Everyday evil vs. Dramatic evil

DokiDokiTsuna 2020-06-27 14:50:34 UTC #1

So a lot's been said about how good antagonists need backstories and motivations and whatnot, to the point of it being a general rule of storytelling.

But recently I've seen some people point out that, in real life, that's rarely the case. People who do bad things are often just "selfish and short-sighted", to quote one. They're cruel and even decide to hurt people not because they have some dark history of abuse or loss, but because they just can't be bothered to think about other people's feelings. Or because their own emotions (anger, jealousy, impatience) are so out of control that they block everything else out.

I actually think both viewpoints are valid and real...they're just different categories of evil.

'Dramatic evil' is so common in stories not necessarily because people mistakenly think it's more realistic*, but because it's the kind of evil that most good stories demand.

You want a lasting conflict? Lots of twists and turns; character drama? Antagonists with the potential to become protagonists and vice versa?
You can't build all of that on the kind of impulse evil that causes people to verbally abuse a retail employee. You have to have something more; something for the characters to actively think about and grapple with.

Otherwise your story's gonna end up hella short: if you had a choice between leaving the random McDonald's cashier alone and getting killed by a magical hero with a huge sword, would you stick to your guns?? Most people wouldn't think it was worth it...

*I think it's worth noting that although people don't write and expect dramatic evil necessarily because they think it's more realistic (now that I think about it, I sure as hell don't) many actually do. I think it's partly due to how stories have influenced our thinking and partly due to humanity's innate search for meaning in everything.

It's hard for people to wrap their heads around simple, unprovoked cruelty. After all, "hurt people hurt people", right? No one would put effort into yelling and screaming and being violent without some kind of deep, tragically-flawed reasoning that propels them, right??

To that I would answer that, for many people, yelling and screaming and being violent is actually easier than facing their thoughts and feelings and using judgement and restraint. I mean, ask any 3-year-old. ^^;

amortelito 2020-06-27 15:18:49 UTC #2

Dramatic evil is so much fun to watch, and it is the type of evil most used to tell stories. I think the reason is because Dramatic evil is easy to spot as "wrong" while Everyday evil is more subtle and people would need certain level of insight or critical thinking to see it.

I mean, Everyday evil is not that deep, but some people might be used to it because of their upbringing. Actually, Everyday evil can also be attributed to the main character.

There are plenty of series that feature Everyday evil in their protagonists and it is infuriating to see them get away with being trash and we should forgive them because they mean well. So they sabotage their friends, lie, cheat, but it is overshadowed by the antagonist because they are more dramatic.

Iris-Grimoire 2020-06-27 15:23:25 UTC #3

I mean, that also makes the reader face some extremely uncomfortable truths in a story that might not intend for it. A moustache-twirling villain that does obviously evil things, gloats, makes mistakes out of ego,wants to take over the world, is easy to stomach in a light-hearted story; because there's a clear path and goal to doing bad things and one the heroes can easily intervene in. You get comfy, because you know they're all walking out alive or at least going down fighting.
If a completely normal guy just suddenly pushes the character in distress in front of the passing train instead of neatly tying them up 5 whole minutes before, just because they felt like it... Not only that brings down the whole starting point, you also fully know they're going to do something the good characters can't stop. It's gross, it's horrifying. And there are stories where that's great, but its effect on the perception of the viewer can't be underestimated.

Inspector_Spinda 2020-06-27 15:44:32 UTC #4

I can't really think of any popular villains with very complex backstories. I don't think any villain really needs anything too overwritten. Most Disney villains either don't have a backstory or were somehow slighted by one of the good guys in the past, ie: Ursala and Scar. Even if you go into books and stuff, Voldemort barely has a backstory that explains his evil. He thinks his dad sucks and wants power. That's basically it. Even with really complex villains like Zuko from Last Airbender who are redeemed. He basically just wants to be loved by his dad. I guess everyday evil just forgoes that all completely and goes "why not?". Which is fine in real life, but does always work in fiction, especially if the villain is suppose to tie into the themes of the story and relate to the protagonist in any meaningful way.

