Anti Hero Trope GoodvsBad or Just an excuse to be bad?

[idontknowyet]

I  am seeing Anti Hero's everywhere in books. They seem to be a way of saying that no one is perfect, but are the really just a way to make bad behavior appear good?   :evil:

[Tulonsae]

To me, it depends. (My opinion on many things.)

The trope has been around for a long time with a lot of variation, and I'm not up on the current trends. What kinds of anti-heros are you seeing?

[David VanDyke]

It's the usual question of means vs. ends. Is it okay to say the ends justify the means, or not? Antiheroes say the end does justify the means, but they have good intentions. Then again, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Lawful Good vs. Neutral Good or Chaotic Good?

And is it merely about laws, or about violating small morals to justify a greater moral end?

How does that reasoning suck an antihero into a downward spiral toward becoming a villain? Or can s/he resist that temptation to go too far?

Is Raymond Reddington an antihero or a villain? How does one define those things?

[elleoco]

In Romance, the anti-hero has been around since the beginning of the genre. I'm old enough to remember the rape romances of the 1980's, where the heroes were just plain brutal, selfish men who should have been jailed. Instead they met the heroine, took one look at how beeuuutiful she was, fell in love, and turned into loving great guys (and I have a bridge for sale in Brooklyn). Those books put me off the genre for years, but obviously they were popular and the trope still is.

I got the impression that when the audience for that stuff began to diminish, it moved into the paranormal, where the selfish brute couldn't be judged for his actions because he wasn't fully human. Nowadays it seems to have moved on to bigger and better human brutes like world-class assassins.

I don't read those kind of romances and maybe I'm just avoiding the same in other genres, but I don't feel like I see a lot of it in thrillers and mysteries. If you label as an anti-hero the kind of guy who has military or similar background and fights the bad guys tooth and nail, including killing, you could say so, but I don't count those as anti-heroes.

[Angstriddengoddess]

I've had to stop reading YA "romances" because I've read a string of 'em where the heroine is so self absorbed no one else is real.


YA heroines are by definition going through adolescence and frequently self absorbed, but there are (or were) limits. Katniss Whats-her-name could be annoying but she cared about other people (sister, hunk, boytoy) enough to sacrifice herself for them. Bella Non-Descript was vapid, but she put her father and her vampire's welfare ahead of her own. They occasionally stopped moping about their sad lives to care about other people.


I just read a YA where the heroine decided to join the Resistance. (Granted, this was a Dystopian where it's pretty much inevitable that she join and ultimately lead the Resistance.) Then she learns they're going to assassinate some people at a party. She goes to the party, meets the people, realizes they're mostly decent people who are trying to help the downtrodden. Does she lift a finger to stop their murder? No. She thinks "What a pity they have to die, but of course it's For The Cause.


Um... that's not the definition of a heroine. That's the definition of a terrorist.


I skipped forward to the last book in the series, just to see if she had any wakeup/turnaround. Maybe the author was painting her as bad or really stupid in order to do a redemption arc? Nope. Up till the end, all that matter was her feelings at the moment. Whether people live or die doesn't matter unless if affects her. She realizes some of the people she's worked with (loved/broken up with/gotten back together with/broken up again hopefully for good pleeeease make it stop) might die in the last battle. Does she think they shouldn't die because "they're young and have their whole lives ahead of them"? Of course not. She thinks they shouldn't die because "then she'd have their deaths on her conscience." People can't even die without it being All About The Heroine.


I want a heroine who acts heroic. Please?

[Paranormal Kitty]

I love a good antihero. I find the goody-goody, moralistic type heroes boring.

[Angstriddengoddess]

I love a good antihero. I find the goody-goody, moralistic type heroes boring.

Read Dystopian YA. :evil:

[Jeff Tanyard]

Um... that's not the definition of a heroine. That's the definition of a terrorist.

 


I like both the hero and anti-hero archetypes, and I think they're both useful.  I also think they do best when played off against one another.  Would Star Wars be better off with only Han or Luke?  I don't think so.  I think part of its charm is that it has both archetypes and is then able to fully exploit them as archetypes.

Robert Jordan did something similar with Mat and Perrin.  One's the goody-two-shoes sort, the other's the scamp.  And I think having both--and a main hero who's somewhere in the middle--was a great idea on Jordan's part.

[TimothyEllis]

A lot of people dont understand what an anti-hero is.

The anti-hero is someone who does the right thing for the wrong reasons, or in spite of themselves, is there to do the right thing at the right time. Hence Han Solo.

The original ones for me were Avon and Villa in Blakes7, back in the 70's. Avon was money mad to start with, was the tech nerd always looking out for himself, but was always there to do the right thing in the end, even when it meant no money. Villa's motto was "Stealing is quicker", but he too always did the right thing in the end.

A reformed, or reforming, brute, is not an anti-hero. He's a brute. Then he's not.

The word hero has a meaning, and putting anti in front of it doesn't change the meaning of hero. It just changes the character of the hero. Superman is a hero. Batman is an anti-hero.

