This narrative structure I would reject completely. It mixes excuses for Strahd's behavior with victim-blaming and comes up with a particularly nasty mix, especially as the entire game is more or less a metaphor for spousal abuse. This makes Strahd way too sympathetic and far less responsible for his actions, which is... way too much like every other story about an evil vampire, ever. It's beyond trope; it's stereotype. Strahd didn't conquer those lands for the people, or to keep anyone safe: he did it because he loves to conquer people, consolidate his power, and he's good at it. It's all about power and glory, which makes his inability to gain the attention of a woman even more frustrating to him: he can't conquer her (thanks to her pesky free will and his lack of any warmth or reason for her to like him) which infuriates him, especially as he is clearly someone used to bending everything in his path to his will. He doesn't damn his brother because he's jealous, or because other people like him: he damns him because he is an obstacle in his path to the object he desires to possess, just like anything else. Strahd doesn't love Tatyana; he wants to conquer and lord over her - which is much easier as a vampire, since you can remove someone's free will and force your way/vision/self onto them. That's what he loves about being a vampire: now he can also conquer people's souls as well as their lands and bodies.
The idea that he's upset because the villagers he worked so hard to save don't have the proper thanks for him just makes me throw up in my mouth a little.
Which isn't me saying it's a bad idea! It's just me saying I'd never use it. I feel like it goes entirely against the flow of the story.
Wow! That's quite the reaction! I made you throw up in your mouth? Now I
know that my writing is impactful.
So first off, my story was the original story as presented in the AD&D Ravenloft boxed set with one minor embellishment (having seen Tatyana before) so whilst you're free to reject it, I don't think it's fair to say it "goes entirely agsinst the flow of the story". It goes against the flow of yours. And it also ties back to what I said in my first post which is that some people
require Strahd to be evil prior to the Tatyana affair because they need to avoid any hint of "victim blaming" on others. It is insufficient that Tatyana intends no evil towards Strahd (as in my version), her actions must not even unintentionally be the cause of Strahd's turn to the dark. As I said in my opening post, for such people (who may throw up in their mouth a little
), they have to make Strahd pre-Evil. And that's, imo, the chief reason they move away from the original story in which Tatyana's rejection leads to Strahd's evil. But as I also wrote, Ravenloft is Gothic Horror. If the notion of rejection driving someone to madness, despair or extremes is verbotten to you, then you must really hate Wuthering Heights and other such Gothic romances.
What I wrote was to address people who say it's unrealistic to suddenly flip to such drastic despair and evil due to a beloved rejecting one's advances. I highlighted context that is easy to miss - this isn't meeting someone you like and asking them out. This is a person who has given his life that she, her family, his brother, his people can live in safety. And not just given his life but endured decades of hardship. It is very understandable that he feels betrayed when he finds his brother for whom he has risked his life countless times (and who has been living in comfort on Strahd's dime for years) should seduce away the girl that Strahd loves or that she should fall instead for his feckless brother who has done nothing for her in comparison to Strahd. Such reactions are natural and something that most people could understand. Even if they've never made a pact with Death for immortal vengeance, there are few people who haven't at least yelled or punched a wall or something in a situation like that.
You say that you'll "reject completely" this story because it makes Strahd too sympathetic. But the best villains are sympathetic. You say it's "beyond trope" but to me the "just evil 'cause" is the worst and most basic of tropes. You say it makes Strahd "less responsible for his actions". I'm not sure I agree with that. It's his choice, but for him to not be just "teh evilz" there needs to be something that pushed him to that breaking point. And in the original story it was Tatyana's rejection in favour of his brother. All I have done is write it a little more fleshed out to highlight the betrayal aspect. And yeah, if I left to risk my life for a bro and came back to find he was putting the moves on the girl I loved, I'd feel pretty betrayed too. Who wouldn't?
You say that it's "not a bad idea" which is fine, but it's not my idea. This is the essential story from the old box set as I remember it. I've only written a fuller version of it. As I prefaced my original post with, some reject the original story because they require Strahd to be already evil to satisfy a need on their part that Tatyana play no part in making him so (intentionally or otherwise). I believe that is similarly why some people insist that his desire mustn't be love, but must be some need to possess. Love evokes sympathy, a "need to possess" demonises him. These are the reasons some people want to revise the tale, imo. Dismissing it because it is "beyond a trope" rings false for me when the replacement is to turn a villain from a sympathetic, tragic character to a 'he was already evil'. The entire thing is a Dracula pastiche anyway so people with an allergy to stereotypes are already going to need to be dosing themselves up with antihistamines. What I've tried to do is, for those who like Gothic tales (which Ravenloft is the setting for), pad out the story a little so it is more relatable. Many of us enjoy that. I don't feel we can just look at Wuthering Heights, Othello, the Aeneid, Fielding's A History of Tom Jones and wipe them all away in horror because "victim blaming". One can read a story containing themes of rejection and revenge without oneself thinking its okay to kill someone for rejecting you. The essence of the Gothic is to make us feel dark emotions. Whether that be through reading, a visual medium, or listening to tales told by the fire or the wireless. Frozen makes us feel emotions, but its not a Gothic just because it has a castle in it. Frozen is not a Gothic because the emotions it makes us feel are joy, love, relief... In contrast, Gaston Leroux's novel
Le Fantôme de l'Opéra (which you can guess the English title of) IS a gothic because the emotions it evokes are Jealousy, Despair, Loss and Vengeance. If I sound emphatic on this subject it is because I am championing Ravenloft as a settting for the Gothic. It is not an exploration, imo, of absolutism in morality - though of course you can run it as such as you wish. But I think it is an exploration of the bleak and labyrinthine corridors of the human mind. Good stories evoke empathy and emotion in the part of the audience. If the audience is led to empathise with upstanding and emotionally well-balanced people who accept that the person whose life they've saved has now gotten together with the one they love by shrugging and saying "I respect that my needs must come second to someone's right to choose" well that's one kind of story but it's not a dark one. And honestly, they probably wont engage much anyway because that attitude represents a triumph of intellectualisation over visceral, blood-thumping fury and who gets emotionally involved in that? But if they empathise with
dark emotions, then you have a gothic.
If your objection is that it condones Strahd's state and actions by "excusing" them, then you miss the point of tragedies and gothics with such themes. Othello doesn't teach us the destructive power of jealousy and possessiveness by presenting a character who suborns their feelings and rationally disengages their emotions. Such a tale would leave no impact on the reader. It teaches us that jealousy and possessiveness bring ruination and despair. Even death. By showing it. Our ancestors understood the Cautionary Tale. A Strahd such as I described, a Strahd as told in the original boxed set doesn't make wreaking vengeance on a bride seem okay. Drawing the reader in to see Strahd's point of view shows the tragedy of it in full emotive glory. Tales that evoke dark emotions - and I think most of us can all relate to Strahd as I have written him - are no less valuable than tales that fill us full of light emotions. Maybe even more valuable for their being rare today.
Ravenloft is a hearkening for the old, the dark and the romantic. The landscapes are beautiful by day and terriffying by moonlight. It's Far From the Madding Crowd, Frankenstein, Great Expectations, Woman in White. The emotions it was meant to evoke were dark ones. You can't do that if the audience lacks sympathy with the main characters. And in Ravenloft there is only one main character and his name is Strahd.
And this from the person who replied to my post, stating how it made them throw up in their mouth, was beyond trope, goes completely against the flow of the story and described it as "a particularly nasty mix" with a pretty strong overtone of "you're wrong". And in each of your posts rounds it off with a passive-aggressive "but whatever, your game" sentiment. Full of yourself, much?
