Forum: Author Hangout

Naw. I find them incredibly grating, also.

In the case of Big Agriculture or Big something, it's a lot more helpful if you can show the motives of the big company - usually, they're not intending harm, but might accept 'collateral damage'

But people are nearly never pure evil. They too are motivated by diverse needs and desires, and sometimes even good intentions or not causing harm are secondary concerns while focused on a goal. These people are much more interesting, especially when they realize what they've done and do any of: react, think about it deeply, or shrug...

May a "Caricatured Antagonist" be useful?

In some circumstances. A "Flash Story" or other very short story has little opportunity for character building, nuance, and such. Tropes or caricatures may be useful to briefly, and easily, establish a character that most readers will recognize and accept. Also, if a writer is crafting a longer story, intending to be humorous (or ironic), or perhaps part of the plot is that a more subtle villain is using an obvious threat (a caricature) so that they may advance their nefarious agenda while the authorities/heroine is distracted. Caricatures might be useful, but less so than one, or a few tropes.

IMHO Tropes are more useful than a Caricature. Having one, or a couple "signature" aspects of a villain, a "lieutenant" a minion, or even a "hero" (protagonist) is useful. Knights should be noble and valiant; in particular the Hero. Antagonists are prone to being greedy/selfish, or at least so focused upon their goal that they disregard the consequences (particularly to others).

Caricatures are almost always an indication of a lazy or unimaginative author. Readers invest time, and usually at least some emotion in a story. Caricatures are nearly always unsatisfying.

An example: The version of The Joker played by Jered Leto in the movie Suicide Squad was an unsatisfying caricature of a villain, and yet deviating from the legendary character. Some versions of The Joker in the comics verged on being a caricature; averted by being possibly a Trope source.

Counter Example: The Joker played by Heath Ledger in the Dark Knight embraced numerous tropes of the character, as well as tropes of a homicidal maniac. His version was a mesmerizing (in a "can't turn away from a car wreck" sense) twist of the character. Ledger portrayed deeper, if disturbing twists, such as Sado/masochism, and apparent cavalier disregard for the lives of others and even himself. Yet, under that madness was a cunning and boldness that allowed The Joker to advance most of his schemes. Seeming chaos was part of his deep plan to achieve his goals. Madness, but not stupid.

In my opinion, most of Lazlo Zalezac's characters are caricatures. In fact, the stories I like most of his are the ones where the characterisation is more nuanced.

The scores and plaudits show that most readers judge he uses the technique extremely successfully. And I have to agree it's appropriate to his writing style.

AJ