I was thinking of characterization and how it's dangerous to a story to write the "bad guy" with no positive traits and the "good guy" with no negative traits. I see this as paralleling the principle of yin and yang.
A disclaimer here: I've always felt some trepidation toward some of the symbolism of yin/yang in Chinese philosophy. Yin of course, means "negative, shaded, dark, passive, female" while yang means "bright, positive, active, male". Taoist philosophy attributes no value or moral judgements on yin or yang, while Confucianism treats yin as bad and yang as good. As you may have noted from the descriptions above, yin corresponds to female nature, and according to Confucianism, female nature is therefore bad. (Wikipedia, 2017).
I obviously object to this. (On the other hand, most females tend toward passive and mysterious -- dark -- in men's eyes. In effect, with my passionate, assertive nature, I fail as a female. Oh well.).
Yin and yang -- in the Confucianic sense, sees yin as bad and yang as good (and we'll ignore the female/male duality for the moment.) A character which is all good would be boring -- what Americans would typify as a "goody two-shoes". He would have no negative forces affecting him in his childhood; he would have no temptations toward evil or any vices or even any character faults. For those of you who read Twilight, I see Bella Swan as such a character -- her only character fault (other than very normal adolescent angst) was that she was clumsy. And all the guys at her school are enamored of her. Yawn, I can't identify with such a being.
A character which is all bad would be likewise boring -- he would be what we'd call a "cartoon villain". We'd find no sympathy for him; we'd hate him with no hesitation, no confusion, or else we'd laugh him out of our minds. Are any of you familiar with Boris and Natasha from Rocky and Bullwinkle? Boris and Natasha were designed to be cartoon villains, but there are other villains out there who were accidentally written that way.
It's hard to write a villain who's convincingly evil yet has good qualities. It's hard to write a hero who has urges or actions that are less than noble. It is, however, important. The faults in the good guy have to be significant; the redeeming qualities in the bad guy have to catch the reader's notice.
I have a character in one of my books, somewhat naive. He cooperates in a plot to frame the Nephilim (for you Bible fans, not quite what you expect for Nephilim) son of his ex-lover out of jealousy. Until that point he has been amicable. He later confesses his deed and the reason, and then that night saves a group of young Nephilim from an attack. He has become one of my favorite characters, because he has become complex.
****
An exercise for all of you readers: In comments, write a short summary of a character who is either a hero with bad traits or a villain with good traits. Have fun!
True you are quite right. One of my favorite novels is "Gone with the Wind" There is Scarlet who is greedy, selfish, lacking in compassion, and had the gall to attempt to her marry her sister' man and attempt to seduce the husband of her only ally Melanie. She is ambitious and is able to build an empire out of ashes. Then there is Melanie the perfect example of a sweet gentile southern lady. She grafts herself to Scarlet...but is she aware of the contempt that Scarlet harbors towards her???? I think she is aware and uses that to her advantage. The reader is only made aware of what Scarlet is thinking and feeling. Melanie is often defending Scarlet to the women and men in their peer group. This action forces Scarlet to maintain the alliance she has with Melanie. Melanie seems to know Scarlet better than Scarlet knows herself. She was able to manipulate Scarlet into taking care of her, and her baby after the siege of Atlanta. I find the book very interesting and have re-read it several times. This is lanetta.
ReplyDelete