A villain that doesn't even know the hero's existence?
In the story I'm writing, the villain is a tyrant who is taking over control of the world (a very small one, with only two continents) as he pleases. The hero and many other people are affected by his actions, besides many other sub problems he is causing. But then the hero rises and head to the villain to put an end to all his tyranny.
So the hero knows the villain (at least basic things like name and behavior), however, the villain doesn't even know that the hero exists, and then all of a sudden the hero appears before him saying that he'll be destroyed and such.
I've read that its best when the hero and villain already know each other, so that the final encounter has more depth.
But can a conflict where the hero is unknown by the villain still have depth?
Remember that just because the villain doesn't know the hero --very likely in this scenario --it doesn't mean that the h …
8y ago
The idea that The Villain knows the Hero that is coming for him does make for a much more dramatic entrance. One might a …
8y ago
Maybe have their first encounter go as such. They don't know each other. But the villain might kill someone the hero has …
8y ago
Certainly a story can have this structure. But your analysis of it seems to assume that the antagonist is a role equal t …
8y ago
It sounds great. I think what's throwing you is that you're expecting to get the story from both protagonist and antagon …
8y ago
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/24711. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
5 answers
You are accessing this answer with a direct link, so it's being shown above all other answers regardless of its score. You can return to the normal view.
Certainly a story can have this structure. But your analysis of it seems to assume that the antagonist is a role equal to that of the protagonist in story structure, and that is not the case. Story structure is about the desire of the protagonist and the things that frustrate that desire. Generally this builds as the protagonist faces progressively greater frustrations and puts forth progressively greater effort to overcome them. An antagonist is merely one form of frustration. Sometimes their role is comparatively minor --- series of rivals in a romance plot, for instance --- and the real frustrations comes from another source. (The titular vices in Pride and Prejudice, for instance.)
So your hero is probably not going to wake up one morning and decide to overthrow tyrannous mundi. They are going to have a run in with some minor official, get into trouble, and have to face progressively more senior bad guys as they gather strength and attract the attention of first local and then regional authorities. Only when they have made a sufficient nuisance of themselves at the lower level will tyrannous mundi take any interest at all and start sending progressively more powerful lieutenants to deal with them, leading at last to the final confrontation.
All this fits perfectly with classical story structure of rising action and rising challenge leading to the great climactic moment. Not only does it work, it is in no way exceptional.
0 comment threads
The idea that The Villain knows the Hero that is coming for him does make for a much more dramatic entrance. One might as the author go so far as to put the Villain as a possible winner too...keep your reader on edge.
Some readers might actually prefer the Villain to win even.
The Biblical Tale of the little kid with a stone taking down the Cyclops is timeless though.
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/24721. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
Maybe have their first encounter go as such. They don't know each other. But the villain might kill someone the hero has a personal attachment to, and so it gets personal next time. Good luck!
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/24717. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
Remember that just because the villain doesn't know the hero --very likely in this scenario --it doesn't mean that the hero doesn't have a personal connection to the villain. Not only is this often found in fiction, it's not necessarily rare in real life: People tend to get fired up about a larger injustice when it becomes personal.
You can make this more or less direct, based on your preference. For example:
- The villain makes a new law, and the hero's mother ends up losing her job and starving to death.
- The villain's entourage comes to town, and one of the soldier's horses tramples the hero's mother to death.
- The villain stops at the hero's mother's coffee stand, refuses to pay for his drink, and then torches it to the ground, with her inside.
The villain probably doesn't care about or remember even the most personal of these incidents, but it's the biggest tragedy in the hero's life. Compare the climatic fight scene in The Princess Bride between Inigo Montoya and the six-fingered Count. For Inigo, the death of his father reshaped his entire life. For the Count, it was just another Tuesday (warning: TV Tropes).
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/24803. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
It sounds great. I think what's throwing you is that you're expecting to get the story from both protagonist and antagonist perspectives. Just focus on the hero. His or her story will have the great arc, the joys and losses, the striving, the ultimate success (and the emotional payoff you're looking for). It's completely fine if we don't get the villian's half of the story.
0 comment threads
0 comment threads