Anti-Heroes: Why Devious is so Delectable, and Where are all the Women?
By Heather Webb | May 31, 2014 |
wifflegif.com
I don’t watch much TV. In fact, I binge on one show per year on Netflix, maybe two if it’s a good year in television, but that’s about it. (There are just too many good books to read.) But recently I’ve become addicted to the political thriller House of Cards and the indomitable Frank Underwood. With each episode, I find myself absolutely gripped—both fascinated and horrified by this character. I wait with bated breath for his next brilliant comment, his crocodile smile, and the twist of his knife in someone’s back. Another superb detail I adore is that Frank is from a small town in Georgia, so his lilting accent and charm almost make you believe he’s a gentleman. Almost.
Frank Underwood got me to thinking. What’s so great about him? He is egotistical, driven, conniving, adulterous—even murderous, yet he’s an amazing orator, a statesman with manipulative skills that are unparalleled, and above all, powerful. Also? He loves his wife. Though his needs are often first and foremost, he truly loves his wife and it shows. Frank isn’t the only anti-hero that has drawn my attention in recent months. I’ve really locked on to them in the last year. But why?
In search of an answer, I skimmed my myriad of bookshelves (Yes, I’m a print girl, despite my smart phone, fancy computer, and e-reader device. The experience of reading a la device just isn’t the same for me. I like to stroke the book covers and…I digress.). So I skimmed my books, looking for these dark characters and after I had gathered a few, I analyzed what made them so dadgum fun to read. This is what I discovered:
Traits that make a Devious, Yet Delectable Anti-Hero:
- Complex Motives: Let’s face it, we love complicated. It’s just a heck of a lot more interesting than simple, or plain. An anti-hero’s motives are typically tied up with a scarring past that sets them on a path of self-protection at all costs, revenge, or, occasionally helping the underdog to take down the big bad conglomeration, or human trafficker, or baddy that’s the ruling power.
- Contradictions: We’re all paradoxical beings, therefore I believe every character should exhibit shades of ambiguity, but anti-heroes have the corner of the market on contradictions. Internal conflict to the extreme is what drives their emotions, beliefs, and impulses. This is a big part of what make them so utterly fascinating.
- Intimacy issues: These also derive from a crippling hurt in a character’s past, and are, therefore, tied up with motives. This isn’t so different from writing a classic protagonist, except that once again the issues must be edgier and more intensified for the character to classify as an anti-hero. Remember that you want to make your readers YEARN to understand the character, to feel for them, pity them. This is HUGE, the pity piece. If we don’t have some sense of compassion for the anti-hero, then they’re poorly crafted…or they may be set up too much like an antagonist—the bad guy we hope will be conquered. (A note of caution: Be careful with crafting your antagonists vs. anti-heroes. An anti-hero is “good” at their core and there is always a line they will never cross.)
- A “Good” Sidekick: Whether this person is a sibling, lover, business partner, or beloved pet, many, many writers weave in someone who believes in the anti-hero, or cares about them. This sidekick may act as a mirror, which is a perfect device to help show the anti-hero’s arc. Take Frank Underwood. One of the main reasons you like the guy is because his beautiful wife Claire stands behind him, even when she knows he’s done something completely off-the-charts WRONG. It helps you forgive him a little and gives you hope that we’ll see more of the man she fell in love with.
- Character Traits that shock us: These traits could range from “isms” like racism, sexism, and ageism to hack sawing murderers, and sucking human blood. We love to feel shocked and outraged by these flaws—but ONLY if the character wrestles with them, and ONLY if they change over time. Which brings me to my next point.
An anti-hero is a character who views morality as a hindrance to their goals. At times, their actions can be as hideous as an antagonist, but what enables us to forgive their misdeeds is to witness their STRUGGLE TO CHANGE. This struggle is what each one of us can relate to, regardless of wealth, position, or stature. It’s the sliver of humanity and remorse, the glimmer of something GOOD inside this anti-hero that makes the reader root for them. If the anti-hero wrestles against his faults, we want to him to succeed in his goals so that he may have REDEMPTION. This is the key to the entire story arc in novels with anti-heroes.
