I promised I would make a real post when I had something to say. Having taken a few days to think about it, I have a topic.

Dani talked about endings over at Jones & Bennett and it got me thinking. Not about endings specifically, though those do factor in. What it got me thinking about was Good and Evil. (A note should be made that the title of this post was almost “Good and Edit” because apparently when my brain says “evil” my fingers type “edit.” Who knew.)

Be it movies, books, plays, television, whatever, I’ve always been fascinated with the bad guys. Call them villains, call them antagonists, call them evil or call them the bad guys, in general I find them far more interesting and even likable than the protagonist/heroes/good guys. (For the sake of expediency, the two will be referred to as “the protagonist” and “the antagonist” from here on in.) Now, perhaps this is just me and my own leanings. I have more than a few friends who think I am hellspawn, and more often than not, I grin at the nickname. I know it’s something other than “the undeniable allure of the bad boy.”

My theory is this: When creating a protagonist, a writer has only to give then a drive to do good. Because, after all, that is human nature to want to “do good.” There doesn’t really need to be much more explanation than that. But, when creating an antagonist, a writer has to give them a reason for being the way they are. If a writer simply says, “Well, they are completely deranged and went off the deep end so long ago he wasn’t even aware there was a shallow end,” that’s one thing. A generally boring and uninteresting thing, but a thing nonetheless. But if a writer gives the antagonist a reason for being the way “he” is, then it becomes more believable.

Now, the thing about that, then, is that the antagonist is much more thought out than the protagonist, and thus a much more enjoyable character to read about or watch. They have more depth to them. They move out of the realm of “evil” and into “misunderstood.” This also, for me, usually makes them more likable.

I mentioned that this would have something to do with endings, also. And it does, insofar as I would like to someday see a book in which “evil” wins. All right, this happens, I know it does. But I want it to be done well, and I want to it still be a happy ending, somehow. Just once, I want the girl being chased by Dracula to say, “Okay, yeah, you know what? Being immortal wouldn’t be so bad. And the sun would only have given me skin cancer anyway. So sure, Dracula, go ahead. Bite me.” (If someone has a suggestion other than Queen of the Damned I would be happy to hear it.)

This doesn’t happen though. In general, the readers want a “happy ending” which means that the protagonist wins, and the antagonist is “taken care of.” This bother me. It bothers me a lot.

I am going to do something about it, at some point. You can fully expect, in my books, Dracula’s going to bite the damn girl.