"evil" protagonists

[radferth]

Cadfan wrote in the Vancian thread "2. Not a fan of the Dying Earth books. Too much casual rape. I know, written in an earlier time, main character isn't a "hero" by any stretch of the imagination, prose is still excellent... but about the point where Cugel sells one woman off to be raped with only a twinge of guilt that he rapidly ignores, rapes another, and then shrugs and walks away when she's drowned as a result of his own actions, I quit reading. Technically neither woman was an absolute saint, and maybe I'm hypocritical for not putting the book down after all the casual murders Cugel commits, but I am what I am, I guess.

I'd rather read Matthew Hughes."

I, too, am having trouble getting through the Dying Earth books for this reason. Perhaps I am being hypocritical, because I love Howard's Conan stories. I expect I'll rally and finish despite my loathing for Cugel, because the setting is quite interesting to me, but I'll be rooting against the sociopathic protagonist. I guess everyone has got a certain level of evil they will put up with from the protagonist, and Cugel is way over my personal line. I had through Elric in the Moorcock Melnibone books would from what I had heard of him, but he just strikes me as more of a petulant PC. My trouble with finishing those books is that they give me PSTD-like flashbacks to bad, railroaded D&D campaigns I have been in.

(As an OT aside in my own thread, for all of the Harry Potter series flaws, I greatly appriciate that Rawlings treats Tom Riddle's sociopathy as a disability, rather than a super power.)

 

[Mouseferatu]

We definitely all have our lines, and it seems like mine is very close to yours.

I can read, and enjoy, fiction with some really brutal and/or despicable protagonists. Heck, a lot of what I write involves protagonists who are, in terms of "shades of gray," of a pretty deep charcoal hue.

But the instant a so-called protagonist commits rape, I put the book down. I have never finished, nor do I ever intend to finish, Thomas Covenant for precisely that reason.

Why rape in fiction bothers me when casual murder doesn't (or at least, doesn't necessarily) isn't something I can fully articulate, and I don't think I can even try to do so on these boards. But it's an absolute line with me, in terms of fiction.

 

[Lord Mhoram]

But the instant a so-called protagonist commits rape, I put the book down. I have never finished, nor do I ever intend to finish, Thomas Covenant for precisely that reason.
.

I tend to agree in general - but I have an exception for Covenant.

I first read those when I was a callow teen and ignored the event - and as I read further found that great chunks of plot of the rest of the first trilogy is him feeling complete guilt for it, and trying to atone. Then upon really paying attention, at that point in time, he believed the world was a dream and had no real consequences - so it didn't matter. But then he found out it did ( Not unlike Raskolnikov not being unaffected by murder in Crime And Punishement), and that was one of the things that tied him to the land. So it wasn't a casual thing - it became one of the keystones of the books. And it was funny too, in that Covenant is one of the few fantasy protagonists (I won't say hero) to whom the killing of the bad guys felt like murder, and he felt guilt over it.

One thing about Donalson's writing, good or bad, sex is never something casual, it has great emotional power, and can really affect people.

--Gets off soapbox

As my username might indicate I feel great attachement to the works of Donaldson, notably the Covenant series. So I sometimes feel the need to discuss my views when it comes up.

 

[Afrodyte]

Why rape in fiction bothers me when casual murder doesn't (or at least, doesn't necessarily) isn't something I can fully articulate, and I don't think I can even try to do so on these boards. But it's an absolute line with me, in terms of fiction.

Perhaps because rape is closer to most people's personal experience than murder? IOW, you're more likely to know someone who's been raped than someone who's been murdered.

Would the revulsion you feel about rapist protagonists be similar for protagonists who participate in domestic violence or child abuse?

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

If the character/creature is supposed to be evil, then I don't mind rape any more than murder. Murder is the more serious crime, not to mention. Then again, there are raise dead spells in D&D, and they have relative certainty about their afterlives (to the extent where you don't even NEED faith, you can freaking take a summer vacation to your final resting place!) and where they will end up. All of that may actually lessen the severity of murder in D&D. I don't know, just a thought.

