Does your WIP have an antagonist? Just one? Are you sure?
My question is asked only partly in jest. Not to be antagonistic, but I’m guessing that many if not most of you have several layers of antagonism in your work, whether you’ve created them consciously or not.
I’ve had antagonism on my mind lately. And not just because it’s tax season. Or because of the latest Game of Thrones trailer. (Well, maybe the Thrones trailer is a small part of it.) What initially prompted it was this thought-provoking essay by WU’s own Jo Eberhardt. Which spurred me to sort out my own antagonists, and how they fit into what I’m trying to build. Granted, my WIP is an epic fantasy trilogy, but I still feel like I have quite a few. And for a moment there, I questioned if I had too many. It certainly got me thinking. The more I thought about it, the more I recognized that most of my favorite stories have multiple layers of antagonism.
Why would I want to offer anything less? So maybe this is a good thing…?
In the interest of exploring the idea, I thought I’d attempt a list of the various types of antagonism, from the specific to the obscure. This might get tricky, so we’d better start with a definition, to make sure we’re all on the same page. Merriam-Webster’s is:
Antagonism – noun
- the opposition of a conflicting force, tendency, or principle
- actively expressed opposition or hostility
[Note: I apologize in advance for using fantasy/sci-fi examples, but that’s my wheelhouse. Besides, as WU’s resident geek it almost feels like a contractual obligation.]
The Antagonism of Setting: Okay, yes, I said I’d go from specific to obscure. And, yes, the concept of the setting itself being antagonistic is sort of obscure. But in many cases, a story’s setting reveals some of the earliest forms of opposition—often before we’ve encountered an active villain. Think about it. Harry Potter (eventually) gets his letter and ventures out for Hogwarts, Ned Stark feels honor-bound to go to King’s Landing, and Frodo and his companions must leave the comfort of the Shire.
Often our heroes are pushed from their comfort zone, or even compelled into danger. The outside world looms as their first obstacle. Using setting as a force of antagonism is an excellent way to grab and hold a reader’s attention.
An Active Villain: Ah, back to the specific. And obvious! Not every story has one, but when we think of antagonism, the first thing that springs to mind is an individual whose aims and/or desires are directly counter to those of our protagonist(s). It springs to mind because having an embodied central antagonist is tried and true storytelling. What would Harry Potter be without Voldemort; Star Wars without Darth Vader; Lord of the Rings without Sauron? I’m guessing probably not the iconic stories known by all and loved by millions.
Agents of an Active Villain: Another fairly obvious one. But these can be much more than mere henchmen or mindless cohorts (or arrow-fodder). They do, however, act at the bidding or command of a central villain. Tolkien’s Nazgûl are a good example. Perhaps they are a bit mindless (driven mad by their lust for the One Ring), but in spite of acting at Sauron’s command, they have enough agency to manage to hunt our heroes across the realm (can you imagine finding lodging in those outlandish wardrobes and with those hissing voices?). They are genuine players on the story-board, but they play specifically at Sauron’s direction. And do so darn scarily, too.
I think Wormtongue fits this category, as well; though Saruman–his director–is not the primary baddie, he is an active villain (see next category).
Actively Villainous Secondary Characters: Now we’re swinging into the rough. Not every story has these (but I do!). These antagonists have both their own agency and an agenda that’s distinct from that of any other force of antagonism. Their goals may be similar or tangential to the primary antagonist’s, but these secondary characters act of their own accordance. Occasionally secondary villains team up with primary villains (and often—surprise, surprise—they betray one another). I’ll stick to the theme and cite Gollum as an excellent example. And this is where Saruman figures in, too. You can dig deeper in LOTR and find examples like Bill Ferny, and even Ted Sandyman (hey, he was a villain to Sam, right?).
Passively Antagonistic Characters: These are characters who come into opposition or conflict with the goals of your protagonist(s) without purposely seeking to do so. Often their intentions are innocent, and the protagonists don’t necessarily consider them villainous. They often offer only incidental obstruction. They may even share the protagonist’s goal, but their means of opposition creates conflicts for your protagonists. Using LOTR again, Boromir springs to mind. He shares the goal of Frodo and Gandalf—to defeat Sauron—but his city and his people come first. And his belief that wielding the One Ring is not only fine but advisable puts him in direct conflict with our heroes (it’s a belief that tragically leads to a moment of active villainy). A case could be made for putting Denethor in this category, too (though he seems to be under some level of control by Sauron, via the palantír).
I would put a favorite character of my own into this category. My Gothic chieftain Thaedan has a cousin, Rohdric. They both wish to defeat the same imperial invaders, but Rohdric, being a former imperial slave, has a very different outlook and strategy than Thaedan—which very much puts them at odds. They’re opposites in temperament, naturally. Which makes for delicious conflict.
