# "Bad guy" main character versus "good guy" main character.



## Patrick Skelton (Jan 7, 2011)

I typically enjoy stories with a "good guy" main character. But every once in a while, I enjoy a first-person narrative told from the point of view of a bad guy. Like _A Clockwork Orange_, for example. However, there has to be something likable about the "bad guy" main character for me to keep reading.

My question is: In your opinion, what novels have the best "bad guy" main characters? And what makes them so likable?


----------



## kCopeseeley (Mar 15, 2011)

Okay, this is total kid fiction, but I LOVED the Artemis Fowl books.  The main character was deliciously evil.  

I also liked George R. R. Martin's books because he took several characters I "labeled" as bad at the beginning of the series and turned them into characters I liked.  He also did that with a few of the supposedly good characters.  I love when authors play between what we perceive as good and evil.


----------



## Harry Shannon (Jul 30, 2010)

Flawed people are more interesting, IMHO. Even a good character should have to struggle a bit to be good.


----------



## Patrick Skelton (Jan 7, 2011)

Harry,

Agree. Perfect good guys are boring.  Just as completely evil bad guys are boring as well.  Everyone is capable of good and evil.


----------



## mjdispirito (Mar 29, 2011)

As mentioned, Artemis Fowl and George R.R. Martin are great examples of some seriously flawed characters.  In the vein of Artemis Fowl is Jonathan Stroud's "Bartimaeus Trilogy".  Another great one--if you enjoy fantasy--is Michael Moorcock's "Elric" saga.  

I think it has something to do with our modern notion that everyone is messed up in some way.  There never has been a perfect good guy, even in spiritual literature.  So our common sense rejects those things.

There is a fine line, IMO, between a flawed main character and a main character who is evil.  I mean, I can't read a main character's rape of a child, for instance.  Sadistic things like that have no place in my ebookshelf.  I know it's out there, but I don't want to look over a character's shoulder while it's happening.


----------



## kCopeseeley (Mar 15, 2011)

mjdispirito said:


> As mentioned, Artemis Fowl and George R.R. Martin are great examples of some seriously flawed characters. In the vein of Artemis Fowl is Jonathan Stroud's "Bartimaeus Trilogy".


Oh yeah, that is a great example! Can't believe I forgot that one. Demon narrator and greedy little boy.


----------



## Patrick Skelton (Jan 7, 2011)

Or how about the narrator in that movie with Denzel who turns out to be a demon?  What's it called?

Love that twist!


----------



## zizekpress (Mar 9, 2011)

Patrick Skelton said:


> Or how about the narrator in that movie with Denzel who turns out to be a demon? What's it called?
> 
> Love that twist!


You mean 'Fallen'? That was a good film...


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

Roger Zelazny's _Jack of Shadows_ has a protagonist who is probably more bad than good, depending to some degree on the reader's point of view, I suppose. But compared to his antagonists he's not all that bad, so you find yourself sympathizing with him and pulling for him to succeed, even though you feel a tiny bit guilty about it at times, such as in response to some of the draconian measures he takes to achieve his revenge.

The same can be said for Michael Moorcock's "Elric of Melnibone" books. Elric is "evil" in many ways, (heck, he facilitated


Spoiler



the virtual annihilation of his own race


), yet he does have certain strengths of character that make him the hero, even if it is an anti-hero. Also, over the complete story arc (at least the original series) you do see him evolve philosophically and to some degree morally, making for an even more compelling story. By the end when he realizes what Stormbringer is and what it does, I was crying for Elric (and Moonglum).


----------



## bashfulreader (Jan 29, 2011)

In general, I really don't enjoy reading anything from the "bad" guy's perspective, but I did think of one exception:  Lestat, from Anne Rice's Vampire Chronicles.  You really can't call him a nice guy, but I still loved the books.  (I find it a lot easier to handle paranormal bad guy than a real one, though.)


----------



## JFHilborne (Jan 22, 2011)

Interesting question. I'm not sure which I prefer. A good guy who harbors a darker side might shatter my illusions, especially if the dark elements are revealed after I've already become vested in his character. On the other hand, a bad guy who exhibits a human side and some decency would be easier to like as the novel progresses. What if you combined the two in one novel? How would they compliment each other? Or not......


----------



## purplepen79 (May 6, 2010)

bashfulreader said:


> In general, I really don't enjoy reading anything from the "bad" guy's perspective, but I did think of one exception: Lestat, from Anne Rice's Vampire Chronicles. You really can't call him a nice guy, but I still loved the books. (I find it a lot easier to handle paranormal bad guy than a real one, though.)


