The villain is always more dynamic; more fun. And even if they're not a fun sort of villain their story is always deeper; more layered. The villain is carried with an inspiring and insurmountable conviction and resourcefulness. The villain is always played by the better actor in the movie. Why do I always root for the villain?
It's not a race thing. I'm not talking about Cowboys and Indians; I'm talking about dynamics that have flesh. And it's not because of some "natural capacity for empathy." No, nothing so cliched as that. Why do I find the classic hero so unbearably obnoxious but their cosmic role so compelling? The hero has their perks too. People like to look at the hero. And I like to be looked at. So it's clear I want to be the hero, too. The hero has a destiny. I still love the classic story structure--hero and villain driving unstoppably to an unforeseen but inevitable meeting point. How this structure evolves depends on how they get to this point, and what they do when they get there. I want to live in a world where this meeting point is more rewarding for the villain, and more punishing for the hero. And that's when we can ask the real question, what is the incentive to do good? Comments are closed.
|
Archives
January 2021
Photo by Hillary Goidell taken for Anniversary! Stories By Tobias Wolff and George Saunders for Word for Word at Z Space
|
||
RSS Feed