'Hold your favorite characters accountable'

[DokiDokiTsuna]

...What does this mean??

I saw it in a twitter thread (that disagreed with the notion, or was at least mocking it) and I gleaned from what people were saying that it meant something like 'don't fawn over villain characters'...or at least that's how they took it.

And I get what they're saying...like, villains aren't real people. ^^; There's nothing wrong with liking them, whether or not you take their actions seriously. They function as part of an entertainment medium, after all; if they contributed nothing enjoyable to their stories that would be a problem in and of itself.

But then again, I feel like I kind of understand why people would say to 'hold them accountable'...for every level-headed fan who enjoys a villain due to their personality/design/character arc, there is another who believes that the fact that the villain is lovable actually justifies everything they do to the other characters.

Like...part of truly loving a villain is understanding and accepting WHY they are considered a villain, not repainting them into a hero. It's the fact that some of the things they do AREN'T justified; the fact that they can be petty and spiteful and cruel and WRONG, that contributes to who they are. If you erase that and claim that they're perfect, actually, and everything they do is right, you're kind of erasing the character.

I think the major contention point is HOW you should go about holding your favorite characters accountable...those who think holding someone (even a fictional entity) accountable = publicly denouncing them and shaming anyone who has any positive feelings about them...are probably the ones who inspired the original tweet. ^^; Like, nah, you don't have to go that far.

I think it's enough to just understand that they have caused "real" harm within their stories, and act accordingly. Like if someone doesn't like the villain you adore and cites their transgressions as the reason why, you shouldn't feel the need to leap to their defense and try to convince them that sexy abs cancel out war crimes. You should be comfortable with liking the character and acknowledging what they've done, simultaneously.

[rajillustration]

So this is super my personal opinion, but I think that villains do things that are...basically irredeemable, if they were real people, right? If you try to kill the whole population of the world like most anime--hard to come back from that!

For me, as a reader, it's not so much about if an author can redeem a villain (because that isn't possible), it's a challenge to us, as readers about whether we would redeem them. It's down to the reader, individually, to decide "hey could you forgive even this guy? Would you trust him?" and I think that's a vulnerable question for a lot of people, and everyone would answer it a different way, even if the story was written really, really well--it's down to the individual reader's experience to decide if they do or don't and either answer is fine.

When readers put it on the authors to make it so they don't have to confront this vulnerable question...that doesn't sit well with me. The author wrote their stories the way they wrote it--they did their part, and it's not like there's any way for their villains to fully take accountability. There comes a point where the readers have to decide if they will or will not take that leap, and if they decide not to forgive the villain--well they shouldn't bother other readers and authors who have. We all have different interpretations of the same works, youknow?

[arbiterswake]

I'd have to disagree with the sentiment that villians aren't real people. In fact some of the most successful villains in my opinion are those who seem the most human. The ones that have dreams, ambitions, motives or a cause as to why they are considered villianous have so much more depth than those who are evil or bad just for the sake of being so. The evolution of a regular character into a villian is also fascinating.

Also there are no regulations telling you as a story teller what you should do with your villianous characters. They don't have to be reprimanded for their actions if it's not suitable for your story. The whole mindset that "the good guys always win" is an exhausted trope that could be shaken up from time to time.

[Caro]

I simply can’t hold villains accountable because they’re just too darn sexy!!!!

[DiegoPalacios]

My thoughts is that it's important for people to distinguish fiction from reality......

The quality of a character is not measured in their moral alignment, but on how they make a story better.

People resonates with different characters for different reasons, the problem is when some people project their identities in said character and feel questioned when said character is questioned.....or when people emits quick judgements based on the character tastes of people......

[DokiDokiTsuna]

I'd have to disagree with the sentiment that villians aren't real people.

When I said that they aren't real people, I just meant that they aren't real threats and don't have to be treated as such.

Like, what do we do when people do harmful things in real life? We 'cancel' them, we warn people about what they've done and explain why it was wrong, we at the very least stay away from them and anyone who behaves like them/sympathizes with them.

You don't have to do that with fictional people, though (especially not with fictional people who are explicitly coded as evil). ^^; No matter how awful they are, they aren't going to harm anyone in the real world and you aren't 'protecting' anyone by acting as if they will (this is a general 'you', btw).

[amortelito]

I agree with this so much.

You are telling a story and the way the characters are portrayed has a purpose for the story. You are creating entertainment that is harmless ( unless it's straight up hate speech disguised as entertainment). It doesn't have to become a "manual to be a correct person".

