Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/34273
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/34273
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

Be careful not to confuse the concept of protagonist with the concept of good guy or even hero. Protagonist simply means the main character of the story. Similarly, antagonist does not mean bad guy or villain, it simply means the person opposed to the protagonist.

There is nothing at all to say that the protagonist has to be good and the antagonist bad. It is certainly the more common setup, but there is nothing that requires it.

Nor is it essential for the audience to root for the protagonist. Do we root for MacBeth? For King Lear? For Othello? For Raskolnikov, For Miss Jean Brodie? What is essential is that the audience be _interested_ in the protagonist. We may wish for the protagonist's downfall and still be more interested in their story arc than that of their virtuous antagonist.

It can be just as compelling to have the reader rooting for your protagonists defeat, or for their reformation, as for their victory. In many ways, the reformation of a bad protagonist is more moving than the victory of a good one. Redemption is one of the most profound themes in literature.

But you don't even need that. There is no one worth rooting for in _On the Road_. It is basically a horror show of cruel and self-destructive hedonism. There is no redemption to be found in it. But it is compelling stuff nonetheless, because in these horrible people we recognize humanity and its struggles. We may, perhaps, hope for a redemption or a comeuppance, but neither ever comes. It ends in exhaustion and estrangement. If there is a payoff, it is that the world stops spinning and the music stop blaring and you can think again. It is a horror show, but it is a compelling horror show.

Original score: 10