Must I Redeem My Antagonist?

[DaisyMama]

I am in the process of converting my WIP from secular to Christian. And I'm struggling with what I'm going to do with my antagonist at the end.

I don't particularly want him to repent, get saved, and make amends with everyone he's ever wronged. But I feel like there's a certain obligation in Christian fiction to do just this.

What do you do with YOUR antagonist at the end?

Also, I don't want my protagonists to counsel/love/forgive the antagonist. At this point in my WIP, I think it would be unconvincing to end that way. Is it acceptable in Christian fiction for protagonists to NOT counsel/love/forgive the villain at the end?

What is your opinion and/or experience with this?

[ProfessorAlan]

Mine is just brought to justice.

[Phy]

I am in the process of converting my WIP from secular to Christian. And I'm struggling with what I'm going to do with my antagonist at the end.

I don't particularly want him to repent, get saved, and make amends with everyone he's ever wronged. But I feel like there's a certain obligation in Christian fiction to do just this.

What do you do with YOUR antagonist at the end?

Also, I don't want my protagonists to counsel/love/forgive the antagonist. At this point in my WIP, I think it would be unconvincing to end that way. Is it acceptable in Christian fiction for protagonists to NOT counsel/love/forgive the villain at the end?

What is your opinion and/or experience with this?

Before you shoehorn your WIP into anything, ask yourself who your audience is and what you seek to accomplish. (And before you do /that/, ask God what He would have you write.)

I especially liked what Brandon Sanderson did with his antagonist, Hrathorn, in Elantris. His motives were understandable, his character arc was believable, and his ultimate actions were compelling and thrilling.

[Tarin]

My bad guys always die.

I think, unless the redemption of the antagonist character is crucial to the story itself, this idea can actually be self-defeating. Unless the reader is made to care for the antagonist, he will find no emotional satisfaction if, instead of getting his due, the bad guy turns out to be a nice guy and gets to live happily ever after. To make a bad-guy redemption work, you have to be weaving foreshadowing throughout the entirety of the book. Otherwise, the reader will feel cheated in the end.

As for the protagonist forgiving the antagonist, I don't know that this is absolutely necessary either. In real life, when a person is badly used by another person, it is very likely that he will spend a long period of time before he is able to forgive the other person. So, if you're needing to wrap your novel up quickly, you could just ignore the "forgiveness" angle altogether and let the reader draw his own conclusions. The two exceptions to this might be: 1) If forgiveness is the theme of your story. Or 2) if you've made a big deal about the protagonist's hate/grudge for the villain.

Any way you choose, it needs to flow with the story.

[dulcigal]

I personally do not like when antagonists are unbelievably repentant in the end. I'm not sure if antagonists do need to be repentant in Christian fiction, unless it's central and/or essential to the story. Most of the Thoenes' work did not have repentant antagonists, and their books are some of the best in the business. Other authors who have had unrepentant antagonists: Dekker, Peretti, Myers, Goyer, Pella, Phillips...the list could go on and on...

Not that it's bad to have it either way, but if it didn't grow out of the story originally, I'd do some hefty thinking/praying about it before making major changes.

[Phy]

As for the protagonist forgiving the antagonist, I don't know that this is absolutely necessary either.

I liked how this was handled in Spider-Man 3.









Spoiler-space












One antagonist is unrepentant and dies. Another doesn't ask for forgiveness but clearly wants to, and essentially puts the fleece out there to be able to ask for (and receive) forgiveness. Another is redeemed so thoroughly that his death is the practical end of the film (a victory for friendship and the healing power of love).

[righter1]

I would agree with the Prof. My antagonists are brought to justice, too. I have read Christian fiction where the bad guy dies, either at the hands of the protagonist, by accident, or self-inflicted. Admittedly, I don't read too much Christian fiction, but this has been my experience.

Personally, I think you have to find what works best for you and the major sub-genre you're writing. If it's a mystery, you can't let the perp get away with murder. The protagonist can forgive him/her, but the law cannot. Unless the protagonist is the law, then, well, s/he has to do his/her job. :)

[Lookin^Up]

One antagonist is unrepentant and dies. Another doesn't ask for forgiveness but clearly wants to, and essentially puts the fleece out there to be able to ask for (and receive) forgiveness. Another is redeemed so thoroughly that his death is the practical end of the film (a victory for friendship and the healing power of love).
I just saw Spider-Man 3 last weekend, and one of the things I loved about it was the variety of ways the antags were defeated. Nor were all the antags cookie-cutter copies of each other. That has always been one of the Spider-Man movies' greatest strengths, creating villains you can feel sorry for. Remember Doc Ock?

The high-tech Batman movies always had the main villain die at the end--so did the not-so-wonderful Dick Tracy movie--which I always thought was a cheat, especially since we know the same baddies had always come back for more in the comics.

In my own writing, I don't defeat my antagonist in the same way every time. Sometimes they die. Sometimes they're brought to justice. One was committed to an insane asylum. A few even repented. Twice I had a pair of brothers/partners divide: one joined the good guys' side while the other either went to jail or was put under house arrest; ultimately they were killed by their own attempt to escape. I once tried to let the villain escape, but that begged a sequel so he could return to be dealt with another way.

Bottom line, I don't believe there is any one way an antagonist should get what he deserves, even in a Christian novel. Not every crook in real life ends his evil career the same way, either. The Bible reflects real life: Samson died under a collapsing temple, Ahab and Saul were killed in battle, Manasseh repented, Paul became a preacher. And the list goes on.