The books you reject, dont have an anti-hero in them. They have a villain being reformed.

[The Bass Bagwhan]

Not quite the same, but I got sick of flawed, tortured detective-types whose lives are a complete failure and the narrative focuses so much in their personal misery spiralling further out of control ... and, by the way, they catch the serial killer. The issue is making sure "bad" characters don't become unlikeable.

[PJ Post]

I love anti-heroes, because they're so flawed. I'm not, otoh, a fan of alpha-holes or generally abusive MCs. To me, it's not a means to an end so much as it's a different moral code that, for whatever reason, is shifted off-axis. Moral relativism. But I think the arc of atonement is where the literary gold lies, like Han returning to save Luke. How they go from me, me, me, to, okay...maybe you too. But just this once...

Elric was the first anti-hero I read.

[Jeff Tanyard]

A lot of people dont understand what an anti-hero is.

The anti-hero is someone who does the right thing for the wrong reasons, or in spite of themselves, is there to do the right thing at the right time. Hence Han Solo.

Agreed.  Lots of confusion out there between "anti-hero" and "villain protagonist."

[Tulonsae]

I can definitely see Han, Avon, Villa as anti-heroes. And I definitely like them. (Leverage had several anti-heroes, working together.)

It sounds like the OP might be talking about books where the protagonists are simply not heroic. I'm not sure because I tend to avoid reading those books.

[TimothyEllis]

It sounds like the OP might be talking about books where the protagonists are simply not heroic. I'm not sure because I tend to avoid reading those books.

By definition, if the word hero is in there, they have to be heroic.

A redeemable thug is not an anti-hero, without a heroic deed. And redemption by itself is not usually heroic.

Learning to stop bashing women does not make you a hero. Just a reformed thug. But if that thug risks his life for strangers with no thought for his own, or any reward, or anyone noticing it, he becomes an anti-hero.

[Alice Sabo]

Not quite the same, but I got sick of flawed, tortured detective-types whose lives are a complete failure and the narrative focuses so much in their personal misery spiralling further out of control ... and, by the way, they catch the serial killer. The issue is making sure "bad" characters don't become unlikeable.

Yes! How many detectives on TV have dead wives/children/fiances? Sheesh. I'm watching Paranoid right now and the main female lead is a man-crazy idiot. First she's ranting about a break up, then she's trying to sleep with a colleague...can we get back to the mystery please?


And when the loss makes the person too unlikeable? I was disturbed when they had Gibbs assassinate his wife's killer on NCIS. It changed him in a way that I didn't think was helpful or insightful. It seemed a reckless move on his part.

[Tom Wood]

Ralph in Wreck-It Ralph is a great anti-hero. He even starts out as the bad guy, but wants a badge that declares him to BE a hero. Then he has to make the heroic sacrifice at the end to really earn it.

[BlueWren]

Can you have anti-heroes in dramas, where there aren't many 'heroic' acts? I'm curious mostly because of characters like Bojack Horseman, who do bad things, have the moral compass to KNOW they did bad things, but are unable to stop themselves from spiralling, leaving them with a lot of guilt (I love a good tragedy). Would he be an anti-hero or a 'villain-protagonist' or something else entirely?

[Jeff Tanyard]

Can you have anti-heroes in dramas, where there aren't many 'heroic' acts? I'm curious mostly because of characters like Bojack Horseman, who do bad things, have the moral compass to KNOW they did bad things, but are unable to stop themselves from spiralling, leaving them with a lot of guilt (I love a good tragedy). Would he be an anti-hero or a 'villain-protagonist' or something else entirely?

I'm not familiar with Bojack Horseman, but that sounds like a villain protag to me. 

Anti-heroes still do heroic things.  They're just not comfortable doing them because they're afraid of others seeing that heroic part of their character.  They want the world to see them as hard-edged and tough, not vulnerable or sentimental.

Hope that helps.   :icon_smile:

[Angstriddengoddess]

I'm not familiar with Bojack Horseman, but that sounds like a villain protag to me. 

Anti-heroes still do heroic things.  They're just not comfortable doing them because they're afraid of others seeing that heroic part of their character.  They want the world to see them as hard-edged and tough, not vulnerable or sentimental.

So, Rick in Casablanca as opposed to... well, Captain Renault up to the last two minutes of the film?


Villains tend to have the best lines. Maybe they steal them.

[PJ Post]

I think the "anti" part can be based on a lot of different flaws. My anti-hero MC in Palimpsest is very comfortable doing the right thing...but his "right thing" may not be "The" right thing, if you know what I mean. I'm not sure any one perspective mentioned here covers all of anti-hero archetypes. For example, redemption is a popular trope, but Han wasn't looking for anything, he was a totally happy camper...Well, until the bounty hunter on Ord Mantell...

[Cathleen]

I guess I've never understood what an anti-hero is, either. So, according to the definition in this thread, Corwin from Zelazny's original Amber series would have been an anti-hero, correct?