What makes a villain?

[Derc]

Well, there are people who only want, what they call in their perversion, 'fun'. Or even better. To 'help people'.

[Cyclops]

Often, it is a misguided sense of victimhood that makes a regular-Joe into a villainous-Joe.
I struggle to think of a single exception to that rule, either in fact or fiction.

I agree its often a self justification but there's actually quite a few "plain bad" villains. Sometimes they are the most shocking.

In the Brother Karamazov the rotten old dad has a little soliloquy where he contemplates doing the right thing for once, and decides to **** **** up because its his nature to do so and he has to be true to himself. He literally chooses evil.

I think Roy Batty is a lovely villain, I mean I know its just a (indeed the) trash cyberpunk movie but its so well done and batty is such a huge part of the formula.

Much is made of the finale, where the alpha replicant spares Rick. However prior to this Roy discusses mortality and morality with his actual creator in an irony laden speech at the conclusion of which he "kills his maker" and his only human friend. After this he goes on a made tear torturing our hero for fun.

That's absolute class villainy there, he demonstrates a fairly complete philosophic (as well as some technical) understanding of his situation (he is after all practically a demigod, physically and intellectually) and chooses multiple murder. The he dies monologuing, laughing at himself and feeling sorry for himself at the same time. On balance his life is rage and villainy over good. Maybe he feels victimhood "I want more life ****er!" but I think he's just greedy, and he knows it because when Tyrell points out that the candle that burns twice as bright lasts half as long he smiles, I think acknowledging his own illogical desires.

Then there's the Joker. I will disregard Joaquim Phoenix on this point, his performance is a portrayal of mental illness and he's not a villain per se, he's a mentally ill guy who does some bad stuff.

I think peak Joker is Heath Ledger (who develops Frank Moore's excellent Dark Knight Joker to a fine pitch). He is simply anti-Batman. In Dark Knight he becomes catatonic when Batman retires and returns as a villain when Batman returns. In DKR he trolls Batman for the entire film to the death. He's shabby where Batman is neat. He's low tech. He's completely unafraid. He doesn't wear a mask. He seems to earn every cent he gets through hard work. He ruins Batman's reputation. I think he's a classic villain in that he is almost conjoined to our hero.

[swabian]

Often, it is a misguided sense of victimhood that makes a regular-Joe into a villainous-Joe.
I struggle to think of a single exception to that rule, either in fact or fiction.

I would simply see it from a criminological point of view (in my amateurish way of course). A villain is first and foremost a criminal and the underling psychological dimension is antisocial behavior, with antisocial personality disorder as the extreme end of the spectrum. There are personality factors, based on genetics and biography that can lead to this and then there is of course the fact that motives, like greed or vengeance, can temporarily, but significantly, override a persons' personality.

Well, there are people who only want, what they call in their perversion, 'fun'. Or even better. To 'help people'.

That would be overt or covert sadism and therefore personality based, I'd argue. In addition, pretending to help someone with the goal to maliciously manipulate would be also quite deceptive, which is in total consistent with dark triad personality factors, especially psychopathy.

It's actually a fascinating topic, but "villainy" is not a good term to summarize phenomena which in actuality are various modes of criminal behavior types. Also antisocial behavior to 90% is simply criminal behavior - also from a psychological perspective, it appears. Everything below the threshold of criminality, that is more of an interpersonal nuisance, like narcissism, doesn't qualify as villainy in a serious sense in my opinion.

[basics]

While it is fun to see villainy from different angles the point is that there is not one who is not capable of acting the villain, why? Because it is part and parcel of human nature in its fallen state. Probably the most prominant work of villainy is the present Meghan Markle v the Royal Family and quite dependent on which side you believe.

[Akar]

Probably the most prominant work of villainy is the present Meghan Markle v the Royal Family

Yeah, not the Uyghur genocide or the genocide in Myanmar or any of the litany of horrific things happening around the globe right now. No, it's those damned uppity royals that are the most prominent work of villainy in the present day.

Yawn.

[basics]

Yeah, not the Uyghur genocide or the genocide in Myanmar or any of the litany of horrific things happening around the globe right now. No, it's those damned uppity royals that are the most prominent work of villainy in the present day.

Yawn.

Akar ole fella,

Good to hear from you again. What other genocides are our Royals indulgent in? You either loves them or hates them and so I must admit to the former. They are what I believe makes Britain Great.

[Akar]

Well thankfully the British royal family has managed to avoid complicity in a genocide in the past few decades, though I'm sure the Queen will figure out some group to vanquish before the end of the decade.

Good to see you back.

[basics]

Akar,

Awe, that's nasty as the Queen does not make political decisions but if it were possible for her to do so I would be happy if she vanquished the SNP forever.

[enoch]

Akar,

Awe, that's nasty as the Queen does not make political decisions but if it were possible for her to do so I would be happy if she vanquished the SNP forever.

Have we considered God made everything therefore God made all villainy. Are the SNP villains?

[conon394]

I would simply see it from a criminological point of view (in my amateurish way of course). A villain is first and foremost a criminal and the underling psychological dimension is antisocial behavior, with antisocial personality disorder as the extreme end of the spectrum. There are personality factors, based on genetics and biography that can lead to this and then there is of course the fact that motives, like greed or vengeance, can temporarily, but significantly, override a persons' personality.



That would be overt or covert sadism and therefore personality based, I'd argue. In addition, pretending to help someone with the goal to maliciously manipulate would be also quite deceptive, which is in total consistent with dark triad personality factors, especially psychopathy.