A Note on Women as Anti-heroes
I also noticed in my stack of books that there are very few female anti-heroes. There are loads of males in all varying degrees of complexity with their sketchy morals and profound depth of character. But where are all the ladies? I think there are two problems here. For one, our moral fabric as a society wants us to believe that women, givers and nurturers of life, are essentially good and unable to commit amoral acts. But there’s another reason that overshadows the first: Gender bias. Strong or complex women only get two roles, both of which put them in the antagonist category. They’re portrayed as either femmes fatales—total freak show hellions with weapons—or bitchy, stoic creatures who wear spike heels, hate children, and eat men for breakfast. And apparently the only way to soften them is to turn them into victims of rape or abuse? (YAWNS. I’m so over this plot thread, by the way.)
Where are all the female anti-heroes? Doesn’t every heterosexual male on the planet complain about how complicated women are? Then why aren’t they portrayed as such in novels? Why can’t we write stories with morally ambiguous women? Perhaps we do, but they aren’t picked up by pubs, or maybe they just don’t sell well. Maybe there’s too much bias that exists. Filmmakers take on a female anti-hero a bit more often—just a bit. Like Notes on a Scandal, an incredible film starring Cate Blanchett and Judi Dench, in which Cate plays a school teacher sleeping with a fifteen year old student. A novel that comes to mind is A RELIABLE WIFE by Robert Goolrick. Catherine Land wants to be free of her husband and slowly poisons him, yet she struggles with her feelings and her own morality. You could argue Amy Dunne from GONE GIRL is one as well, though I’d more likely throw her in the antagonist, femme fatale category. But once again I digress…
Despite gender, remember the most important piece to writing solid, believable anti-heroes is to layer them, complicate them, give them flaws and tics that push the boundaries of what we believe is right and wrong. And above all illustrate their STRUGGLE and growth so we can cheer them on as they seek REDEMPTION.
I’d love to hear from you! Who is your favorite anti-hero? Are there any women anti-heroes you love? Which character traits repelled you? Which did you identify with?
Heather Webb is the USA Today bestselling and award-winning author of historical fiction. As a freelance editor and an adjunct in a MFA in Creative Writing program, Heather has helped many writers sign with agents and go on to sell at market. When not writing, she feeds her cookbook addiction, geeks out on history and pop culture, and looks for excuses to head to the other side of the world. To date, her books have been translated to seventeen languages.
Maybe it’s the kind of fiction I read, but I can’t think of any fictional anti-heroes in short fiction or novels (male or female). You mentioned searching your books for anti-heroes but I would have liked to hear some of the book titles and the names of the characters you’re referring to.
In the TV world, I’m fond of “The Americans” and I think Elizabeth Jennings is an excellent example of a female anti-hero who is very complex and is not a “femmes fatale,” “total freak show hellion with weapons,” or a “bitchy, stoic creature who wear[s] spike heels, hate[s] children, and eat men for breakfast.” Although she might kill a man or two before breakfast.
Ooo, I’ll check out The Americans. Sounds interesting. Thanks for the rec.
Often you can find anti-heroes in genre fiction, though that’s not always the case. A few examples are:
Sherlock Holmes
Hattori Hiro (ninja and sleuth) in Claws of the Cat
Ender from Ender’s Game
Thomas Covenant in Lord Foul’s Bane
Oh! I just thought of a female! Lisbeth Salander from The Girl With the Dragon Tatoo.
Lisbeth is definitely antihero, and Stieg did a every good job explaining her behavioral traits too.
Sympathy, sympathy.
I LOVE ME SOME LISBETH. She is anti-bitchy badass.
Katniss from The Hunger Games series is another example of a strong, complex female MC.
Hi CG! I agree that Katniss is both strong and complex, but I would argue that she’s a heroine and not an anti-hero. She risks her life daily to put food on the table for her family (and a few others), and she also volunteered as tribute. These are very heroic acts. Yes, she did kill other teens, but it was her only way to survive. When you remove a character’s volition, they become a victim of the circumstance and, therefore, no longer in control of their fate in many ways.
Gillian Flynn does a good job at creating female antiheroes. I enjoy the protagonists in Sharp Objects and Dark Places. I believe we don’t have a lot female antiheroes because many authors don’t know how to create them. Many authors have a tendency to miss the plausibility mark when creating female antiheroes AND Heroes. They are either too overbearing or the men around them seem like super-idiotic-cream-puffs. Oh yeah, and those bad female characters lack change too. It’s almost like many of those authors are trying to get the readers to accept the character “as is” instead of taking the character through some type of real change.