Tarin is absolutely right. The villain's end needs to flow from the story.

[DaisyMama]

Great input, everyone!

My main concern was whether or not it's okay in the Christian publishing/reading world to let your characters act NOT the way the Bible would direct them to.

I've felt convicted for a while to write Christian fiction. I was holding out and doing mainstream because I thought it would be more affirming personally to get accepted into the mainstream-fiction world since it's a tougher market. But I've finally followed God's leading to use my talents for His glory.

I guess I'm trying to get a feel for the standards in Christian publishing in regards to the morality/actions of the characters. If the protagonist is a Christian, do they have to react to obstacles in a Biblical manner, or is it acceptable for them to react in human, flawed ways?

I know where my WIP is leading, and I feel good about it. I'm just trying to figure out how picky the Christian publishers are going to be.

Thanks, everyone, for your input! Keep it coming! :)

[Phy]

But I've finally followed God's leading to use my talents for His glory.

Excellent!

My follow-up question is this - is God leading you to write to encourage or exhort /believers/ or to write using your Christian mindset and spiritual perception to a 'secular' audience? (I obviously don't know the answer - this is a rhetorical question as you are the only one who does.)

I was thinking about this the other day; one advantage Jesus had over us is that in his day, there were no 'Christian' or 'Secular' labels. You can make the argument that there /were/ labels, but they may have been more along the lines of 'Jew' versus 'Gentile', labels that become essentially irrelevant in the light of Christ's coming.

So who did Jesus 'market' his stories to? He spoke one way in the temple, another to the Sadducees and the Pharisees, and yet another to the hoi polloi, the common man. He was all about using fiction to share or reveal truth.

I'm interested in doing that, too, despite genre, market, publishing house, or label. I consider my audience as I write, and remember that we're fishers of men, not fishers of fishers. I /have/ written to Christians, and still will, but it's not my primary focus or my primary audience. I'm using my talents for His glory, but only write to Christians a fraction of the time. When I do, I'm trying to accomplish something specific.

[David Meigs]

I perfer to kill my antagonists. :)

[whitehawke]

lol. I like to dangle my antags by the ankles high above a river and then let them drop. Muahahaha :D Well, okay, I have only done that to one so far.

[Lookin^Up]

If the protagonist is a Christian, do they have to react to obstacles in a Biblical manner, or is it acceptable for them to react in human, flawed ways?

I know where my WIP is leading, and I feel good about it. I'm just trying to figure out how picky the Christian publishers are going to be.
I can't speak for CBA publishers, but personally I like Christian protags who also have human flaws; they are easier to access. Point to one person in the Bible who did everything perfectly, besides Jesus. They were all flawed, and so are all of us. If a Christian publisher can't understand that, they're living in a dream world unattached to reality.

If, on the other hand, those "human flaws" include sexual immorality or debauchery or greed or any other "fruit of the flesh" (Galatians 5:19-21), red flags should be popping up.

[Phy]

On the surface, it might appear that you are arguing both sides of a point. Are you saying that you like Christian protagonists who are understandably flawed but who are not continually, habitually given over to the litany of sins you reference? Because all Christians are tempted and many fall, if only for a season. Those struggles can make a story stronger and justify a later redemption.

[DaisyMama]

Phy, I think I'm coming from the same place you are. My protag is human, flawed, and makes a very poor decision early in the novel. This leads to estrangement from Christian friends, etc. and perhaps even a "turning her back on God" period, because she can't be close to God and making the decisions that she's making.

The novel, however, is not glorifying or romanticizing those choices, and there are negative consequences for the decisions made. The main focus of the story is on the folly of her decisions and the relationships that weather the storm.

I think there are right and wrong ways to have protags make bad decisions. It's not an excuse for gratuitous immorality, but a novel with "goody goody" protags would be unrealistic and boring to read. We're all flawed, and a realistic novel would reflect this in its characters.

[Lookin^Up]

On the surface, it might appear that you are arguing both sides of a point. Are you saying that you like Christian protagonists who are understandably flawed but who are not continually, habitually given over to the litany of sins you reference? Because all Christians are tempted and many fall, if only for a season. Those struggles can make a story stronger and justify a later redemption.
Yes, all Christians are tempted and many fall, often because an ungodly person has taken advantage of their trust or some other soft spot. Daisy said it well:

The novel, however, is not glorifying or romanticizing those choices, and there are negative consequences for the decisions made. The main focus of the story is on the folly of her decisions and the relationships that weather the storm.

I think there are right and wrong ways to have protags make bad decisions. It's not an excuse for gratuitous immorality, but a novel with "goody goody" protags would be unrealistic and boring to read. We're all flawed, and a realistic novel would reflect this in its characters.
Case in point: in Savage Worlds, there is a segment where the captain's daughter is seduced by a worthless rebel, the main antagonist of the story. Ordinarily Rachel would not be tempted by such a person, growing up as she did not only in a Christian family, but a Christian world (Millennial Earth). But Hazmun, the rebel, pretends he understands the trials she has been going through, and even feigns sharing her faith. Thus, she is taken in unawares. Every step of the way it's clear from the wording that her date with Hazmun is not a good thing.

It is the need to be understood that's at the heart of the temptation Rachel succumbs to, not pre-planned rebellion on her part. She shows a human flaw in falling for Hazmun's lies, yet her basic faith remains intact. Thus, my protags are far from goody-goody, even though obedience to the Lord is central to their faith. That is far from a boring subplot!

[Phy]

Well, you've got /my/ attention. ;)