Villainy

[ericoppen]

No: HPFGUIDX 109402

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> Dunno about you but I'm disappointed in Voldy.
> Seems to be more caricature than character.
> More cardboard cut-out than cut-throat.
> Which is a bit surprising; JKR's pulled off a deliciously nasty 
piece 
> of work in Snape but seemed unable to go a step  further and 
produce an 
> equally convincing evil mastermind.

To be fair to her, those are _hard_ to write...at least if you want 
the good guys to win!  S.M. Stirling says that in his works the 
villains "have read the Evil Overlord list," so he has to work harder 
to pull off believable wins for the Good Guys.  And sometimes---they 
don't.

> 
> The problem is that most villains are set up to lose; it's a given -
 
> evil never triumphs, and it won't in HP either. No matter how 
powerful 
> and intelligent, no matter that he has overwhelming technological 
(or 
> magical) advantage and an army of ruthless killers at his beck and 
> call, it makes no difference. Even if the hero has nothing but a 
bent 
> pocket knife and a piece of string, the baddy goes down.

Hence, the plethora of Incredibly Stupid, Overconfident Villains.  
Otherwise, the writers might have to _work_ to figure out convincing 
ways for the heroes to win.  

> 
> To do this the author must force him into committing egregious or 
even 
> farcical mistakes. He has to - otherwise how could he  possibly 
lose?

To be fair, a lot of RL villains have done just this.  The man who 
led Germany from 1933 to 1945 is a prime example---I'll not mention 
his name here for fear of invoking Godwin's Law, but it has been 
commented that anybody in the world _other than him_ could have won 
against Stalin by doing a few simple things that were well within his 
power.  

 
>what makes an evil 
> mastermind make the grade.
> 
> Firstly -  he must have ambitions that make sense.
> Voldy needs to sort out  his priorities here.
> He wants to be immortal. ( Why? What is the point? To any thinking 
> person immortality isn't a boon, it's a curse. It might be 
> understandable if he was going to do something with all that time; 
> travel the galaxies, meet strange aliens, feed them to Nagini. Not 
this 
> one -  he's staying at home.)

Of course, he should also figure out _eternal youth_ while he's on it-
--wouldn't do to end up like that character in Greek myth, the one 
who got immortality but _not_ eternal youth, and ended up as a 
cricket.

And I wouldn't mind immortality---the thing I'll hate most about 
death is that there'll be all these books coming out afterwards that 
I'll never get to read!    

> 
> In PS/SS getting hold of the Stone is his priority, Harry seems to 
be 
> an accidental stumbling block to his plan.
> Thereafter he turns his attention on Harry. But if he stuck to his 
> plan, gained true immortality while in the meantime avoiding young 
> Potter then Harry becomes an irrelevance. And he'd save himself an 
> awful lot of trouble if he stopped bashing his head against the 
same 
> brick wall time after time.

Very, very true.  Or if he went with the "Keep it simple, stupid!" 
plan---finding and hiring a Muggle hit man or hit team to go after 
Harry in the summer at the Dursleys' wouldn't be terribly difficult.  
Or Imperiusing one of the Dursleys to poison Harry's food.  


> 
> What are his wider ambitions?  In reality we only have a vague 
idea, 
> and that from Hagrid, " Getting  supporters.....Taking things 
over." A 
> bit vague for a manifesto. And since I can't remember Voldy coming 
out 
> with any of the standard give-away phrases during any 
> foaming-at-the-mouth carpet-chewing episodes; it makes you wonder 
if 
> Hagrid's to be trusted in this.

True again.  Hagrid's not exactly a bubbling fountain of Revealed 
Truth, now is he?  For that matter, what if "taking over the WW" 
isn't just what he tells his DEs is his plan, to keep them busy and 
out of his way while he gets up to his _real_ goals.  


> This time there's Voldy  and a few dozen half-assed half-wits with 
> delusions of adequacy who can't even subdue half a dozen school 
kids 
> without cocking it up.

I wouldn't be surprised, myself, if the DEs at the Ministry weren't 
hampered by _not_ being "Lord Voldemort;" IOW, unlike him, they did 
have scruples, even unconscious ones, about hurting or killing kids---
especially since some of them had children that age themselves.  

