Redeeming Villains in Stories - Right or Wrong?

[CensoredAlso]

Then there's one of the show's all-time most controversial villains, Todd Manning. His main storyline when he was brought on was as the leader of a vicious college gang-rape of Marty Saybrooke. Ordinarily, this would be a character beyond redemption, but they took full advantage of the kind of complexity the serial drama format has and we saw his redemption take place very slowly over a matter of years. He did remain a villain capable of many things, but he also carried the guilt over his rape and that was the type of thing he would never do again. (Unfortunately, in the last couple of years, the show's undone lots of his careful redemption and had him go BSC and tried to make him a romantic lead being fought over by people who should know better than to see him as a prize when he's never fully paid for his more recent deplorable acts...but at least for a good decade and a half, it was a well-done complex storyline)

Yeah I remember Todd, he was really popular. I think they did a good job making his character's journey a complex one, and not too contrived or objectionable. Maybe it wasn't realistic, but again, I don't think it's always a story's job to be realistic, but just to get an important message about morality across through the characters.

A person would have to be pretty disconnected from reality to make life decisions like that based on fairy tales.

Yeah see that's the thing. There are always some people who are either disturbed or ignorant and take what they read in a book or see on TV too seriously. But it's likely that they would have these problems regardless of what entertainment they watched. And obviously the great majority of human beings are able to distinguish between real life and fiction. Instead of attacking the media, we should be addressing the psychological issues of the humans who watch it.

 

[D'Snowth]

But does that desperation come from buying into the "happy ending fairy tale" we're taught?

Not necessarily. I'm mean, sometimes the two can be interconnected, but it's not always the case.

Really, the question seems as silly to me as the complaint one SS viewer had about The Count being portrayed as a sympathetic character because that teaches children that vampires aren't eeeeevil.

I think the Twilight saga does that more than SST... I mean, when I was a kid growing up, I never even thought of Count being a vampire... he was THE Count, and therefore, I thought of him as a count... to me, a "vampire" was a bat, and Count wasn't a bat, lol.

 

[CensoredAlso]

I mean, when I was a kid growing up, I never even thought of Count being a vampire... he was THE Count, and therefore, I thought of him as a count... to me, a "vampire" was a bat, and Count wasn't a bat, lol.

Yeah I know I don't think it occured to me that he was a vampire until I was a grown up, lol.

I heard a very bizarre true story once. This apparently really happened. There was a group of parents who were asked their thoughts on a potential radio program for children with a Dodo Bird as the main character. Apparently one parent said, "I don't want my children learning from a Dodo! The Dodo's extinct; it's a loser! I want my kids to be winners!"

Um....wha?

 

[D'Snowth]

There was a group of parents who were asked their thoughts on a potential radio program for children with a Dodo Bird as the main character. Apparently one parent said, "I don't want my children learning from a Dodo! The Dodo's extinct; it's a loser! I want my kids to be winners!"

Sounds like a helicopter parent, lol.

 

[frogboy4]

Some stories are about what we can aspire to be, others are about lost chances at redemption. Both are equally as valid. The only harmful story device is one that is over-analyzed in order to meet the requirements for children. It's up to the parents to decide what their kids can see. Sure, lousy parents exist, but that shouldn't require everyone else to pick up the slack for raising their kids. My two cents.

 

[CensoredAlso]

Sounds like a helicopter parent, lol.

Yeah you're probably right, lol. Well thank goodness he rescued his kids from the evil Dodo!

The only harmful story device is one that is over-analyzed in order to meet the requirements for children.

I do think there are a lot of things human beings naturally do very well, such as tell a story, whether for a message or just for pleasure. Of course some people are more talented than others, but the talent has existed in some form since the beginning of time. We don't know why it works, it just does. But interestingly, when we try to over-analyze it and "fix things," it all falls apart, lol.

 

[dwmckim]

Oh - meant to include this in my last post, but left it out...

Another important thing to consider is that the best stories/writing has some kind of change where the main character is somehow different at the end; changed in some way even if it's just a minor learning experience. Now usually that happens to the protagonist but could also be the antagonist as well.

 

[D'Snowth]

Another important thing to consider is that the best stories/writing has some kind of change where the main character is somehow different at the end;

That's because in writing, character growth and development is your friend, not something to be feared, like a lot of writers do.

 

[Gonzo14]

I didn't read the entire thread, but based on the first few, I think there's a great example of this in the show, Prison Break


-----PRISON BREAK SPOILERS IF YOU'RE NOT CAUGHT UP------






The character of Brad Bellick is hated in the first two seasons as the prison guard who harasses the main characters, and is not always ethical, then in season two, hunts them down and holds them hostage trying to find the large sum of money they were after. (Long story short, he was a jerk)

Then he began to change and really get much more character development in the third season when they were in the Panamanian prison and he was treated like an outcast and forced to be vulnerable. Then in season 4, he's on the team with the very same people he harassed earlier in the show.

When he sacrificed his life and died for their mission, you suddenly feel really bad for this character you hated\

 

[Drtooth]

Some stories are about what we can aspire to be, others are about lost chances at redemption. Both are equally as valid. The only harmful story device is one that is over-analyzed in order to meet the requirements for children. It's up to the parents to decide what their kids can see. Sure, lousy parents exist, but that shouldn't require everyone else to pick up the slack for raising their kids. My two cents.

Nothing I could say could top that. Indeed that's my feeling. I have a thing against child psychologists. Always have. Sure, there are some good ones that actually solve problems, then there are the hacks that want to write books, be very successful and look like heroes so they can hike the price of a visit up. Saying that bad people can become good and good people can become bad, among other things, isn't harmful. In fact, child abductors seem VERY nice when they want kids to go into their vans. Grouchy, nasty old people sometimes are that way for a reason. Things are never what they seem nor should they.

I mean, when I was a kid growing up, I never even thought of Count being a vampire... he was THE Count, and therefore, I thought of him as a count... to me, a "vampire" was a bat, and Count wasn't a bat, lol.

To me, the Counts so much a vampire as Duckula is a vampire... he never turns into a bat, he walks around during the daytime in the sun light... of course, Duckula we all know has ketchup in his veins and will eat nothing but vegitarian foods... and Nanny's Hot cocoa and Chocky Bikkies.

With the Count... while he did start out to be a vampire, that has since left the character's traits. in the earliest sketch he had no reflection... to me, he's just an old goth with large incisors.

I heard a very bizarre true story once. This apparently really happened. There was a group of parents who were asked their thoughts on a potential radio program for children with a Dodo Bird as the main character. Apparently one parent said, "I don't want my children learning from a Dodo! The Dodo's extinct; it's a loser! I want my kids to be winners!"

That sounds like something the parent of a bully would say. That's far more harmful to kids than any cartoon dodo.