#probably realistic ones like the one about quote defeating corypheus end quote

[malefilus]

I like to imagine a sarcastic/aggressive Hawke’s title by act 3 is something long and drawn out like Daenerys in Game of Thrones. 

“Hawke, Most Likely First of Their Name, Champion of Kirkwall, Ruler of Fuck Around and Find Out, Hands Rated E for Everyone, Breaker of Everyone’s Patience”

[allisondraste]

Writing Deliciously Evil Characters: A Meta Post

Recently in a discord conversation, I was discussing some feedback that I have gotten on my longfic, regarding my portrayal of the odious Rendon Howe.  Arl Howe is a classic, stereotypical “mwahaha” type of villain, which is not the standard in Dragon Age where the Wardens are Grey and the villains are Greyer, in that most of the bad folks aren’t doing bad things for the sake of doing bad things (e.g. Loghain, Meredith, Solas), but rather because they believe what they are doing is “right.”  Howe, on the other hand is a man who betrays his closest allies in the first of what would be a series of awful vies for power during the Fifth Blight that would eventually lead to his death and the destruction of his family.  He’s not the only character who does evil for pleasure/power/personal gain (think Livius Erimond, the Grand Duchess, Corypheus, Danarius blah blah blah).  However, the feedback was about Howe, so I’m going to reference him throughout this post.

Essentially, I have received a number of comments in which people have remarked something to the effect of “The way you write Howe makes me hate him even more.” I love this feedback because that was the plan all along and it’s the equivalent of someone saying “The way you write [insert widely beloved popular hero character here] makes me love them even more!”  I love love love villains, and as much as I am in the camp with everybody else wanting to stab the man in his slimy, weasley guts, I also love writing him.  In my personal opinion he is actually a very good villain, and I’ll go into why in a bit.

For those of you who haven’t encountered my meta posts before, I’m not a writer by trade.  I am a mental health professional, and my background is in psychology.  So when I make posts about “writing” some type of thing, I typically focus on the psychological components of why certain things work for characters, why others don’t, and how to make a character’s actions realistic and true to who they are as a person. That being said: I do speak about sensitive things in my posts, and this one is no different, so I will be putting the rest of this post behind a Read More.  If you are triggered by the mention of trauma and abuse, violence, and mental illness then I would caution you to take care of yourself if you choose continue on!

What is Evil?

If I were to ask you to give me the name of someone who is “evil,” I would bet money that the people everyone lists would be what society likes to coin “psychopaths” or “sociopaths,” and these are individuals who are callous, cruel, and lack consciences, anxiety, and empathy.  They are your serial killers and super villains.  Your unarguably bad, awful, evil people. They were always evil.  Born evil. Raised evil.  They eat, sleep, and breathe evil.  Concentrated evil flows through their veins. They probably also hate puppies and babies.  You all get the picture.

First of all, this is not only an inaccurate understanding of what standard human evil is, but it is also an inaccurate and romanticized view of psychopathy/sociopathy (the words are actually interchangeable, people just like to pretend they are different).  The media loves itself a juicy slice of psychopath.  It’s why we have movies about Ted Bundy and why Discovery ID is a thing. However something that is so incredibly important to note is that regardless of how an evil person presents, “evil” as a thing, a behavior.  It is  not a personality trait, but a societally motivated response. People are not evil; they do evil.  Someone  may be born with a diathesis, or predisposition to do evil things, and then be influenced by environmental factors to enact those evil things, but nobody in the world is born evil. Not. A. Single. Person. In fact, as the Stanford Prison Experiment, conducted by Philip Zimbardo (who also has a wonderful TED Talk  on the Psychology of Evil), shows ANYONE under the right circumstances can do evil.  The Stanford Prison Experiment is actually an excellent example of why the Templar Order is the way it is!  When people of equal standing are placed in a position where one group has perceived power and authority over the other, and when the guilt is diffused across a “group” rather than placed on a single person, horrible things can happen. In fact, more evil is done by groups of people than individuals for this very reason.

I originally had a much longer explanation about how society causes evil, but the post ended up being long anyway and this was unnecessary (but, if you want a post about that in the future, feel free to hit up my inbox or otherwise just check out that Zimbardo talk linked here).  

My point is that in order to write compelling villains it is important to understand what drove them to reach the point of atrocity they have reached, why they do as they do.  A villain who you cannot answer those questions for is going to fall flat.  Disclaimer: I am not suggesting that you excuse a villain’s actions or make apologies for what they do.  Evil is evil regardless of intention, however, knowing the explanation for the behavior can help you capture it in a story.