Actively Antagonistic Meta-Individuals: These are individuals who represent, cause, or lead an antagonistic force or movement, but they have no direct contact or conscious concern with our protagonists. In epic fantasy they are often distant emperors or kings/queens. In LOTR, I would exclude Sauron from the category because he has a direct interest in our heroes. (Perhaps we could say Morgoth fills the roll in the Middle Earth legendarium, but that’s an obscure reference.) The Night King from Game of Thrones makes a better example. That creepy dude doesn’t care which Westerosi opposes him. He’s just intent on conquering the living.
Antagonistic Meta-Symbols: The One Ring. The Death Star. That Tiki-god charm necklace that Bobby Brady found in Hawaii. You get the idea.
Unembodied or Thematic Antagonistic Forces: I guess I’ll just lead this category off with the dark side of the Force. In Epic Fantasy this layer often involves some version of dark or unclean magic. Sometimes it’s an archaic religious element or a denounced deity. But it’s not limited to those. The applicability and metaphoric intent of such devices is a matter of interpretation—both by the characters within a story and its readers. But for me that only adds to the intrigue.
In my WIP, I have a prophecy that I would put into this category. Even within the context of my story world, the prophecy is ambiguous, has only anecdotal validation, and is open to interpretation (or misinterpretation, as the case may be). It’s often used as a basis for accusation or as a justification for… well, all sorts of outrageous behavior. I’ve enjoyed thrusting it on my characters to see how they bear up under its weight. It’s one of my primary forces of antagonism because it’s reflected in every facet of my story’s conflict.
The Inevitable Inner Antagonist: We’ve all heard the saying. We are our own worst enemies. At some point in every life (some more often than others), the saying applies. And, for me, if it’s true that at the heart of every story is the change that occurs in the protagonist, this form of antagonism is one that every story necessarily explores to some extent.
As I say in my reply to Jo’s wonderful aforementioned essay, this is a fundamental antagonism my protagonist faces. His inner antagonist is a combination of all of his worst impulses: his ego, his stubbornness, and his inability to forgive (himself and others). In order to defeat them, he must embrace honor and humility, friendship and love.
It’s fundamental because without this layer, there would be no story. It’s the motherlode of all of my story’s conflicts.
Layer It On Me:
I totally agree with Jo’s essay’s point, that every element, including the antagonists, should culminate in the story’s ending. Each layer of antagonism should clearly be a working component of a cohesive whole. In other words, don’t jam in some random baddie just to impede your hero. Advice which would seem to make utilizing various layers of antagonism all the trickier.
But having taken a look at my own layers of antagonism, I more firmly believe they can serve the build to a natural and satisfying (I hope!) culmination. I can more clearly see how having layers of antagonism offers not only complexity and realism, but opportunities to increase the conflict, raise the stakes, and heighten the urgency and tension on every page.
I’m pretty sure it’s self-evident, but I’ve come to embrace my layers of antagonism. Adding them was my inclination from the onset. But I’ve come to believe they add a richness to the stew. And I do love a hearty story-stew.
Serve me up! How many antagonists are in your WIP? Are you seeing your own layers of antagonism in a new light? Is there such a thing as too many layers? Let’s discuss.
[Image is: The Portonaccio Sarcophagus, by Ryan Baumann on Flickr.]
About Vaughn Roycroft
In the sixth grade, Vaughn’s teacher gave him a copy of The Hobbit, sparking a lifelong passion for reading and history. After college, life intervened, and Vaughn spent twenty years building a successful business. During those years, he and his wife built a getaway cottage near their favorite shoreline, in a fashion that would make the elves of Rivendell proud. After many milestone achievements, and with the mantra ‘life’s too short,’ they left their hectic lives in the business world, moved to their little cottage, and Vaughn finally returned to writing. Now he spends his days polishing his epic fantasy trilogy.
This is so enlightening, Vaughn. As I was reading your excellent post, I was totting them up (antagonist, i.e.) My MC has the big bad dragon to contend with, but her fear of dating is nearly as debilitating. She also has best-friend problems and an antagonistic schoolmate who lives to torment her. Then there are her parents,(esp. her mother), the disbelieving townspeople all around her (Dragons? Pah! ) and the police. I could come up with more but I’ll need more coffee. But yes, a lot of layers. Only they each have their own flavor, their own level of intensity. And built in are their flip-sides of redemption (or not) and grace, so I don’t think there are too may. The reader, however, may disagree. We’ll see. Thanks for waking my brain up today!
Hey Susan, What I love about the various components of antagonism that you mention is how naturally they break down into layers. Each is something your protagonist must deal with on a different plane – various fields of play, so to speak.
And YES–thank you for bringing up the built in flip-sides of redemption and grace. I’ve been thinking about the flip-sides of each of my layers since I read your insightful comment. I do love complex characters, including antagonists (maybe especially them?). And that built in aspect can only enhance the complexity.
