Balance of power. Breaking the Antagonist's iron grip?

[SirTimberWolf]

Quasi-epic title for a fundamental question I've been mulling over since I finished the ending of my story.

Summed up: my protag has absolutely zero chance of winning a knock down drag out fight with my antag (which he quickly learns when my antag shatters his cheek) However the protag doesn't give up, even at the edge of death he tries to fight. When the antag picks him up and asks him why he keeps fighting he points to his girlfriend (who the antag has been trying to capture/kill through the book).

When the antag asks him 'What makes that thing so special?' the protag simply says 'I love her'. The antag pauses, stricken with his answer and finally he sees that the things he's been neglecting in his life might be more important than the things he been pouring his energy into (war up to this point basicly.)

My question: I think I might have screwed myself into this ending but at some level, it works. The antag spends the majority of the book investigating case files regarding the protag's love interest. (very important to the story) His daughter keeps trying to get his attention and hold it but he always comes back to 'work'. However the protag is very emotionally invested in his love interest and their lives.

All through the book they go back and forth- antag trying to one up protag- protag simply trying to stay alive. And when it finally comes down to it the antag sees that he was wrong (with pushing from his daughter and his own love interest.)

So is this too sterotypical/corny/whatever?

-Woefully lost
John

[alleycat]

If that was the final climatic moment (the antagonists finally seeing that love is greater than all) then, to me, it would probably be a letdown. Now if it was just part of the ending, or just made the antagonist pause momentarily giving the protagonist an opening, then it could be a good detail.

[catethegreat]

If that was the final climatic moment (the antagonists finally seeing that love is greater than all) then, to me, it would probably be a letdown.

I agree.

What would be great is to have the antagonist realize that he has been wrong all along and yet continue on with his evil doings.

PS: I would be careful making your antagonist too sympathetic. Having him realize his mistakes and want to spend quality time with his daughter, etc. would be a definite letdown. That is unless your antagonist is really just a secondary character who happens to be causing problems for your MC.

[Matera the Mad]

Yeah, sudden realizations by obsessed creeps that they are wrong will make believability scanners hang and crash, even at low default settings. If it was that easy, we'd live in a nice-guy world. If it could happen, it could happen the other way -- protag could say he was wrong. Not gonna happen.

[Michael Davis]

I agree with alleycat. If you build upon it, maybe how it changes his approach, makes him quit his job, stop hating women, want that type of human bond, or what ever, I see no problem. Writing is just a twist or new angle to old ideas anyway.

[a_sharp]

John,

Seems to me you've spent the whole story building up reader hatred of the antag, and most of the story has been conflict between antag and protag. The sudden realization you describe won't be satisfying. In fact, it sounds deflating by your own description.

By fight time, we want to see this kind of antagonist bloodied, or something like. His realization, if you must have it, might come as he's dying, or being led away to prison (for whatever reason) or as he's met some other drastic end. Your reader has invested a lot of emotion rooting for the protag and wanting the antag to get what's coming to him. To make it dribble away at the end is anticlimactic.

Looks like you've built a powerful conflict between these two characters, probably lots of passion, with a violent peak (the fight) culminating the mutual hatred. Something or someone has to break something. That's just how story goes, that's how we want it to end. Up to this point, it sounds like you've achieved what a lot of us struggle for. I say don't waste your success from all this effort on an ambivalent out-of-character switch.

[Woolly]

Rather than drop an anvil on the reader, drop an anvil on the antagonist. That's to say, a scrappy protagonist, even when physically outmatched, can figure out some graceless way to blast the enemy to hell. It doesn't have to be an elaborate triumph of wit over strength, but how it happens will be an important determinant of how people feel about the story and should reflect in some way the themes and personalities of the characters and the buildup of the whole story. The exchange with the antagonist asking why is potentially interesting, but not conclusive. Perhaps after that conversation the protagonist realizes how far he's willing to go and how desperate he is to live and grabs the antagonist's daughter, leading the antagonist to realize that he would rather save her. Of course, such a move would have to be in-character for the protagonist and would have to be dealt with in some way in the aftermath. It's self-evident, of course, that this is your book and you should make your decisions; my example is simply an illustration of one way in which the threads of the story might come together more cohesively.

[DamaNegra]

(snip!)he points to his girlfriend (who the antag has been trying to capture/kill through the book).

When the antag asks him 'What makes that thing so special?' the protag simply says 'I love her'.

(snip!)

The antag spends the majority of the book investigating case files regarding the protag's love interest. (very important to the story) His daughter keeps trying to get his attention and hold it but he always comes back to 'work'.


What I want to know is why the antag spends the entire book investigating and capture/kill a person he did not deems special or important. Is it just to mess with the protag?

Then... uh... I'm sorry but I need a stronger reason.

[Use Her Name]

What You described seems corny to me. The whole antagonist weeping because someone mentioned love is like a Disney film. Beauty and the Beast, maybe.

I think also that a scenario like this assumes that the antagonist is so dense he has never questioned his own actions. If so, he is not a very good character. I don't know who your antagonist is, but if he's got anything of any social value, he's got a ton of beautiful wenches to chose from. If he wants the girl so badly that he would kill or maim to get her, then he has really thought about love-- probably egotistically and erroneously, but he thought about it.