If you look at Gillian’s characters, they go through some real changes. They don’t turn into these super moral characters in the end, but they do, at the very least, realize they need to make SOME changes. Gillian also uses backstory to help explain why these female characters are so jaded. I believe she helps to create sympathy towards the character in doing so. There’s an explanation for the main character’s immoral behavior. I bet we could learn a great deal from Gillian Flynn’s antiheroes.
You know what, I think I’ll to read Gillian Flynn story today, because I like me some female antiheroes. OH YEAH!
Haha- if you don’t like Gillian Flynn’s stories. The (Blank) (Blank) Trilogy has some good antihero type, female characters too. *smile* They are frickin AWESOME. I’m just sayin………..
I’ve only read Gone Girl, but I’ll have to read Flynn’s others, Brian. Thank you for the recommendation.
I think you bring up an excellent point! What happens to the male characters when the female becomes the anti-hero? Many authors seem to think there needs to be a “cream puff”, or softer, male figure to balance the woman’s strength. Hmm…food for thought and possibly another post. Thanks!
Ooo, please let me know your thoughts on the story SHARP OBJECTS, if you get around to reading it.
Great post! I do love me a good anti-hero. Thomas Covenant is probably the poster boy, lol. I’m thinking Mr. Rochester in Jane Eyre and Stephen King’s Gunslinger. As for women, I think you’re spot on with your assessment. I wrote a novel with a female anti-hero lead which never made it to publication. Maybe I’ll have to brush it off and see if I can get it out there!
I’d love to read that, Kerry! I’d say it’s resurrection time. :)
First, is that WU’s first GIF? You rebel, you.
This is perfectly timed. I’m about to embark on a rewrite of a manuscript that features an anti-hero protagonist. He’s a male, sorry. But he does have a kickass female sidekick. That ought to count for something. My trilogy has a female anti-hero, but she’s a secondary character. I hope she’s deliciously love-hate-able, and that folks will end up rooting for her redemption.
As for scanning my shelves or existing females, I wonder if you can make a case for Cersei Lannister…? (Although I’m not sure I ever really rooted for her redemption.) Or, although she starts out as a straight protagonist, could Daenerys Targaryen fit the bill by Dance With Dragons? I guess just about all of GRRM’s characters are darkly complex, aren’t they?
Thanks for the great tips and the perfect timing, Heather!
I think that maybe Arya might fit the bill. We want to root for her because she’s been through so much and she comes from a great family, but we can see that she’s turning toward the dark side. I haven’t really read the books as far as the show goes, but it seems like she is a complex female character (not quite a woman yet) without being the femme fatale or a maneater.
Devyn, I have yet to see Game of Thrones, but I’m thinking about starting it. I’ve heard so many great things about it. I read one of Martin’s books. Though I admire how he breaks classic fiction rules, ultimately his style didn’t suit my tastes. Still, I need to see what all of the Red Wedding is about. And now? Arya! I will check her out for sure.
Hi Vaughn. :) Certainly no need to apologize! I love anti-heroes, regardless of gender so bring it on. You nailed a quality I really enjoy reading and watching in a character– that love/hate factor that makes them so interesting. Good luck in your edits! It sounds like a novel I’d like to read already.
Loved this post!!! Great analysis of what makes a great anti-hero. My favorite woman anti-hero is Emily Thorne from Revenge! I so appreciate how unapologetic and conniving she is while still remaining likable. Brilliant!
Kate, I was just getting ready to say the same thing about Emily on Revenge. She has all those traits. But I quit watching. It got old with so many anti-heroes (Jack seems to be the only hero) — a little too much of the dark side for me.
Carmel, I thought the show didn’t do a good job balancing either which is why I stopped watching, but it does have promise.
Kate, I watched about a season of that show and enjoyed Emily Thorne as well, and also Madeleine Stowe’s character. She’s probably my favorite. It seems that this archetype of female is coming into vogue more, though mostly in TV and film. Thanks for your comment!
