Is it so wrong that I see something worthwhile in things others call evil?

Question

I've been around the block once or twice. I've been there. I've done that. And I even managed to see a few movies too. We had a discussion in my English class about heroic and villainous archetypes as they are applied to literature and film.

Fun times those were, and we got to talking about the stereotypes associated with the hero. The hero is always strong, the hero is always noble, the hero is always masculine, the hero always is in support of the current state of government, the hero always gets the girl and the happy ending.

And the villain? The villain is often an intellectual, the villain often displays traits that are not what the general consensus of masculine is, the villain always wants to bring down the status quo, and the villain will never ever get any kind of happiness. Sad, isn't it? And yet I can't seem to help myself, I find myself rooting for them anyway. I'm like a Red Sox fan.

Who do you root for in your works of fiction? Do you think it says anything about your moral character? Is fiction a mirror that shows the beast within us or just simple entertainment and nothing more? Am i wrong to root for Lucifer's ideas of democracy in Paradise Lost? Am I mad to support the state of anarchy that the titular V in V for Vendetta advocates? Am I looney to agree with Agent Smith when he says that humanity is a virus that would never appreciate a paradise?

Or maybe I'm just a man who sees a work of fiction's arguments for what they are; simple arguments that advocate the author's point of view, and my contrary nature by default agrees with the strawman dressed as a villain.

So in true dramatic villainous fashion I ask you this my friends; What do you think?

Answer 1

Not always. According to that the revolutionary Americans were villains.

Answer 2

I think that is a valid point and although there are examples of Heroes standing against the status quo. Like Luke Skywalker in Star Wars, Or Katniss from the Hunger Games or many more "Noble Rebel" types where the hero or heroine is fighting against the suppressive government, usually in a made up reality of the creators/authors.



The best works of fiction are the ones where there is no true "Bad guy". Yet still there is the antagonist and protagonist. Or, perhaps, like my favorite book, The Count of Monte Cristo, where the protagonist is an Anti-hero. A man bent on having his revenge on the men who ruined his life.



A lot of people only want to see Good and Evil as Black and White and they want their fiction show that as well. Yet reality is not like that, you cannot see good and evil as sides. Or even as people. Evil and Good are the actions one takes, and is in all of us. Sometimes fiction does portray this. Sometimes it doesn't. It depends on your taste.



I don't think you are wrong at all for rooting for Lucifer or V, and agent smith does have a valid arguement, however pessimist it is. But the important thing is the fictions intention, how it makes you feel about reality and your views there.

Answer 3

It's not wrong at all.



In my opinion, it goes to show what our society places value on. Masculinity/Vanity (The pumped up hero), sometimes foolish acts of bravado (LETS RUN IN AND KILL IT WITH STICKS!) and sexual stagnation (the hero always gets his girl, ect.). All the while downplaying the potentially serious issues, illnesses, or intellectualism of the villain-most of which are now being called " Anti-heroes" in fiction in order to illustrate their own relative humanity.



In short, as you mentioned, they're strawmen. The villains are everything people don't want to be: being "smart" makes you a nerd and bullied, being great looking and hulking and brave makes you popular. And who doesn't want to be liked?



I'll spare the rest of the lecture on how damaging these models are, but there you have it. According to the stories smart/pained/sick=bad or evil. Simple as that.

Answer 4

The hero isn't necessarily pleasing everyone... he's the one who does the right thing.



Socrates was the hero of Plato's work, but he was the most disliked character of his writings - actually, both in truth and in Plato's work. If you get outside of the popular works, you might get sound stories where people are actually against the current state of things; where they are suffering, hated, pushed aside... Romeo and Juliet is an other one - you do not get the archetype opposition, but they are at the center of the story and live against the system.



I will end with this thought:



What others call evil isn't necessarily evil; evil exist without them to see or understand it.

Answer 5

I truthfully have a pair of books that designate the arguments that the Bible would not somewhat say something approximately homosexuality. they are observed as: "What the Bible somewhat says approximately homosexuality" by using Daniel A. Helminiak, PhD and "the infants are unfastened: Reexamining the biblical data on comparable-intercourse relationships" by using Rev. Jeff Miner and John Tyler Connoley. the 1st one is quite technical and precise and reads like a masters thesis type e book, and the 2d is quite right down to earth. They modern the argument that the Bible isn't against homosexuality. i don't somewhat comprehend something relating to the main factors for the anti-gay argument, yet your father could be greater helpful at that element than i could be. The supplies I quoted right here especially plenty instruct what the Bible somewhat skill by using the Leviticus source and the Sodom and Gomorrah tale, and the hot testomony supplies by using Paul to boot

Answer 6

I think the answer is in your address of us: my friends. That's the very thing. If we have friends, any of us, then that comes with certain social agreements, rules. I won't kill you in your sleep, you won't steal my stuff, make out with my wife - even if we are "villainous" friends, thick as thieves, so to say, still there are rules. I won't rat you out - you won't fall asleep in the getaway car.



When one of us violates the rules, it screws the whole arrangement. If there are ten of us and say one guy, call him Dan, starts violating our rules, we would either fix his clock, or get rid of him, but he becomes a villain to us - and it's not a romantic image. He's an A hole who broke the trust with his buds.



Is a villain to society different?



I think villainy is people enjoying the perks of belonging to a society but not paying their dues - perhaps while wearing a rakish hat. That's all.

Answer 7

I think you may feel sympathy for the antagonists.

I usually root for the character that appeals to me most, as in being humorous or just interesting. I think fiction is a vent for creativity and ideas used to entertain oneself as well as others. I wouldn't say you were mentally inept for liking these -as many would say- unsettling ideas, but more of thinking outside the box.

Answer 8

Idiom: One man's meat is another man's poison



http://www.usingenglish.com/reference/idioms/one+man's+meat+is+another+man's+poison.html



http://www.answers.com/topic/one-man-s-meat-is-another-man-s-poison