_The Vampire Lestat_ is my favorite Anne Rice book. Lestat has an interesting personality. I can handle reading from a villain's perspective if he or she is interesting. Characters in general, whether "good" or "bad," have to be interesting to hold my interest!


----------



## Alain Gomez (Nov 12, 2010)

Patrick Skelton said:


> My question is: In your opinion, what novels have the best "bad guy" main characters? And what makes them so likable?


I really liked the evil uncle in Mysteries of Udolpho simply because I hated the good guys so much.


----------



## patrickt (Aug 28, 2010)

I always wanted to be a good guy and I read books with good guys as protagonists.


----------



## markarayner (Mar 14, 2011)

A lot of Chuck Palahniuk's books feature characters that are the "bad guy" in one sense or another, and I quite enjoy the approach.  Of course, the big one for me on this front is Lolita's Humbert Humbert.


----------



## Patrick Skelton (Jan 7, 2011)

Chuck Palahniuk...didn't he write Choke and Fight Club?


----------



## TadVezner (Mar 23, 2011)

Stephen R. Donaldson's "The Real Story" had a main character that surprised me, how bad he was, in every sense. We're not talking just "flawed." And yet I kept reading.

Likewise Suskind's "Perfume." 

I think in every book that centers on a "bad" main character, you kinda have to have preachy, intolerant, foolish, arrogant, or otherise equally bad "good" guys to balance it out. People you're so sick of that, no matter what, the last think you want is order and peace in their universe.


----------



## Scott B. Pruden (Dec 2, 2010)

Not to sound Clintonian, but it depends on what your meaning of bad is. Do you mean truly evil, a little naughty or just flawed? I believe all protagonists should be flawed in some way just to give them depth or provide a story arc for them to find some form of redemption. Make the hero flawed enough and she becomes an "anti-hero." And if your protagonist is truly bad, you're going to have to at least make him colorful enough (Hannibal Lecter, anyone?) for readers to want to follow his exploits.


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

Just thought of another one: _Grunts_ by Mary Gentle (unfortunately not enKindled). It's your stereotypical epic fantasy told from the Orcs' point of view. I thought the 2nd half dragged a bit, but the first half was wickedly funny at times.


----------



## Steve Vernon (Feb 18, 2011)

People get behind bad guys and anti-heroes because secretly, deep down inside, we all figure we'd look wicked cool wearing a big black hat.


And even a white hat shows the stains...


----------



## William BK. (Mar 8, 2011)

I'm not sure I mind either way. But if your bad guy or villain is the main character, I'd like to at least see him conflicted about what he's doing. If he/she is just a clone of Iago and evil without reason, then I'd lose interest. 

The problem lies in defining "bad guy" here. Do we mean an anti-hero who in spite of being a total [email protected]@rd somehow saves the day, or do we mean the villain who actually needs to be stopped or who is successfully implementing his evil schemes? At the end of the day, I think I prefer reading the latter type of book. Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I don't like it when a bad guy saves the world. However, I'm okay with the [email protected]@rd doing something totally dastardly and getting away with it...

I'm not asking for flat good and bad guys. I only ask not to be put in the position where I have to cheer the bad guy to do something good. If he's bad, I want to see him fail or achieve something evil.


----------



## Josh_Stallings (Mar 18, 2011)

I agree that the definition of "BAD" and "Good" Guys and gals is hard to define.  All of Hard-Bioled crime fiction is based on anti-heros.  From Chandler on we have been writing about broken characters, trying and often failing to rise above their "badness".  I am drawn to deeply flawed people trudging to do good with in their personal moral code.  I find myself bored by pure good or pure evil.  James Lee Burke is a master of making broken heroes work, and allowing you slip you felling on who is and who isn't evil.


----------



## AnnetteL (Jul 14, 2010)

I think the reason anti-heroes work is the same reason a great good hero does: neither is totally good or totally evil.

If a "good" hero is 100% perfect, no flaws, he's more boring than dirt. He needs a weakness. (Even Superman had his Kryptonite.)

By the same token, a good anti-hero isn't all evil. There's something we can relate to--maybe it's a good quality or a motivation for being evil that we can sympathize with on some level.

Artemis Fowl came to mind for me as well--and he's a great example, because his life is so messed up that we do root for him, even if he's breaking the law. Sometimes he's being bad to outdo even worse bad guys (which is moral in its own way). Other times he's doing bad things to save his mother (who can't relate to THAT?).

Even if the bad guy isn't the main character, I like to read about bad guys who aren't all evil.