Why Villains Fall Flat

If my readers are anything like me, then there have been times in the consumption of media that they encounter a really awful bad person who you just kind of feel “blah” about.  They are supposed to be your protagonists’ mortal enemy, but their defeat falls flat and feels empty and anticlimactic.  Sometimes in the horror genre, authors take the “telling less” approach regarding their villains because that increases the “oooh” creepy feeling that they want to have.  This is actually really really effective for a horror film.  It is not so effective when writing action/adventure, romance, etcetera.  Why? I think that it can be pretty well summed up by the following quote by existential psychologist Rollo May:

“Hate is not the opposite of love; apathy is.”

Essentially, in order to truly hate a villain and to be both disgusted by their actions and thrilled by their defeat, you have to care about them in some way shape or form.  You have to be invested in their “origin story” and/or care about someone who is closely tied to them or affected by them.  It’s why Rendon Howe is such a good villain, and why playing the Cousland origin and meeting his children makes you hate him even that much more.  When you play the Cousland origin, you get to see the Arl through the eyes of someone who doesn’t know that he is bad.  Rendon is aloof, but ultimately respectful and he seems to have the implicit approval dear old dad (they were war buddies after all! Fought in the rebellion together!!).  Then, he has the family murdered in their sleep in a premeditated act of sheer ambition.  We get to see the death of a young woman and her son, and watch as Warden Cousland leaves her parents behind to die.  It’s tragic, it’s all Howe’s fault, and it’s effective.  Then you have this opportunity to meet Howe’s eldest son Nathaniel who is so bitter and full of rage that *you* the “hero” destroyed his family.  He can’t fathom his father doing something evil enough to warrant what happened to the Howes.  He was never that bad!  He just got caught up in politics!  He picked the wrong side in a war!  He tortured prisoners because the country was at war!.  His bedroom was  next to the torture dungeons because politics and war! I’m not saying that Nate has the most accurate view of his dad -- the man certainly wasn’t winning any father of the year awards, after all, a fact which Nathaniel eventually comes to realize (“maybe I shouldn’t defend the man who found the screams of prisoners to be soothing bedtime ambient noise” -- okay I’m exaggerating so sue me).  What I am saying is that in  listening to Nathaniel speak about his father and his family, we learn more about Howe, his life and his motivations.  We realize there is nothing more than a man behind all that evil, a man who has a family (and a family in which the other members are actually good and decent at that) and we are able to see that maybe he could have been good had things gone differently for him.  Again, it’s effective.

What Causes People to Do Evil?

As I mentioned before, just as with greatness, people are not born evil.  Evil is something that people have thrust upon them, and it is honestly really tragic if you look back and see all of the individual steps that led to a person becoming the villainous bastard you know and love to hate.  There are many different reasons a person might do evil things, but it typically falls into the theory we psychology nerds call the “diathesis-stress model,” which posits that certain people are born with a “diathesis” or a predisposition for a certain type of behavior.  In the case of an evil person it might be that the person has an irritable temperament or ambitious, selfish, narcissistic, aggressive, deviant, manipulative, etcetera tendencies.  When these people are placed under a stressor (such as, but not limited to: abuse, trauma, modeling of crime or deviant behavior, desperation, loss, etc.), the darker sides of those qualities comes out.  

NOTE: This is not to say that everyone who has these qualities and undergoes a stressor is going to become evil.  This is not to say that abuse/trauma/etc. causes evil.  In fact, most people who are traumatized do not go on to traumatize others; however, if you look at everyone who has done evil, almost all of them have done so because they grew up in an environment where such evil was the norm, and they learned nothing better.  They are people who were pushed by desperation.  They are people who ultimately have a story that is not “Oh, they’re just bad.”

Evil is the perfect storm of nature and nurture that, unfortunately, some people are not able to escape.  

Sometimes, it’s easy to care about villains because their intentions and motivations are very overtly stated.  For example:

Loghain is motivated by a very rational fear of the Orlesians and Cailan’s closeness to them.  We learn all that Loghain’s family went through during the Orlesian occupation, what happened to his mother.  We also can toy around with the possibility that his decision to quit the field at Ostagar was less obvious treason and more obviously pragmatic.  This of course doesn’t justify anything he does (you know, like striking a deal with the magisters to sell the Alienage elves into slavery or allowing Howe to, uh, torture people, what have you).

