Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
Imagine the Hero / Heroine fighting the Dark Lord in the throne room of the Citadel of Evil. The hero is smart, kind, muscular, has a perfect hairstyle and Carden armor.
Now replace him with a drunk, dirty, smelly drunk in a tank top and sweatpants, with a distinctive vocabulary and fighting style.
And imagine how the hero beats a child, an old lady, a kitten, etc. with a bat.
Which image is more attractive?
Alien – attractive? The Terminator? Drug thugs from “Breaking Bad”?
We must not forget that a person always dislikes a neighbor whose wife is prettier, the cow is fatter, and the grass is greener and looks for flaws in him(beautiful-snob, rich-stole, strong-stupid, smart – or nerd or snob again), so villains are necessarily endowed with such features that the mass reader/the viewer subconsciously disliked them. None of the above qualities says anything about a person's personality.
It is not the abstract “image of evil” that is attractive, but rather the very specific character traits of a very specific character. Certain features of the protagonist or antagonist are the result of the work of the screenwriter/writer. And they depend only on the purpose that this image serves. So giving evil positive qualities is nothing more than an artistic device.
First, it helps to add depth to the character, to become more human(heroes also tend to add some shortcomings). Second, it increases the contrast between the protagonist and the antagonist. If the hero is a simple guy, the sophisticated rich villain will look more expressive and vice versa(Harry Potter – Draco Malfoy, Thor-Loki, thousands of them!). And then the conflict comes alive. Instead of a fight between a beaver and a donkey, there is a confrontation of personalities. And the good wins not because it is good, but because the virtues of the hero outweigh the virtues of the villain. And you do.
It reminded me of another question from an unknown source: “Who is more obsessed with sex – a rapist or a Catholic abstinence activist?”
The correct answer is both,and equally (and maybe the priest even more so).(tc restrains its true intentions with a Christian firewall.) Indeed, the cultural layer based on Christian morals, which forbids us to do anything and everything, contributes only to one thing – an increasing obsession with phenomena that are interpreted as unambiguous evil.
It turns out that the average viewer, one way or another brought up in this layer, will in any case be possessed by evil, and it does not matter whether from the righteous or the sinful.
I immediately remembered the novel “The Master and Margarita”. Woland is the devil, pure evil, isn't he? But it turns out that evil is not the devil, but people. The devil is just playing)
Images of evil are more consistent with the average person themselves, as they are not sinless and look for excuses for their mistakes in third-party support. The most important thing for them is to remember and know that they are loved, and they are not satisfied with the phrase ” love despite their sins.” They want the kind of care and love that doesn't stop them from living their own lives, which they choose for themselves.
Evil and vice are very tempting. You may be as pure and pure as an angel, but something dark will still dwell in you and attract you.