Excellent points, Heather. I just blogged about this subject, noting some examples of anti heroes that include Michael Corleone from The Godfather films and Walter White from Breaking Bad. Walter was a fascinating character for me because at the beginning he could not have been more sympathetic, but there was a dark side to him all along which flourished as he got deeper into the drug culture. One example of a complex female character I cited was Scarlett O’Hara, a self centered, domineering harlot, and yet a woman who single handedly saved her family during the Civil War. Thanks for a great post.
Why would you call Scarlett O’Hara a harlot? I don’t think of her as a harlot. She was a flirt, nothing more sexual than that.
I agree, Tina. I don’t see Scarlet as an anti-hero or a harlot. She was a flirt, yes, and complicated, yes, but she wasn’t a classic anti-hero archetype.
Great example! Walter of Breaking Bad is certainly another fascinating anti-hero, CG. I’ll have to check out your blog post. Thanks for stopping by today.
Oooooh, cool, CG Blake! Given your take on Scarlet O’Hara… we are left with a very interesting (engaging, exciting) conclusion of The Southern Belle as anti-hero. Wow. Love this concept. Throw in Belle Starr (yeah, she dressed like that) form real life and we be rockets. I recently wove a short essay of Southern Belle as disease into a reportage-story of the demise (well, end of life) of Zelda Fitzgerald. It will be pub’d in a book I have coming out in Oct from a Southern publisher.
The real question to deal with in doing an anti-hero is keeping her from becoming the villain (antagonist). Something good from something bad is kind of the call, isn’t it? Which brings up a rather silly question… can a villain be the hero (protagonist) of a book? If the villain is the hero… who the hell if the antagonist?
Randy, a villain can absolutely be the protagonist of a book, but then, it would be considered a anti-hero because there still has to be enough depth and sympathetic traits to root for them, to keep wanting to turn the pages. Very few people will read/watch an absolute train wreck of a human being who has dastardly morals if there’s nothing redeeming about them as people.
And to answer your question–if an anti-hero/villain is the protagonist, they can be their own worst enemy that leads to their demise. OR, you can always have outside forces be the antagonist, ie, government, society, etc.
Heather,
Great post and discussion.
“Very few people will read/watch an absolute train wreck of a human being who has dastardly morals if there’s nothing redeeming about them as people.”
To counter this, Cormac McCarthy, and in particular his book Blood Meridian come to mind. It isn’t reading for everyone, to be sure. But it created a standard for that configuration. You end up loving the kid, who didn’t kill as many as everyone else, but reported faithfully on the dastardly exploits of his companions.
I do enjoy exploring the dark side of human nature, since I see it in myself. It is interesting to think about how we use language to convince ourselves that the evil that we do is good. The best study of this was in Hatter’s Castle by AJ Cronin. Cronin was a physician, and oh how he delved into the depths of human misery and psychology. A masterful portrait of a very, very fallen man and the people whose lives he affects.
With regard to women, fairytales are full of evil stepmothers, wicked witches and the lot. Classic.
Vijaya, the novel by Cronin sounds intriguing. I’ll have to add it my list. So many books to read so little time…As for the wicked stepmothers in Disney, they are certainly the “evil” women, but I would call them a classic antagonist as opposed to an anti-hero…unless we’re talking about the recent reboot of films like Maleficent. Thanks for your comment!
I recently wrote an article for Bright Ideas magazine called The Antiheroes Journey, where I track the role’s evolution from Odysseus through the Middle Ages (where he all but disappears — the Romans/Christians HATED Odysseus) to the rogues and scoundrels of the picaresque novel (one of the most famous of which featured a woman, Moll Flanders) and finally to the huge resurgence of the role on contemporary TV.
One of the most interesting aspects of the character is that it tends to reappear when the virtues of a society have begun to curdle into hypocrisy and corrupt self-interest. This is one of several reasons the antihero began to reappear — and flourish — during the 1990s, when the dot.com boom tried to pass itself off as general prosperity. The real estate disaster that followed hasn’t changed things much.
And who better to point out the hypocrisy and blatant, corrupting self-interest of a decadent culture than women?
The claim that there are few if any female antiheroes defies the evidence. You talk of so many good books to read. I agree. But apparently you’ve missed those of Kate Atkinson, Cornelia Read, Tana French, Denise Mina, Val McDermid, Christa Faust, Denise Hamilton, Sophie Littlefield and a host of others with strong, complex, morally flexible (shall we say) women characters.
