Quick villainy check

[silvrethorn]

Am I right in thinking that "because she's evil," "because he's like Hitler," and/or "because he's a megalomaniac" is frowned upon by editors as a villain's motivation in a story? Don't publishers (and readers) desire more complex and relatable reasons for villains to perform their villany these days?

Comments

[cornerofmadness]

Honestly I don't know. Voldemort was pretty much megalomaniac

[silvrethorn]

But at least Voldemort had a backstory. Orphaned, half-blood, rejected by his father's family and bitter against them--his whole shtick was revenge. A megalomaniac with no backstory is just a mustache-twirling cliche, and I'm pretty sure I've read somewhere--probably several somewheres--that evil for evil's sake is a no-no. It certainly makes for a flat, uninvolving story if the villain has no dimension.

[cornerofmadness]

well yes, that is certainly true. There needs to be some sort of motivation.

Of course the flip side is every villain is the hero of his own story

[silvrethorn]

Showing why the villain thinks he's right automatically takes him out of the cardboard-cliche category and gives him dimension. One of my writers' group members seems to think she doesn't need a reason for her villain to build a secret genetics lab, attempt to breed aggressive, trans-species mutant soldiers, and take over a solar system beyond "he's evil" and "he's a megalomaniac." A real villain would have a real motive--hates UniWorld's pacifist one-world governing style, felt cheated out of a high-command position so he's gonna show 'em all, anything besides "Because I'm evil, bwa-ha-ha!" Not knowing why the villain wants this rulership so desperately makes the story feel poorly thought out and amateurish, not to mention flat. And a quick Internet check confirms that, yeah, "because he's evil" is not an acceptable motive for your villain if you want to be published (or sell any books if you're self-published).