[tehuti88]

Someone already mentioned, above, an angle that could possibly help or save this scenario--the antagonist not reaching the moment of realization unless his own daughter is endangered. That makes a lot more sense than him having an epiphany over the protagonist's love interest; why should he care about how the protagonist feels about her? He hasn't cared about the protagonist's feelings before then, so it's unbelievable if he suddenly does.

In my own WIP, the lesser bad guy and his wife have been hassling the good guys for a long time. The protagonist is constantly asking them why they do this, and warning them about the punishment they'll get in the end, but they're all about gaining power, and they honestly don't care what she has to say. Soon the antagonist's wife is going to end up killed when the bad guy behind it all betrays them, and THAT is going to be the minor antagonist's epiphany moment, when he realizes the cost of what he's been doing (his wife's life) and sides with the good guys. THING IS...he does this only to get back at the main bad guy...and he never fully abandons his selfish ways. He still has his own goals of attaining power and possibly someday taking on the good guys again, but at least for the moment, he sees it in his best interests to help them out. See? He has a realization moment that what he's doing isn't for the best, but he still stays true to his character and there isn't an immediate, 180-degree change. He helps the good guys but for his own selfish reasons, and despite being the lesser of two evils, he's still an "evil."

"Bad guys" rarely experience dramatic changes in their views because one of the good guys is endangered or they see that the good guys are "right." They're more likely to see the error of their ways if it's one of their own who's in trouble. However, even then, it's unlikely that they'll do a complete turnaround. Your villain would be far more believable if he only turned around what works for him, what's most advantageous to turn around, while otherwise remaining true to his villainous character. Otherwise, he's not really an antagonist in the end, just misunderstood.

[maddythemad]

I think you've already heard my opinions in the above posts (several times), but something that stuck out to me was why the antagonist would be trying so hard to kill our MC's girlfriend, when he doesn't even find her attractive/interesting/whatever.

Also, of course I don't know how it's done in the book, but it seems like a plot where the MC is eternally trying to escape the baddie-- and the baddie is chasing him around and (despite being more powerful), eternally letting him escape-- could get dull/be too episodic. (Obviously you may have subplots, etc, that keep this from being so.)

Finally, re: the ending, I think that, yes, when you describe it to us that way, it seems corny. HOWEVER. Many talented writers pull of "clichéd" plot material or plot twists in ways that don't make them seem stupid at all, and then it's only when you're describing them to someone else that you're like, "Um, yeah, that sounds stupid and dumb. BUT IT'S AN AMAZING BOOK." And if your book has been building towards this moment for awhile, I feel like it might work. Especially if it's more of a character-driven piece as opposed to an action/adventure novel (in which case I find it harder to believe the ending you have in mind would be satisfying.)

But, of course, I haven't read the book. None of us have. So...... we might be wrong.

Try posting the scene in SYW? Good luck, SirTimberWolf.

[SirTimberWolf]

Thanks for the replies, everyone.

I've had some time to think it over and, while I still haven't come up with an end all be all solution, I'm sure I'll figure something out.

During the story the antag finds the protag's love interest and thinks that she is part of this war (the opposing side) however he quickly learns that she couldn't have come from the forces his side is fighting against. This leads him to think that there's a second group of people like his enemy (very dangerous to his cause. It could extend the war and all this.)

The antag becomes exedingly upset as the protag (and, unbenounced to him, some of his 'allies' help him to) get away by using his street smarts, hiding between the cracks and so forth. So when they finally come together the antag is itching to find out why he would risk his life for something he considers to be sub human. As a secondary, he wants to find out if there's a secondary group somewhere.

I suppose it'd make sense that he might pause for a moment, giving the protag an opening, especially when he learns that the antag isn't all he seems. Something he can exploit. . . :e2writer:

I guess the only question now is: Does the antag live or die? Looks like its time for an all nighter.

[TrickyFiction]

What You described seems corny to me. The whole antagonist weeping because someone mentioned love is like a Disney film. Beauty and the Beast, maybe.

In defense of Disney's Beauty and the Beast, Gaston never let up. He was a villain until the bitter end.


Anyway, what I want to see in the end of a book is the protagonist overcoming obstacles. I don't want the obstacles to just collapse before him. Don't get me wrong. I love the redemption of the villains. It was the whole reason little eight-year-old me fell in love with Star Wars. But Luke had to win first, before Vader went soft. Luke had to beat the dark side by resisting its allure or whatever. Only after that could both antagonists collapse on themselves.

That said, the idea of a powerful antagonist turning into a blubbering mess because the hero says he loves his girlfriend, seems unlikely and a little hokey to me. There's got to be more to it than that.

[Dale Emery]

So is this too sterotypical/corny/whatever

The way you've presented it seems too corny to me. It seems very Grinchlike.

Your description gives the impression that the antag is entirely unaware of the concept of love. And yet suddenly, when the protag professes his love for the girl, the antag rethinks his whole life.

For this to work, the antag would at that very moment have to be on the brink in his own development, close enough to a breakthrough (or a breakdown) that the protag's words would connect deeply with him. That means that you'd have to plant a lot of clues that the antag is capable of having that insight, at that moment, in response to that stimulus.

It's probably doable, but if I'm reading your description right, and the antag is so unaware of love as not to be able to imagine the protag's motivations, then I don't see how he could be ready to have such a profound insight.

Dale