Thanks much for your nuanced enhancement of the topic! Looking forward to experiencing your layers of antagonism.
This excellent post prompts me to say something that I’ve never said to another man:
You had me at Bobby Brady.
I’m just proud of the restraint I showed in not repeating the dark theory that Bobby *knew* of the menace of the Tiki charm, and was out to get his brothers with it. (The secretive murderous little brother layer of antagonism…?)
Thanks, Keith!
Great summation of antagonists! I never would have thought about antagonist so completely, but I think it’s important to have a clear picture of where to draw tension and conflict from.
In my first book I was really concerned because, for most of the story, Hazel never even met the bad guy. I realized I had proxy-bad guys, who led up to the big boss battle at the end with the villain.
In this current book/wip, I was thinking I had too many villains all spread out and the story structure might be messed up. Now, after reading your post, I realize I have one villain, a couple of actively villainous secondary characters who aren’t really the villain, but just villainous-ly serve their own purposes, some unembodied antagonistic sources, some internal antagonism and an unintended passively antagonistic secondary character. I’m feeling much better about my story! I feared about its structure, but now I can see it actually has quite a lot of structure, just constantly changing/developing antagonists. Maybe there is hope, after all!
Ah, my week is already made. And on Monday morning! Huzzah!
This is great news, Lara, that you’re seeing your antagonism – and thereby your entire structure – in a new and hopeful light. This is exactly what happened to me after reading Jo’s post. And it’s exactly why I wrote the post.
Thanks much for letting me know. Here’s to delving the layers together. Onward!
Great summary of badness! I am absolutely for many layers of antagonists – life is layered, right? :-) And just having watched The Fellowship of the Rings with my oldest son for the first time (his first, not mine), your examples resonate within me!
As for my WIP: I think I have many of the layers you describe – the big bad arch villain, various henchmen, two semi-villains with their own agendas, “the system” (the society I made up), and of course the inner antagonist (aka shyness, doubts, old promises). No bad magic (as there is no magic in my world, just misled hopes and goals).
Could there be too many layers? Possibly, though I don’t think there is a fixed number for it. I think as soon as it feels forced and leaves the reader groaning “oh no, not another one”, it is probably too much. I think readers would feel the difference between layers that are there because they organically fit into the story and layers that have been slapped on for effect.
(By the way, I am really getting interested in that trilogy of yours!!)
Hi J – What a lovely moment – the introduction of the world of LoTR to your son. I agree with you, that the reaction could reach the point of, “oh no, not another one.” And I think that point is far more likely reached if there is a lack of genuineness or cohesion to the layers. Great point.
As for being interested in reading, back at you! Every time you describe what you’re up to, I get more interested. Keep us posted?
Thanks for your insight and your kind words.
Hi again – thanks for your interest! I’d love to you keep you posted. But just so that you know, I am writing in German, my mother-tongue. Which creates the funny situation that I read and discuss about story and craft in English, but do the actual writing in German.
Well, at least I keep the story-level separated from the meta-level that way …
Well then… Keep us posted on the translated version? (Typical monolingual American here.) I wonder if the switching is helping you with some sort of mental segmentation of story and craft? In any case, I stand in awe and salute you. Wishing you the best with it!
Thanks, will do – if it ever comes so far!
I have been doing a little translating myself, as my best writing friend is American and I wanted her to show the beginning. Of course the translation is far from perfect, but strangely enough the process helped me with the German version too: By looking closer at the text in order to to translate it, I found some things that just “didn’t work” (too slow, redundant…). Plus it showed me a) how difficult translating is (so now I am even more in awe of professional translators than before), and b) that it was the right decision to write in German. With all my love for the English language, I will never have the instinct to feel if something is “just right”.
But I still love my English craft books and this site, so I will continue my writing journey in two worlds.
Very cool to hear about this, J. We’re lucky to have you, and your unique perspective.
Onward!
Hmmm, let’s see…
The protagonists (two very different sisters) are each the other’s outward antagonist. The trail also has its share of antagonists, from dangerous wild animals to hazardous rivers and cliffs to the disorienting effect of the sameness of the trees to the specter of hypothermia. And the ultimate antagonist that both characters are facing is the fear of not being in control of their lives and fates.
Whoa, Erin. I am totally in on this. I LOVE when the elements of nature become a major force of antagonism. And a sister story! And neither nature nor sisterhood are remotely one-dimensional elements. So much to explore there.
Looking forward to it! Thanks for weighing in.
I don’t think there can be too many layers of antagonism, depending on how the writer handles them and resolves them. Initially, my MC’s major antagonist is her husband, but as the novel progresses, it’s the memory of her mother, and the memory of something my MC did in her youth that is truly antagonistic to her choices and her future–all of this wrapped around her missing daughter and how to get her back.