As for my limits...I don't know. I'm sure I have some, but they've gotta be pretty far out there. I've even described torture sessions on some occasions, even though that does bother me a bit. Then again, I never go into super specific or lengthy details.

The only time I've really had a non-good character "take a stand" was one of my CN characters, when he saw a PC in his travelling group he had not known prior, which (not to his knowledge) was a male succubus. They were raiding a paladin's tomb and had just defeated some Crypt Wardens. Each one seemed rather joyous and as they were destroyed, they'd mention about fullfilling their mission and going on to a nice afterlife... So, last one remaining, the succubus declares he'll never be seeing his friends again and begins level draining him. The player claimed those who die from it are condemned to the Abyss. My charcter had no clue exactly what was happening, but could tell it wasn't right. So he rushed in and finished off the crypt warden before the other PC could finish his dirty work. Odd place to draw a line, but there it is.

 

[S'mon]

Cugel raped someone? I didn't even notice. I guess it mustn't have seemed any more 'real' than him killing someone. The rape at the start of the Covenant books is different of course, the whole point is to rack him with guilt for the next umpteen thousand pages.

I wouldn't want any rapist (or other evil, for that matter) PCs in the tabletop games I run these days, although I suppose it might be ok as backstory for a Covenant type. Within limits of description/decorum it might be ok in some online games, though.

 

[Set]

I never read enough of the Dying Earth stuff to even notice these details, as the story itself bored me (granted, I was like 12, but considering that I'd read the Silmarillion, the Illiad and most of HP Lovecraft by then, I had a pretty high tolerance for dry reading).

I did read the Thomas Covenant stuff, and that was a huge turn off for me. It was bad enough that he did it, but it became increasingly obvious that the event (which seemed out of character at the time) only existed so that he could feel bad about it afterwards. Having characters maimed, assaulted or killed to advance someone else's storyline is lame, IMO, even when it's Frank Castle's family, who are faceless un-people who have to die tragically so that he becomes the Punisher.

Still, the genre is filled with non-heroic heroes. Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser were unrepentent thieves, and occasional hit men. Conan stole everything he couldn't have sex with or kill, and a few things he did. Elric of Melnibone was never a nice man (even if his enemies were worse), and had no problem devouring the souls of people to 'power up.'

There's the occasional Three Hearts & Three Lions type character as well, but they aren't exactly the norm.

Our modern media goes a step further, with movies that celebrate ultra-violent assassin characters (Wanted, Pulp Fiction, The Replacement Killers, Kill Bill, Pitch Black/Chronicles of Riddick, even James Bond, to an extent) or cops / agents / lawmen / soldiers who take the law into their own hands to 'get the job done' (John McClaine, Jack Bauer, half of John Wayne or Clint Eastwoods characters) or even primarily 'good-guys' who come from morally gray backgrounds (Seely Booth from Bones, former sniper, Ziva David from NICIS, *hawt* Mossad assassin, Wolverine, psychotic manimal dwarf ex-assassin/samurai/lumberjack, etc.).

And those are the (generally) tame examples. At the far end, we have 'protagonists' like Dexter, serial killer of serial killers, or comic book characters like Venom (who was suggested to be *eating people* in earlier appearances, although they seem to have backed off on that...) becoming superheroes.

It seems like, to be a 'hero' in today's stories, one has to have a shady past and be unapologetically good at (and prone to) threatening, hurting and / or killing people, as well as willfully ignoring any laws or oaths one has sworn to uphold in the performance of one's duties, as nothing says 'good-guy' like 'liar with no code of honor.'

Note that this is *not* a 'things were so much better in some mythical golden age, society is declining!' hand-wringing. Heroes of myth and legend (and even the gods) behaved terribly, sometimes striking people dead for even looking at them funny. We've pretty much always glorified people who take what they want and scoff at restrictions that we have to follow, whether they were named Hercules, Conan or Riddick.

