling of all villains, and they're the ones we tend to remember the most. Hannibal Lecter, anyone? Howsabout Heath Ledger's Joker? So on and so forth.

Just remember: Motive, action, response.

What drives the character? If anything drives them at all.

What do they actually do? The best answer is: Something plausible physically, but morally horrifying.

How do they respond to the things that they do? Are they at all horrified, is this just business as usual?

In other words, there are many ways to write villains depending on what you need. The key is making them believable, even if they're inexplicable. "Bwahaha" mustache-twirling "evil just because" villainy rarely works unless played for comedy. A villain like the Dark Knight's Joker can seem that way, but they definitely explored some of the underlying psychosis that drove him; that was basically the point of the whole movie.

There are some potential exceptions, such as Mr. Croup and Mr. Vandemar from Neverwhere. They seemed to embrace a version of "just because" villainy, though they were also hilarious characters, so it worked, and the author still showed the reader a bit about what made them tick.

For me, I often find more relatable and humanized villains to be the most compelling and able to disturb. If I may use a Shakespeare example, I've always found Shylock more compelling then, for example, Iago, even though Iago was basically the embodiment of villainy. With Shylock, the audience finds themselves relating to the guy. If I may embrace a cliché, the key is making the reader explore their inner darkness, more or less.

[Duffy]

Define Evil?

[Visla Eraclaire]

Define Evil?

Wank wank wank. If we can all have this conversation, we know what we mean well enough not to get off course on that silly discussion.

Go post in a real thread :P

[Duffy]

The point I was badly making, is that getting stuck into sociological definitions of a word which is contextual is silly.

You could be a paragon of good and order and care for your people, but make an evil decision - you can equally be loved and liked, and do the right thing but take advantage at every turn.

The best way to play evil, is to do it in such a way that people don't even consider you evil. It's not evil after all, unless somebody good says it is, or unless a law is passed that criminalises it.

To the noble hierarchy of Middle England, Robin Hood was evil, a bandit, a brigand. But to the common people of Sherwood and Nottinghamshire, he was a saint, beyond reproach of the laws he would've ultimately broken.

So, Amber Eyes, work out why you're 'evil,' and then go from there. The deeds will slot into place.

[Visla Eraclaire]

Alright, so that makes a lot more sense than I thought it was going to. You should still go post in a real thread though.

I think everyone's saying the same thing. You need to figure out a motivation, which is different from a reason.

Tragedy is the thing that sparks your decline, but what's your motivation to do "bad" things? Revenge improperly enforced against the world at large? Catharsis from bottled up emotion?

It needn't be static either, frequently the motivation for the first evil act is a temporary one like frustration or feelings of powerlessness, but they develop into more complex justifications as the person examines their new moral freedom and continues after the emotions have passed.

[Duffy]

Tragedy is the thing that sparks your decline, but what's your motivation to do "bad" things? Revenge improperly enforced against the world at large? Catharsis from bottled up emotion?

This works, very much so. I couldn't agree more.

(As for real threads, I'm trying, but there's 3 posts to make before I fairly get around to ours again).

[Knave]

I've written a ton of evil characters. I just don't do heroes often, and I probably should try them a little more.

Key thing to remember is that there must be a problem with either how a character pursues their goal, or the goal itself. Perhaps both. Hell, they don't even need goals, they just need to exist, do things, and fail to redeem themselves or even want to redeem themselves. One thing that is important, is that they must have a reason, not even a good reason, just a reason that justifies what they do to themselves.

My examples:

I once wrote a human like golem desperately in love with his creator. The problem is that the creator created the golem so that she could look friendly by comparison, when she herself was shy and mildly deranged. She views him as cardboard cut out, and he takes it out on anything that she doesn't forbid him to destroy. So the end result is a frustrated, inhuman, emotionally broken, morally bankrupt,hyper violent, excessive jerkass which the narrator mocks as a ken doll because he may not even be anatomically correct. I wrote this character well, I have a post on my computer that actually scares the crap out of me... This would be an example of a monster.

My next would be an old grandfather. This our old man is trying to create a good home for his scattered great-grandchildren. The problem is that he serves a demon which controls time, and has forced him to live his life in constant repeat, and only allows him to exist as his life in general is considered funny even though its filled with murder, betrayal, and the oldman's death. Now our old man is not one to wax poetic and whiny, he has work to do, his family being scattered about, and the pursuit of a new home for them. I tried to give him a noble feel. Then I made him a necromancer determined to kill a vast number of people to swell his ghostly army, then break into heaven and take over. He is sorry, but he's not apologizing, he's gone too far and done too much for that. This is one of my favorites, a good man at heart, who finds that the best thing he can do is also the worst.

In retrospect, I think the best I can say on this subject is that much like a tragic hero is an interesting character, a tragic villain can be just as, if not more, riveting.

EDIT:

YEs, I am throwing my hat in with the last couple posts, so fast, yo. =O

[Amen]

Not a complete monster. I would argue he follows the pattern I lay out.



I was just discussing this example yesterday. It's brilliant and noteworthy simply because he manages to make someone who is pure chaos an effective villain. Of course, if he tried to do it for more than the length of a feature film I wonder if it would still be compelling. We'll never know.

The point is, these people rarely make compelling villains. I didn't say never for a reason. It's a much more difficult formula to follow and the examples given are a result of masterful writing and acting. I don't think it's advisable for someone who's looking to experiment on something new.

I don't think Heath Ledger's Joker is an exception. He isn't just a psychopath, he seems to be a psychopath who has made an extreme philosophical choice and wants to justify that choice to the world.

He only would have been a truly chaotic (and unsympathetic) villain if, say, he didn't have any speaking parts in the movie.

I think Visla hit the important part of what it is to write a villainous character. It's the same thing as writing a normal character, just more interesting, and in some cases more difficult. They need to seem real, which means having justifications for their actions.