Hey Beth, some great layers of antagonism there, but I’m especially wowed by a memory being antagonistic. I mention the inner antagonism we all face, but making peace with ourselves and our pasts (even our misguided or poor choices) is a terrific addition to the conversation.
Thanks much! You’re another one I am looking forward to reading.
Thanks, Vaughn, you made my day, Beth
Your level of antagonism is astounding. Must start thinking more badly.
Ah, to inspire others to think more badly. My parents would be so proud, lol. Thanks, Heidi!
Nice post Vaughan! A much more complex look at antagonistic forces than the typical protag vs. villain dynamic.
They are definitely layers of antagonism in my current WIP. I’ve got a big, bad villain, but the relationship between my two protags (strong romance element in this book) is also antagonisic. The story is set amid real historical events, though there is also the antagonistic layer of the political forces and shenanigans at play.
It’s a challenge to juggle and sometimes I curse myself for being drawn to these multi-layered stories!!
Hey Sheri, Sounds like you’ve got all of the best ingredients for a rich story-stew, all right. Boy, do I hear ya on the challenge and the juggling. But we write what we love, don’t we? I guess when we look at it that way, it’s a blessing and a curse. Here’s to fighting the good fight!
Thanks for weighing in. Wishing you the best with it!
My current WIP is barely even a WIP at the moment, more some early glimmers and questions. But as I read through your great explanation of antagonistic layers, I could already see how the layers might begin to evolve as I proceed. I have a small college town setting and there are definite opportunities for points of conflict within the community: the townspeople, members of the faculty, the new librarian. Thinking of layers appeals to that structural part of my brain…and more questions equal more inspiration. Thanks!
Hey Alisha, I love the simmering faze. When the dots start to connect, and everything you read or see seems to point the way. I love how a small town college setting could be so rife with secrets and lurking conflict.
I’m delighted to have been one of the sparks that are fueling your creative fires. Here’s to layers and structure and more questions. Onward!
Great post, Vaughn. It’s got me thinking about a plot twist in which a perceived antagonist turns out to be an ally when the chips are down. For example, a pesky neighbor who’s always asking about the MC’s personal problems threatens the MC’s plans to leave an abusive husband, but she’s the only one to help because none of the MC’s “friends” have the nerve to ask where those mysterious bruises come from. The antagonist’s “nosiness” was actually genuine concern.
Hey Christine – I love moments like that! And they’re such great teaching moments, particularly in story format. Quite often they play on our suppositions and even our prejudices. When we see a supposed adversary in a new light due to their actions, we are learning not to take each other for granted, and to seek and listen. It’s a valuable lesson for the times.
Thanks for the great addition to the conversation. Here’s to the illumination story can provide to each of us.
Great post, Vaughn. My WIP checks most of the antagonist boxes. Hmm. Maybe epic fantasy lends itself to multi-level villainy…
Hey LK! Great to hear from you.
I was wondering the same as I wrote this. But thinking about the non-fantasy books on my shelf, like The Pillars of the Earth and The Far Pavilions, I’m thinking that perhaps the “epic” part is more essential than the “fantasy” part. But I’m sure I love stories of all genres that have complexities like this.
I agree – your work is a great example! :) Thanks much for weighing in, and for your kind praise, my friend.
Thanks for the wonderful post!
Learning how others use different antagonist layers is always fun for me.
As a newbie, one of my favorite sources is this one by H.R. D’costa. She also talks about 4 types of villains and different ways to layer them so they engage with each other and the protagonist. Thought I’d share :)
https://www.amazon.com/Story-Climax-Disappointed-Screenplay-Essentials/dp/1519522762#mediaMatrix_secondary_view_div_1553020870242
Thanks for the recommendation, and for your kind praise. Best wishes to you for your writing journey!
I’d have to check with the other mods to see if they concur, but when doing a Dissection of breakout novels, V, it’s common for us to not be able to name a specific, singular, active antagonist. It seems more often that people are forced into action by setting, theme, and society. Something to ponder, anyway.
I do agree that the best books have multiple layers of antagonism, even if some layers are only glimpsed briefly. It’s like the author added a pinch of nutmeg, saffron, or cayenne to their secret antagonistic sauce.
Hey Jan – I guess now that you’ve pointed it out (about the lack of a specific antagonist in breakouts), I don’t doubt it. Which makes me wonder if you get more active/specific antagonists in genre work. Not that there aren’t genre books without a specific antagonist.
Good analogy on the use of spices. I think even less specific or broad-force antagonism can be used in layers. And should be used as judiciously as a strongly flavored spice. Thanks for the inside scoop from the WU Dissection group! It’s the perfect final dash of seasoning for the conversation. :)