And those are just the women crime writers. What of Joan Didion, Susanna Moore, Janet Fitch, Susan Straight?
Among male crime writers: One of the joys of Dennis Lehane’s Mystic River was his capability in rendering the inner life of the women characters, two of whom were anything but sweet wifeys or “total freak show hellions with weapons,” or a “bitchy, stoic creatures who wear spike heels, hate children, and eat men for breakfast.”
Daniel Woodrell specializes in strong, morally ambiguous women characters. And Lisbeth from the Steig Larrson trilogy, as noted, defies your stereotype quite handily.
In avoiding TV you’ve missed another motherlode of antiheroines. The Sopranos and Breaking Bad featured antiheroines of captivating complexity. Game of Thrones bristles with them, The Vikings has one of the greatest in all of history (Lagertha) among numerous others, and both Homeland and The Americans feature antiheroine leads.
In fact, given the abundance of antiheroines in current literature, film and TV, I find your inability to encounter them rather quixotic. Could it be that you’re not just avoiding TV, but skirting as well exactly the type of books that would feature the kind of heroine you claim doesn’t exist?
Hadn’t thought about it that way, but you’ve just written down the short list of TV shows I watch – and made it clear why: “strong, complex, morally flexible (shall we say) women characters.”
When I finish the current book (whose main character, interestingly enough, turns out to be more morally flexible than she would ever dream), I have a series planned with a female Travis McGee-like character. Yup. Morally flexible.
Thanks for taking ‘morally complex’ out of my subconscious and into the conscious where I can tweak it to my heart’s content. I’ve never been fond of unambiguous morality.
HI, Alicia:
I can’t help but think that publishers would love to see a female Travis McGee. Brilliant idea.
David
Just read your excellent article in Bright Ideas… and tweeted it out! :)
Fascinating, and helpful as I continue to shape my ideas about my female anti-hero. The context of history – and the absence of women as anti-heroes throughout it – helps to inform what I hope to do with it. I’m not looking to create a female version of a classic male anti-hero, but rather help bring into being the female version that serves the same desires as the male one… if that makes sense. And isn’t overly ambitious.
This, I found particularly insightful: “…the psychological depth and moral complexity of the antihero provide a greater range of dramatic action than a hero constrained by virtue.”
Exactly.
Thanks for the thoughtful article and chance to churn this through my brain.
Yeye- what David said.
Hi David, I do love a good conversation and always get one here at Writer Unboxed.
First of all, I’d love to read your article. It sounds like both a fascinating cultural study of sorts as well as interesting commentary on ye old anti-heroes.
As for the list of authors you mentioned, I have read books by four of them–thank you for the reminder–the rest, I haven’t read, but will certainly look into them. I’m always on the hunt for something new. In terms of avoidance of television, that isn’t the case for me, but rather, my TBR pile is towering and I’m also a mother of young children. When it’s time to make a choice between TV or reading, there rarely is a choice for me. (Though this doesn’t mean I “avoid” it, certainly.) In terms of avoiding books of this nature, that simply isn’t true. I read across genres at the rate of about a book per week in addition to all of my nonfiction research, and just haven’t encountered that many. Perhaps they’re hiding in crime fiction and *occasional* literary novels? I’m willing to get to the bottom of this question!
Another interesting point–I was just talking with another author friend of mine and she posed the idea that female readers are far less forgiving of a morally ambiguous woman. She has a point…you don’t typically hear about men closing a book because there’s a woman with nunchucks kicking someone’s butt into next Tuesday, or because there’s a woman having an affair with her husband’s best friend. It’s the WOMEN who might close the book. Food for thought for sure.
Thanks for your comment today!
David Corbett,
I enjoyed the two female characters that you brought up from Dennis Lehane’s MYSTIC RIVER.
The novel gave us a hero and a villain, both male. (Jimmy tried to be good but when life became too painful, he chose to be the villain.)
Just to be clear, the two “morally interesting” women were not main characters, so they were not really anti-heroines as I understand the definition, anyway. I think they were supporting and influencing characters like Lady Macbeth.
Tina, while anti-heroes don’t have to be the main character necessarily, they do have to exhibit certain traits which all point to a lack of a moral compass (or one that is cracked and nearly broken). But I agree–many of these examples have supporting female roles as opposed to starring (outside of TV), which was a point I was trying to make. Thank you for your thoughtful comments!