My biggest pet peeve with the rape issue mentioned upthread is when it is used to *empower* a female character. Red Sonja (or the movie I Spit On Your Grace) is the shining example of this trope, but it's pretty much disgusting no matter where it shows up. It's arguably a step up from using a woman's rape to empower or advance the characterization of a male relative, since that makes her victimization purely ancillary *to her own character,* but still, ick.

 

[S'mon]

I did read the Thomas Covenant stuff, and that was a huge turn off for me. It was bad enough that he did it, but it became increasingly obvious that the event (which seemed out of character at the time) only existed so that he could feel bad about it afterwards. Having characters maimed, assaulted or killed to advance someone else's storyline is lame, IMO, even when it's Frank Castle's family, who are faceless un-people who have to die tragically so that he becomes the Punisher.

I have zero problem with revenge plots, and I once played a PC, John Derrick, out to revenge his wife who'd been murdered by GENOM corporation in the 'Bubblegum Crisis' universe. The murder had taken place years before the start of play, play started with Derrick recently escaped from jail.

OTOH, I agree with your point on the Covenant example - it wasn't just yicky, it came across as completely out of character and very poorly written - even with him thinking the victim was a fictional mind-construct, he'd at least have tried to seduce her first!

 

[Cadfan]

I can't say that its impossible for me to enjoy a book with an evil protagonist who commits rape. Its just that it rarely happens. In fact, I can't think of an example of it happening.

In books like Bones of the Dragon, by Weis and Hickman, the main characters are fantasy versions of Vikings. And like Vikings they go on rape, loot, and pillage raids where they, in total historical accuracy, attack farming communities, murder people, and gang rape the women. This all happens off stage (they try at one point but are magically thwarted), but we know the main character has participated in this and considers it honorable, manly activity. Now the plot of the book series involves his society fighting against eradication by outside forces, and I can't help think to myself- Screw them! Let 'em die! Yeah, there are innocents in their culture too, women and children and such, but wouldn't it be a net positive for the world if the hero and everyone he knows and loves were horribly killed? Probably. They aren't good people.

Jim Butcher's Codex Alera has similar problems, but worse. It simultaneously tries to convince you of all the following things. First, that rape is very bad and very traumatic to the victims and evidence of the evil of the rapists. Second, that rape is totally sexy- aphrodisiac slave collars! And more! Third, that rape is totally legal and part of this society's laws and society is fine with that. Fourth, that protecting this society is a good thing and the main character's a hero for doing it. I know that technically speaking the main characters take down one rape den. Good for them! Now what about all the rest of them? Oh, right, those didn't attack your family. So they're fine, I guess.

Vance, by comparison, maybe isn't even that bad. He's just doing a classic plot from mythology. Its just one that leaves me a little uneasy.

I didn't finish either of those three series. I finished a few Codex Alera books before deciding to just stop reading more. I read to completion the first book in the Dragonships series, but don't intend to read the rest. And I got through almost all of Dying Earth until I hit the point where the main character sells one woman to be raped and then personally rapes another all within a very small number of pages. And I just decided that it wasn't fun anymore.

I have put down books because of murder, too- The Weavers of Sarymar series. Good books, but you're supposed to feel bad for characters when their families and loved ones get murdered, and yet some of the main characters murder people for their own convenience and this never gets mentioned or noticed as a potentially bad thing. It just happens and is gone, but every time the character who committed the casual murder gets upset about someone killing their loved ones, I'm reminded that, when situations were switched, they did the same thing. And the authors efforts to get me to empathize with them becomes blunted.

 

[Hand of Evil]

It is all a trick, some done well, some done poorly. What am I talking about, getting people to dislike or like a character. Rape, murder or kicking a puppy is just that, a trick, to get you to form a "quick" dislike to a character. How it is done and what happens after is where it becomes a good trick or a bad one.