Hated Characters and the Fans Who Love Them

[sistermagpie]

My very first fandom was X-files. Well, we know how that show ended. ::sigh:: But last night a friend I met through that fandom came into NYC and she and another X-phile friend and I went out to dinner. I can now officially say that I really have discussed Wittgenstein over drinks. (Even if it was only briefly and only one of us really knew Wittgenstein and it wasn't me and I'm probably misspelling it.)

Here's the thing we were wondering about.

Chris is now in Buffy fandom, and I do LOTR and HP. Back in XF we spent a lot of our time defending Mulder against everyone who claimed he was a jerk, not to mention useless and totally incompetant without Scully. Both of us said the next time we were in a fandom we'd have to go for the character everybody liked. So here I am in LOTR and I sometimes find myself defending Frodo from folks who think he's useless and incompetant without Sam (who should really have been the ringbearer, you know!). I've never been called upon to defend Merry, Sam or Pippin, only Frodo seems to draw the occasional hatred. And of course he's my favorite character.

And then I somehow manage to look into the HP universe and out of all the dozens of characters I pick Draco Malfoy as a favorite. Chris, meanwhile, ended up being a fan of Spike. I don't watch Buffy at all but I know enough to know this has basically led her into the exact same place we're always at: arguing for the redemption (or in Draco's case the saving) of a character many many people want to see burn in hell. (She didn't know who Draco was at first, having only seen the first movie, but once she identified him as "the little blonde kid" she said, "Go you!!") She showed me a tape of the scene where Spike tells Buffy he's got his soul back and I have to say I think he'd be the character I went for on that show as well. (Great scene btw that made me wonder what I missed by not watching Buffy.)

So why is that? Why do we always go for the character that seems to need the most defending? Seriously, I don't think I just think they are the ones that draw the most bashing because I'm more sensitive about them. Because I tend to defend any character that gets too bashed and don't remember having to run to the aid of other characters as much as these, who are also my favorites. Scully got a lot of criticism towards the end of XF but for years it was just Mulder bashed all over the place. LOTR doesn't generate a lot of hate but honestly, if anyone it's usually Frodo who gets dissed. (People who dislike Sam seem to just say they can't stand him and leave it at that while Frodo is accused of being objectively horrible.) Draco and Spike are criticized for obvious reasons but it's not always as objective as people claim it to be.

Mulder, Frodo, Draco and Spike are very different characters in a lot of ways. But they still all seem to draw a guilty verdict from a lot of people who like characters judged good or bad--and whatever they are now can't ever ever change. Because people never change. And their motivations don't matter. If you think they matter you're just a fangirl of the actor or even worse a ::gasp!:: moral relativist. (As it happens I am a moral relativist but not in the way that term is commonly misused to mean a person who doesn't believe in right or wrong.)

I have no idea why I always seem to end up with these characters, the ones that draw the disapproving eye of conservative types who pass judgment. (Note: I realize there are plenty of regular people who just don't like these characters for valid reasons--I don't mean to imply that *not* liking them means you're too judgemental.) I guess maybe I just like the characters who live in the grey areas who have at least one foot in darkness. Or that seem to be in pain and pain usually implies darkness. Characters that are in pain and aren't dark are more the stuff of Lifetime Movies.

Comments

[praetorianguard.livejournal.com]

A couple random thoughts, but they won't be nearly so well thought-out as yours. Alas, I'm still on wonky meds from having my wisdom teeth pulled.

First, and this is mostly and age/maturity thing, a lot of people want to champion a character they can save. (I do not think this applies to you, but I think it's relevant.) I've seen it a ton of people, particularly in teenaged girls, who go for the bad boy because he's in need of saving. Obviously, saving per se rarely (never?) works, and there are a lot of other people who are willing to step in and say, "Hey, look at this character. They're already good. Why waste your time with Draco/Spike/Mulder?"

Which leads me to, second -- in two parts: Why do people like 'bad' characters (shorthand for characters in want of defending) if not than to save them romantically? And why do other people find them not worthy at all?

I tend to find the characters you've mentioned more...interesting, for lack of a better word. I think any choice they make to be 'good' is more powerful than that same choice by someone who has always been 'good.' Their traits are almost always shades of gray. And because we are, essentially, a 'good' society, we tend to read good qualities into 'bad' characters more easily than, say, making Harry follow in Voldemort's footsteps. I'm with you; I prefer my characters complex and gray and less-then-perfect. For example, I'm not a huge Canon!Draco fan, but I found Ron to be much more interesting following his GoF meltdown.

But there are people who prefer their characters black and white, and the simplicity that comes with them. There are people who prefer to keep plot and characters in handy 'good' and 'bad' boxes. And a lot of that can be attributed to the author. For example, many of JKR's events can be spun to make Draco or someone else sympathetic. Certainly the scene in B&B can be reworked that way. Also, the scene at the end of SS. But it's easier to read what the author gives you and let her take you where she will.

I joined the fandom after GoF, and for the longest time I was confused about the anti-Ron sentiment. I didn't realize until about a month ago that it didn't come until after he reacted the way he did in GoF -- and bucked the totally loyal sidekick role in the process. *shrug* I like him much better this way, and I can see how I could spend a lot of time defending him. It's also interesting to me that the fandom seems to obsess much more over Redeemed!Draco than EquallyComplexRon. I think, again, that's the tendancy to want to make characters 'good.' And to look with disdain upon characters that were 'good' that might now be 'bad.' (Reference your archetype post and how betrayal is just as much a part of Ron as redemption is a part of Draco.)

I think it's a matter of 1) taking things out of the box in which they were given to you, and 2) preferring complex, gray characters. There will always be people unwilling/unable/uninterested in doing one or the other. So the people who do prefer such characters spend a lot of time in their defense.

[/rambling] I hope that made some sort of sense. It just sort of came out. Would you mind if I friended you?