David–
A great comment–thank you. I’m sure you’re right about periods of moral/ethical decay giving rise to anti-heroes. I would also say that societies in which people feel a loss of control or confidence generate the conditions for admiring characters who operate by their own standards. The rest of us would like to but are constrained, so we relish tagging along with fictional characters who aren’t constrained by conventional norms, a mortgage, child-rearing, etc. I always think Dirty Harry is the consummate anti-hero. His behavior is essentially criminal and sadistic, but he operates as The Law, and this makes him doubly satisfying. Especially when the politicians pressuring him are slithery, and the criminal antagonists are even more sadistic than is Harry.
Joyce Carol Oates takes on New Feminism’s many layers of unique women’s lives, antiheroines one of her aesthetics. Foxfire: Confessions of a Girl Gang delightfully portrays a cast of young women antiheroines who reject conventional ’50s women’s role expectations.
I would add another character trait layer to the antihero inventory, a rigid if alternative non-normative social-moral values code. Women’s empowerment activism, for example, has a noble goal–though the means to the end may be unjustifiable. Alternatively, women wearing brass drawers who commit the same social blunders in public as male neanderthals. My way or no way! Another antihero trait is wickedness readers love to hate though hope for realization of transformative nobleness: pitiable selfishness that sets up self-sacrifice for the common good.
Sketchy, edgy protagonist rogues with flawed hearts of gold are dynamic antiheroes because they’re unfinished gems subject to any outcome from a crisis. They mature surprisingly, or tragically come undone surprisingly–Bildungsroman genre: doubt of outcomes a subtle, profound, sublime, irresistible appeal.
Not just adult antiheroes, children–teenage young adult–Pony Boy in S.E. Hinton’s The Outsiders, Jerry Renault in Robert Courmier’s The Chocolate War, Dicey Tillerman in Cynthia Voigt’s Homecoming. Younger yet antiheroes are rarer for middle grade ages: Jacob Wonderbar of Nathan Bransford’s Jacob Wonderbar and the Cosmic Space Kapow, Kate DiCamillo’s Opal in Because of Winn Dixie.
A central agonist trait of antiheroes is behaviors contrary to projected normative social-moral values that are antagonal, causal, tensional, that incite and satisfy complications and crises.
Who needs antagonists when an agonist is her or his own worst antagonizing nemesis–an individual and society’s social-moral expectations theme type, and the outcome one of realization or failure of personal empowerment duties; that is, assigning blame to others is counterproductive and at root a social crisis plague. Dynamic agonists cause, pursue, and satisfy their own crisis complications. Actually, that latter is a trait feature criteria since Aristotle, across the literary opus, and as well present-day for a narrative’s strongest unity and appeals. No external forces needed for anything but the tangible surface action appeals.
All great thoughts, Poeticus. I’d throw Snape in Harry Potter on that pile in children’s literature as well.
And I loved this statement you made: “Who needs antagonists when an agonist is her or his own worst antagonizing nemesis?” I couldn’t agree more. Thank you for your commentary today!
This article couldn’t have been published at a better time, for me. I’m in the middle of creating an anti-hero and one of her key (yes, her) traits is a deep misunderstanding of how the world works and an assault view of her place in it. And I may add she is nurturing but…
Needless to say, Heather, I strongly agree that it is time to paint our female characters in a variety of shades.
Fabulous, Leanne! I’m so glad it was of help to you. Good luck nailing down that character. It sounds like something I’d love to hear more about. Thanks for stopping by!
Love this! I’ve been thinking about anti-heroes, especially female anti-heroes for a while… I’ll be writing one this summer for the second season of my all-anti-heroes-all-the-time Debt Collector serial. :)
I like how you break down the problem with female anti-heros as being both societal and writer-imagination (i.e. gender bias). While I won’t have to fight gender bias to create my female anti-hero, I will be keeping an eye on the societal expectations of female characters as being essentially nurturing (or evil). Your post will be a great list to check my character against as I create her – thank you!
Also: my favorite female anti-hero… Starbuck on Battlestar Galactica (the new version).
Susan, I just mentioned something about that societal pressure to a friend of mine earlier. So much of what we create is done to draw readers. If readers (particularly if your target demo is women) will close the book on a rogue female character with ambiguous feelings toward justice and right and wrong, then we’re sunk. I wish you luck! Write on!