Meredith - See my above discussion of the Stanford Prison Experiment, but also consider her temperament and the trauma she was exposed to as a child with her sister who had magic and caused the death of 70 people including her family.  Is it okay that she abuses her power and abuses mages? Hell no… but we have motivation.

Solas - *sigh* Don’t make me do this one.  We get it. He has to RIGHT the WRONG. It’s his DUTY.  Cool story, still evil. (disclaimer: I love Solas. Ma vhenan. But I look at him with a critical eye when I choose to love him.  That’s important.)

Sometimes the motivations are not so clear.  I’m not particularly inclined to care about Corypheus other than I’d kinda like for him to get away from me with that demon army.  I don’t really give a flying duck about Erimond other than he is, as Cole so succinctly puts: an asshole.  There are lots of characters like that, and honestly it’s good to have a few of them sprinkled about a bit.  They’re not particularly fun to write or compelling to read (in my personal opinion), but hey! Your mileage may vary.

And now we’re back to Howe (Maker help me I never thought I’d be doing a  meta post about this awful man, but here we are).  He, and actually most if not all the minor villains in DAO, is actually really good despite his motivations not being so blatantly obvious as Loghain’s or Ulfric’s or any of the others you face in that game.  When he says, “I deserved more!” at the end, without further thought about the topic, it’s easy to say “God what a power grubbing weasley little snake of a man,” or a “cold codfish arse,” as one of my friends aptly described him.  However when you look at his background… it’s not so simple as all that. Just a few notes:

According to the lore Rendon has two fathers: Padric, who disappeared with the Wardens never to be seen again and who Rendon never forgave, and Tarleton who had no sense for loyalty and sided with the Orlesians in the rebellion and was ultimately hanged.

Young Rendon, despite his parentage chose to join the Rebellion with his besties: Bryce Cousland and Leonas Bryland.  At some point, he becomes injured and is no longer able to fight.  He is cared for by Leonas’ sister Eliane, who would later become Lady Howe.

There seems to be a lot of strife between Howe and his wife’s family, so much so that Eliane’s parents were even cold and critical of the Howe kids, Nathaniel in particular (maybe because he looks the most like Rendon, who knows?).  He expected to receive some of the Bryland wealth, but that did not happen (likely because he did not actually love his wife and Eliane’s family had no great love for him.  As far as marrying a Howe in Thedas, it would be much like marrying a Greyjoy or a Frey or a Bolton in Game of Thrones.  It’s not a family anyone particularly wanted to be associated with)

It is likely that Howe became very insecure and upset by the success of his friends, even resentful of them.  Handsome Bryce, his promotion to Teyrn,  and his Pirate Wife.  Leonas and his lovely [wealthy] family.  It made him miserable, and accompanied with all of the things that had been modeled for him by his family… it was not much of a stretch for him to go darkside.

So…What Was The Point of this Allison? Why Have You Written This Hellishly Long Post?

1.) I wanted to.  It was fun for me. This is how I spend my free time apparently.

2.) I wanted to provide some basic pointers for writing believable, but undoubtedly bad villains, and I felt like it needed context.

The Tips...Get On With Them Already. Please. We’re Begging You.  TL;DR!

1.) “Evil” is not a personality trait, it is a behavior.  People are not born evil.  They are led to do evil.

2.) Romanticized psychopaths/sociopaths are boring.

3.) In order to develop hatred for a character, you have to make the audience care about them, and the ways to do so are endless.

4.) Evil is the combination of a predisposition to do bad things plus some catalyst that causes someone to go darkside.  Nature and Nurture working together to make a twisted thing.

5.) Grey villains are abundant and very cool. Their motivations cloud their morality.

6.) Not-so-grey villains are also abundant, and can also have the potential to be very cool or the potential to be glorified Scooby-Doo villains (“And I would have gotten away with it too if it hadn’t been for you meddling WARDENS”)

7.) The line between a compelling “mwahaha” and a bleh “mwahaha” lies in the character’s backstory and motivations.  It lies in the audience caring in some way, shape, or form about that person.

8.) Rendon Howe is a character who, in my honest opinion was done right.  People loathe him.  He’s absolutely detested. Why? Because he’s a “cold codfish arse”? Maybe.  I posit that it’s because we have enough information to care about him.

Thank you for coming to this TED Talk, you all have been wonderful.