Here's an interesting one--I'm not sure if the main character is an anti-hero or not: John Cleaver from the I Am Not a Serial Killer series. He's a teen sociopath who makes up rules to do the right thing, but at the same time, he ends up doing some bad things because in those cases, it IS the right thing. But where do you draw the line, and when does a good thing become a bad thing? Fascinating and disturbing all at once. The third book in the trilogy just came out. I'm going to have to download it (and then read it during the day!).


----------



## mjdispirito (Mar 29, 2011)

So what it comes down to is the defining role of "good" and "bad" characters.  Is there such a thing anymore?  Even with villains, it's important to not peg them as the typical rubbing-hands-together-while-laughing-maniacally type.  Maybe the concept of good and bad no longer holds water... ?

I also thought of Conan for another example--brutish, womanizing, given to excess, but the consummate fantasy hero.  Is he good or evil?  We can ask that question for any character: are they wholly good or evil, or a mix of varying qualities?


----------



## DanG (Mar 10, 2011)

I really enjoyed _Soon I Will Be Invincible _ which has the villian as the main character. It's not a point of view I see done enough, well enough.


----------



## EGranfors (Mar 18, 2011)

A Million Little Pieces

The Evolution of Bruno Littlemore(?) (he's a chimp and very arrogant!)


----------



## Guest (Apr 7, 2011)

mjdispirito said:


> I also thought of Conan for another example--brutish, womanizing, given to excess, but the consummate fantasy hero. Is he good or evil? We can ask that question for any character: are they wholly good or evil, or a mix of varying qualities?


I think we tend to think in very black and white terms, and therefore still cling to ideas like good and evil. But in truth evil people don't consider themselves evil. I really don't envision someone wakes up in the morning, pours a cup of coffee, and says "I believe I shall be extremely evil today. Now I shall start by kicking a puppy."

Lestat was a great example. He talks about evil, but honestly one wonders if he even understands the concept. Conan kicks butt, but that is because he wants to beat people up. Not neccessarily save the world. The entire Sellswords series by R.A. Salvatore follows Jarlaxle and Artemis, the bad guys from the Drizzt books, but even though they do evil things, it is clear they don't put stock in the definitions of good and evil.

And evil is relative. Who is the villain in _Merchant of Venice_? We know who the villain is suppose to be based on the norms of the era. But who would be the villain today? Heck, who is the real villain in the Book of Job? The devil, who wants to bet God that he can tempt Job into sin, or God for LETTING HIM TRY?


----------



## Ottilie (Jan 15, 2011)

Haha fun question!  I do enjoy an occational good boy in books, but there is just something about readinging a mysterious bad boy who has another side to him.  The recent one for me is Ren from Nightshade, another is Roiben in Tithe who was a black knight   It is really bad to be a sucker for them...


----------



## Markterry (Apr 5, 2010)

I'd second (or third) Artemis Fowl.


----------



## Markterry (Apr 5, 2010)

I'd second (or third) Artemis Fowl.


----------



## marktrainer (Apr 6, 2011)

A lot of the classic noir crime novels have bad guys as the protagonist.  The Killer Inside Me, The Postman Always Rings Twice and Double Indemnity come to mind right away.

I think most of us have a deep fear of breaking the law alongside a buried desire to do whatever the heck we want.  It can be thrilling to see how things play out for characters who do the stuff we secretly want to do.  I also think that the squalid ends most of these protagonists meet reassure us that we're better off not going that route.


----------



## markarayner (Mar 14, 2011)

Patrick Skelton said:


> Chuck Palahniuk...didn't he write Choke and Fight Club?


You got it. And I was thinking also of Rant and Survivor -- both feature pretty flawed anti-heros.


----------



## SM Johnson (Apr 5, 2011)

Bad guy main character that I ALWAYS rooted for was.... drumroll (and put on your memory stretching hats) Don Pendleton's The Executioner - Mack Bolan. He was a very bad guy, who dedicated his life to killing ever "badder" bad buys.

Similarly, how about Lee Child's character, Jack Reacher? Talk about the ultimate revenge fantasy. "What, you won't serve me a cup of coffee in this town? Fine. I'll dig deep until I find corruption, and then I'll blow up your city/county building. You'll wish you served me coffee instead of trying to run me out of tonw!" (Not a direct quote, btw, just very wide and generalized paraphrasing).

Pehaps I am confusing "bad guy" main character with anti-hero. Regardless, I love both of the above.