I think that a lot of the "commit gratuitous atrocities, bwahahaha!" 
schtick the DEs go through is to weed out the ones that really aren't 
up to snuff---the ones who can't or won't obey Lord Thingy, right, 
wrong or purple.  

> 
> Nah. Spiteful and targeted revenge for imagined childhood slights 
is 
> one thing -  stretching it to a lust for world domination is a bit 
> much,  even in these days of ersatz pop psychology.
> 
> As presented in the books Voldy isn't a world threat, he's a local 
> problem. In the 5  years covered by the books Voldy and his 
acolytes 
> have killed about 20 (if you include the 13 Muggles). Hardly 
impressive 
> from the most evil coterie around, is it? Voldy as a renegade in a 
> small, hidden sub-section of society that works on a different 
basis to 
> ours is fine. Expanding into the RW where RW systems and logic are 
our 
> everyday currency is a mistake IMO.

Especially since the MoM is in communication with the Muggle PM.  At 
seventh and last, a FAE or even a pony-nuke on Lord Thingy's position 
would fix _his_ little red wagon, once and for all.  

> 
> So -  an outline for an evil villain:-
> 
> Understandable and/or credible ambitions that appear  achievable.
> 
> An original motivation that rings true (animus to your father 
turning 
> one into a world tyrant just doesn't hack it).
> 
> Intelligence in the villain predicates intelligent actions within 
the 
> plot. For example punishing a messenger because he brings bad news 
is 
> stupid and counter-productive. Even worse, not using a wand when 
you've 
> got one in your hand.

That said, it is stated repeatedly that the Notorious V.Mort has gone 
through a lot of "dangerous magical changes," starting out as that 
han'sum young Head Boy and turning into something like a bad _Star 
Trek_ alien from the first show.  Can it be that some of those 
transformations didn't go _quite_ right, and played hob with his mind?

> 
> Why concentrate solely on the hero? Why not knock off the hero's  
> friends and supporters? That really would be evil and there are too 
> many Weasleys anyway.

Good question, this.  

> 
> Nasty habits that chime with primitive personal fears. War doesn't 
do 
> it, it's not aimed at you the reader *personally*; but imagining 
being 
> ripped open and having your heart eaten can make your toes curl. So 
> could selling Ginny to the Goblins as sushi-on-the-hoof, but 
> controlling Belgium is a yawn.

Or, even worse...no, let's not go there.  This is _Harry Potter,_ not 
_The Alchemist of Gor_ (_Potions Master of Gor,_ in the US edition).  

Of course, selling Ginny might turn into a money-making deal for Lord 
Wal-Mart.  See the O. Henry story "The Ransom of Red Chief" if you 
want the details.  

> 
> Ranting and posturing is out. Cold and implacable is in.
> He might be  a nutter, but if he doesn't *appear* to be reasonable 
> how's he going to attract followers?
> 
> Potential problems will be foreseen and taken into account.
> He's supposed to be bright, isn't he?
> 
> If he intends "taking over" he must have some idea of why he wants 
it 
> and what he's going to do with it when he's got it. Anybody know? 
It 
> would help greatly if the reader knew what it was that Harry was 
> actually saving from his evil clutches.
> 
> If he captures or corners the hero,  expect the hero to die except 
in 
> *very* exceptional one-off circumstances. (The conflict of wands 
works 
> for Harry vs Voldy;  Harry also escaping the ravening horde of DEs 
> doesn't wash.)

All excellent points.  

Frankly, were I in Tom Riddle's shoes as he left Hogwarts, I'd get 
myself a job with the MoM, to learn how it worked from the inside 
out.  I don't know if I'd become an Auror---I'd bet that potential 
Aurors are screened by a top Legilimens, and until I had Occlumency 
down absolutely pat, I'd not want to risk going near a Legilimens if 
I didn't have to.  

I'd also get to know Important Wizards---*cough the Malfoys and 
Blacks, cough cough* who could help me in my Rise to Power.  I'd 
leave the magical transformations for later, once I was MoM or the 
man behind the MoM, pulling his strings.  If he were as good at 
schmoozing in the Ministry as Percy Weasley seems to be, combined 
with a bit of the ol' ruthless approach (poison in the Butterbeer, a 
discreet AKing _with no stupid Dark Marks,_ and so on) he could well 
still be a relatively young wizard when he got to the top.