My main issue with moral over explaining in movies/comics/cartoons is that you are dumbing down your content. As if you had to spell for your audience what is right and wrong instead of trusting them to have a mind and values on their own.

People make mistakes, or do subtle mean things on purpose, nobody is perfect in real life and we all get away without "being held accountable" for every day screwe ups. I don't think there is needed to address every single toxic thing a character does.

Plus I have a problem with twitter constantly trying to "hold others accountable". Seems more like a way to control, punish and bully people you disagree with than defending values.

[indagold]

They're not real, there's really no reason to care unless like you saw hannibal and now you wanna eat a baby, then maybe you should care.

[Inspector_Spinda]

I’m not an expert but I feel like the only ones who take villains so seriously that they justify the nasty behavior or teens that don’t know better or are in an edgy phase or crazy dumbasses. Either way they’re probably not capable of “holding them accountable”. As long as there are people who exist who call them out, the whole notion seems a bit redundant

[Inspector_Spinda]

I’d also add that the only ones we could be denouncing publicly are like Christian gray and shit but hopefully he’s not anyone’s favorite character. Lmao

[SilentHamster102]

Why repainting a villain into a hero is wrong? When I see a Russian/Soviet villain in media I'm always repainting him into a hero in my imagination since childhood, because it's fun and so on. I'm not going serious explaining why I think like that.
But it's fun and I don't see anything wrong with it, because everyone can have their own opinion on things and who is wrong and who is right.

[DokiDokiTsuna]

Why repainting a villain into a hero is wrong? When I see a Russian/Soviet villain in media I'm always repainting him into a hero in my imagination since childhood, because it's fun and so on. I'm not going serious explaining why I think like that.

There's imagining a villain as a hero/cheering them on for kicks, and then there's legitimately believing they must be a hero just because you happen to like them, and harassing anyone who says otherwise. I was speaking of the latter.

Also, this really only applies to simpler narratives where the label 'villain' is fairly easy to assign; in more mature media where every character is kind of gray, you can't really use the same logic. Although I think the basic principle of 'don't make excuses for characters who have legitimately done terrible things' still stands.

[paracosmosfiction]

See, when I hear the phrase "Hold your characters accountable." I don't just think about villains. I think about all my characters. Even the 'heroes' of the story. Maybe it's because a lot of the characters I write aren't necessarily good guys or bad guys. (The setting of my series is Dark Fantasy, so there's a lot of moral ambiguity going on.) But I feel like I have an obligation to hold them accountable to the things they do. And by that I mean, whether they're a villain, a hero, or an anti-hero, there needs to be consequences for the shenanigans they get up to.

For instance, if your character kills a lot of people, there needs to be repercussions for that. No one racks up a massive body count and then comes out all bright and squeaky. No matter which side of the moral argument they may be on, it just doesn't work that way. Eventually, they're gonna kill the wrong person and piss off someone who will make their life miserable.

There are other examples I can think of, that's just one. But the basic principle is what matters here. For every action, their is an equal and opposite reaction. Even if you're not trying to state an argument for any particular side in your narrative being the "correct side" then you at least should display the consequences of your character's actions in such a way that feels believable. To me, that's what it means to hold your characters accountable.

[cherrystark]

As a reader, I don't this phrase applies just to the "villain" characters. I think it means that all characters should see the consequences of their actions. In romantic dramas, we see the storyline a lot where a woman gets pregnant and some force separates her from the baby's father. If he caused her to leave and the story brings them back together, later on, he needs to own up to what he did and accept that he missed part of his child's life. In "Friends", Ross should have dealt better with the fact that he didn't see his children full-time and that step-parents were in the picture. He was more concerned over losing Rachel at the end than seeing his daughter.

I think it's also worth noting the difference between a villain and an antagonist. In general terms, a villain thrives on the chaos they cause (Joker, Loki, any Scooby-Doo bad guy). An antagonist can just like to tease the protagonist. (DW, Draco, any high school Queen Bee in a teen story). They may be a thorn in the protagonist's side but could ultimately have the MC's back when push came to shove. A villain destroys a city/town/company for $$ or kicks and giggles, they should go to jail. An antagonist destroys MC's project out of jealousy, sadness, etc -- maybe a grounding? idk

[Crusoe]

I haven't read the full thread, so sorry if I'm repeating things that have already been said, but this doesn't just apply to antagonists. To have a realistic protagonist with depth you have to hold them to the same norms you're subjecting your villain to or even more so and also have them learn from those mistakes. Like... It makes sense and makes for a way more interesting story if you hold your superhero responsible for deaths and damage in the same way that you hold your antogonists accountable for deaths and damage.