It's actually a fascinating topic, but "villainy" is not a good term to summarize phenomena which in actuality are various modes of criminal behavior types. Also antisocial behavior to 90% is simply criminal behavior - also from a psychological perspective, it appears. Everything below the threshold of criminality, that is more of an interpersonal nuisance, like narcissism, doesn't qualify as villainy in a serious sense in my opinion.

Personally I think conflating villainy with criminal behavior remains a problem to me. I find villainy a more general term than a Psychopathy or some individual committing a crime for some other selfish reason that need not have done. Villain it seems to me deserves basically to stay in the real of story telling. Its not a clinical or exact diagnosis and covers people who on their side are perfectly normal members of their society. The Villain of a story can be an obvious sociopath - in every way but he or she can be just somebody doing normal things in their society that seen from an outside perspective (and perhapse inflicted on the outside observer) are a Villain.

[basics]

Have we considered God made everything therefore God made all villainy. Are the SNP villains?

enoch,

In my eyes they are, why? Because they live in a dream world where it is expected that just over two million of the employed will keep the other three and a half million in comfort. Right now with the finance ploughed into the country by the rest of the UK population Scotland under the SNP has a huge financial hole out of which it cannot dig itself out of. But of course the idea is to break up the UK and get back into the EU where it hopes the pickings will be better. That's not independence. So, does that answer your question?

[enoch]

enoch,

In my eyes they are, why? Because they live in a dream world where it is expected that just over two million of the employed will keep the other three and a half million in comfort. Right now with the finance ploughed into the country by the rest of the UK population Scotland under the SNP has a huge financial hole out of which it cannot dig itself out of. But of course the idea is to break up the UK and get back into the EU where it hopes the pickings will be better. That's not independence. So, does that answer your question?

Someone has forgotten their Kipling.

Now this is the Law of the Jungle -- as old and as true as the sky;
And the Wolf that shall keep it may prosper, but the Wolf that shall break it must die.
As the creeper that girdles the tree-trunk the Law runneth forward and back --
For the strength of the Pack is the Wolf, and the strength of the Wolf is the Pack.

Seems to me the SNP wants to get back to the pack instead of Lone Wolfing it on a decrepit island still lost in glorifying their past atrocities. Also any True Scotsman bridles under continued English rule.

[basics]

enoch,

So why is the Commonwealth now bigger than it ever was? Could it be your atrocities or the real benefits from being associated to us? As for Kipling he does make exceedingly good cakes.

[conon394]

enoch,

So why is the Commonwealth now bigger than it ever was? Could it be your atrocities or the real benefits from being associated to us? As for Kipling he does make exceedingly good cakes.

And the commonwealth does what nowadays exactly?

[basics]

And the commonwealth does what nowadays exactly?

The commonwealth is an extension of the old Empire in that these peoples' leaders see an advantage in staying close to Britain obviously for the benefits that Britain gives them. They are for the most if not all independent countries some becoming enemies in their search for freedom from us yet have found it to be more advantageous to retain links. There are now fiftyfour yet at the beginning there were only eight. Quote, " The Commonwealth Secretariat, established in 1965, supports Commonwealth member countries to achieve development, democracy and peace. We are a voice for small and vulnerable states and a champion for young people. We help to strengthen governance, build inclusive institutions and promote justice and human rights." Unquote.

[swabian]

Personally I think conflating villainy with criminal behavior remains a problem to me. I find villainy a more general term than a Psychopathy or some individual committing a crime for some other selfish reason that need not have done. Villain it seems to me deserves basically to stay in the real of story telling. Its not a clinical or exact diagnosis and covers people who on their side are perfectly normal members of their society. The Villain of a story can be an obvious sociopath - in every way but he or she can be just somebody doing normal things in their society that seen from an outside perspective (and perhapse inflicted on the outside observer) are a Villain.

People can commit individual acts of villainy without having a criminal history, but this is always driven by intense negative emotions. Indviduals who persue a long term criminal career over time become so desensitized that it changes them. Personality disorders are not inherited but symptoms of them have a more or less strong genetic background, for example impulsiveness or a lack of empathy. Only long term exposure and adaptation to stressful social surroundings form the character to become a criminal mind, usually starting from childhood on. Villains in stories can be modeled after reality and usually are. Sometimes i think those characters simply don't make much sense, but when it is done well, it often is plausible to a degree that makes me think said characters are modeled after real life criminal biographies. A villain also has to be not only of a criminal mind, but do something significantly heinous that requires a hero to fight them. In novels, villains are of course counter parts to the heroes the story is developing around, but in real life they are just extreme examples of criminality.

[basics]

swabian,

When growing up children have a tendency to villainise others barely on the fact of dislike. I like him ot her but I don't like them is an attitude we all have and perhaps it is the source of bullying in many cases.

[swabian]

swabian,

When growing up children have a tendency to villainise others barely on the fact of dislike. I like him ot her but I don't like them is an attitude we all have and perhaps it is the source of bullying in many cases.

What does it matter to you what others think? Let go. Leave. This is a forum about computer games, games about war. I don't think the power of your word finds true appreciation here

[Gromovnik]

Akar ole fella,

Good to hear from you again. What other genocides are our Royals indulgent in? You either loves them or hates them and so I must admit to the former. They are what I believe makes Britain Great.

Your belief is wrong once again. The island is called "Great Britain" to distinguish it from the Lesser Britain, AKA Brittany, AKA Bretagne, AKA Breizh. Not because of prince Andrew.

[Gromovnik]

Awe, that's nasty as the Queen does not make political decisions but if it were possible for her to do so I would be happy if she vanquished the SNP forever.

Ah, so you're into democracy just like you're into christian love. Cool.