Inspector_Spinda 2020-06-27 15:47:29 UTC #5

I mean, sometimes everyday evil can be just as uncomfortable. More often than not serial killers are born, not made. They just have something wrong with their brain chemistry and may come from the most average households you can imagine. Or in the Lorax (book) where the Oncler just wanted a business and accidentally destroyed the world

DokiDokiTsuna 2020-06-27 16:07:14 UTC #6

I actually think lighthearted stories actually have a higher percentage of everyday evil. I mean, evil without clear motivation doesn't have to be "horrifying, unbridled, senseless destruction" it can also be "I'm the asshole landlord; if you want your sink fixed it's gonna cost extra because I just don't like you :)"

Sometimes you learn the "asshole landlord" hates the protag because their life contains everything that they wanted but could never have...but sometimes you don't, especially if they're a minor character. ¯_(ツ)_/¯ It's common for comedic shows to just have bullies that exist to be bullies. It's usually played for laughs, but it definitely still counts as everyday evil.

I mean...if that's all you got out of Zuko's character arc, I think your definition of "very complex" might differ from most people's...

Just off the top of my head, there's wanting to be loved by his dad, sure, but there's also wanting to be a valuable and appreciated member of a family that's literally taking over the world, trying to reconcile his own sense of morality with wartime "morality", searching for a sense of self-worth according to the Fire Nation's cultural definition of 'honor', trying to decide whether his uncle is a role model he should look up to and respect or just a naive fool who ran away from his responsibilities to his country...there's a lot to unpack in there. How much more complexity do you need...?

Inspector_Spinda 2020-06-27 17:01:27 UTC #7

My bad. Never actually saw the show. But ftr I'm not saying simple is bad. What I was trying to get across is that most character motivations can be boiled down to something like, in Zuko's case, fitting in and being excepted which is also a very realistic cause of people doing bad things (bullying to name one)

AmysGames 2020-06-27 17:09:43 UTC #8

The way I see it, not every antagonist needs to have some over-the-top dramatic backstory to explain their actions, but they should have a believable reason for being an antagonist—even if that reason is just being "selfish and short-sighted." Even shallow motives are still motives.

That said, giving your antagonists deeper motivations tends to make for a more interesting story, which is probably why it's so common as writing advice. It's definitely not necessary for a good story, but it's a fairly easy to way to add more depth to it.

As an aside, I feel like "evil" is a pretty strong word for just being a jerk. Rude landlords, schoolyard bullies, etc. don't really read as "evil" to me so much as... well, antagonistic. Not all antagonists are necessarily "evil." But that's just my opinion, lol.

DiegoPalacios 2020-06-27 18:39:32 UTC #9

Some villains can get away without a dramatic backstory, as long as they are threatening and interesting enough.

Everyday evil antagonists can also work well in high stakes conflicts as long as they have enough power to be an obstacle to the protagonists.

Everyone hates Umbridge, but that is the point of her character, and that is what makes her defeat way more satisfying.

The trend of giving antagonists tragic backstories may be a bit tied to the trend of making likable villains. In older times, villains were designed to be hated, so we root for the heroes more easily. Both are valid types and can help yor story, the key is knowing when each type shines better.

Iris-Grimoire 2020-06-27 19:09:33 UTC #10

Still, I mean in more the pathways they get there. Once-ler is a good comparison to a character that's not necessarily the big bad, since he wants the thing, he doesn't care about the consequences, he gets the thing and it's too late to go back now. But you know he wants money, or the cliche villain wants to take over the world/be president/ release their actually complex boss from the cosmic prison. Usually, if the characters don't get that out of doing evil things, they just won't do them or even sabotage other villains - pettiness ends up being a means to an end, not a cheap emotional thrill like IRL. That gives some comfort to the audience, and all the more (good but unexpected) horror when someone doesn't follow that rule.

And yeah, DokiDokiTsuna, bullies definately get the more everyday depiction in a story even if it's super child friendly one; probably why a lot of nostalgia-themed reviewers get unnerved by some recurring ones. You just have this character doing very real abuse and everything in your literature brain tells you there shouldn't be anything stopping the adults from doing something about it, because the story just called out for a solution to the situation. But, like real life... they don't.