----------



## mjdispirito (Mar 29, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I think we tend to think in very black and white terms, and therefore still cling to ideas like good and evil. But in truth evil people don't consider themselves evil. I really don't envision someone wakes up in the morning, pours a cup of coffee, and says "I believe I shall be extremely evil today. Now I shall start by kicking a puppy."
> 
> Lestat was a great example. He talks about evil, but honestly one wonders if he even understands the concept. Conan kicks butt, but that is because he wants to beat people up. Not neccessarily save the world. The entire Sellswords series by R.A. Salvatore follows Jarlaxle and Artemis, the bad guys from the Drizzt books, but even though they do evil things, it is clear they don't put stock in the definitions of good and evil.
> 
> And evil is relative. Who is the villain in _Merchant of Venice_? We know who the villain is suppose to be based on the norms of the era. But who would be the villain today? Heck, who is the real villain in the Book of Job? The devil, who wants to bet God that he can tempt Job into sin, or God for LETTING HIM TRY?


I just had to bump this one... Excellent exposition, Julie. One of the better ones I've read on the subject.


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

purplepen79 said:


> _The Vampire Lestat_ is my favorite Anne Rice book. Lestat has an interesting personality. I can handle reading from a villain's perspective if he or she is interesting. Characters in general, whether "good" or "bad," have to be interesting to hold my interest!


This is one I definitely need to read again. The only reason I even considered reading the next few Anne Rice books was because of The Vampire Lestat. Lestat was not a good guy, and that was a welcome change in protagonists for me at the time.

I'm definitely fine with an evil doer or an especially flawed hero as a protagonist. The flaws of Corwin in the Great Book of Amber were also really interesting to me. When he led an assault on his own land that caused a great rift, I found myself captivated. I might have even not liked the Merlin subseries as much as the first 5 books in The Great Book of Amber because Merlin was nowhere near as interesting as his father Corwin, imo. I actually found myself liking Luke and his mother quite a bit more than I liked Merlin in the last five books.

I'm going to have to reread that entire series again. Unfortunately, I loaned it to an old girlfriend. Guess I'll have to pick up the series again !


----------



## purplepen79 (May 6, 2010)

Corwin from the Chronicles of Amber . . . thank you for that great example, rexjameson!  Love those books, especially the ones featuring Corwin.


----------



## Tony Rabig (Oct 11, 2010)

Run, do not walk, to your bookstore/library/computer and grab the series of novels Donald Westlake (writing as Richard Stark) wrote about the professional thief Parker. Wonderful dark and gritty stuff. Westlake's stand-alone chillers THE AX and THE HOOK are also well worth your time (and a lot of writers will probably love the opening chapters of THE HOOK).

Bests to all,

Tony Rabig

_--- edited... no self-promotion outside the Book Bazaar forum. please read our Forum Decorum thread._


----------



## Patrick Skelton (Jan 7, 2011)

I liked the conflicted bad guy main character..particularly if there is redemption.


----------



## markarayner (Mar 14, 2011)

purplepen79 said:


> Corwin from the Chronicles of Amber . . . thank you for that great example, rexjameson! Love those books, especially the ones featuring Corwin.


Oh, and Elric of Melinbone too!


----------



## SidneyW (Aug 6, 2010)

Tony Rabig said:


> Run, do not walk, to your bookstore/library/computer and grab the series of novels Donald Westlake (writing as Richard Stark) wrote about the professional thief Parker.


I was wondering as I scrolled through if anyone was going to mention Parker, because he's the first character that came to my mind. The first book, which they seem to make over and mover into movies, is a great one, and the others in the series are always engrossing, to me, as well. Tough stuff with a tough, bad guy lead.


----------



## Guy James (May 2, 2011)

I think James Patterson does a very good job of this in the way he has good guy and bad guy povs. It's a nice contrast that he sets up. That way, you can have both, and the reader can find things he likes in each pov and can secretly root for the bad guy in some instances.


----------



## Picatsso (Mar 24, 2011)

I always ask myself why I want the crooks to get away with the loot....but only if they are cute and interesting and funny....dumb.

Like Oceans Eleven.....you WANT them to get away with it...just 'cause it's cool.


----------



## Tamara Rose Blodgett (Apr 1, 2011)

Really tough (I'd think) to write a POV making the protagonist be sympathetic to like and also "hate." But, when it's done well, it is way-better/exciting/engaging than the regular, "good-guy-main." Personally, a flawed character resonates much better with me. I like people to prevail against terrible circumstances and make tough choices based on doing the right thing...or sometimes the wrong thing because that's all they could "see" to do. Thoughtful question...those are the type that get us all thinking!


----------