Most of the stories I can think of that feature anti-heroes as the Main Character feature a male anti-hero. But there are some females. Anti-Heroes were more popular about 70 years ago, but seem to be making a comeback. Here are some of my favorite novels, short stories, movies, t.v. programs with anti-heroes who are the main character:
THE GOOD GIRL movie character played by Jennifer Aniston
THE DWARF written by Par Lagerkvist
THE BAD LIEUTENANT starring Harvey Keitel
THE SHIELD, DEXTER, BREAKING BAD, DIRTY HARRY
“THE POND” by Patricia Highsmith
THE SECRET HISTORY by Donna Tartt
A great list. Thanks for your comment today, Tina!
Love this post! And I agree with Vaughn, GRRM makes some great female, complex anti-heroes. I’m also with you on House of Cards. Couldn’t stop watching once I started, and now, I want to watch the British series it’s based on.
I think that one of the best things about an anti-hero is seeing the world from their POV. Because, from an anti-hero’s POV, he’s not a bad guy, in fact in his view, he may be a misunderstood good guy. A perfect example is Kevin Spacey’s character in House of Cards. From his viewpoint, he’s doing all the wrong things for the right reasons.
Bernadette, why is it that the Brits often beat us to the punch with bestselling TV? I’ll have to see what their version is like as well. Thanks for stopping by!
I haven’t watched this series but it sounds like he believes the end justifies the means. Most “bad” people think this way. They are just doing the dirty work that has to be done. Sometimes they re-think their actions in the end like Al Pacino’s character in Insomnia.
Gothka the torturer from Joe Abercrombie’s The First Law comes to mind. He’s one of the most intereresting characters I’ve ever read. Now that I think about it, the whole series has interesting characters and, in my mind, no heroes, just anti-heroes and antagonists.
There’s nothing like a series packed with great characters! I just read the synopsis and this sounds like something I should pass along to my husband. He would devour it. Thanks, mshatch.
Going back in time, I’m thinking of Dorian Grey, Lolita, Crime and Punishment, The Stranger.
In movies I think the worst (best) antihero might be Daniel Plainview in There Will Be Blood. OMG that guy scared me. But as you said, he does elicit pity – his only emotional attachment is to his adopted son, and it’s heartbreaking to watch him lose that relationships because of his inability to let go of his ego.
I’m sure as soon as I submit this, I’ll think of some females, but I’m drawing a blank right now. :)
Oh yeah! You listed some novels (and a film) with great antiheroes.
Tina is on a roll during anti-hero Saturday. Um Hmm!
You said it, Fritze! There Will be Blood was INTENSE and riveting and Daniel was about as close to an antagonist as you could get while still remaining sympathetic. I loved the nod they made to the Devil, in fact, in a great scene when the fire was raging and black oil ran down his face. Still, you wanted him to succeed over the preacher. Anyone who uses religion to satisfy their greed is somehow worse than someone who is just plain greedy.
What a fantastic post and wonderful comments too. I just love House of Cards, based on the English series which is also well worth watching. Also love The Americans. I actually think that both the women in those series are classic anti-heroes too. They are just as conniving, manipulative and in the Americans, more murderous than their husbands! And what about lady Macbeth!
I am personally though, at present more into the soft romantic writing of love and compassion and helping others. Maybe I need to introduce a new character to give my new novel a bit more bite! A somewhat sadistic guy who has turned to the ‘dark’ side!
Sherry, I love the idea of mixing it up! Challenge yourself and see what fun you can have at your characters’ expense. :)
Reposting this from the FB convo on Heather’s page! ;-)
—
I think we–general we–are drawn to books that reflect something conscious or unconscious within us, or something we wish was part of us. Therefore we feel jolted out of our comfort zone when a female protagonist does not fit within the image we’ve constructed of ourselves.
TV/movies are not “us” in that it’s an actor who is portraying the character, and their own personal charisma and acting ability fills in the corners of the writing. With books, we’re filling in the corners with our own biases, personality quirks and traits, fears, desires, etc. And since women are bombarded with tons of negative and conflicting messages every day, it might be that women readers delve into books to escape this.
The “blank slate” or ingenue might be popular because of the aforementioned filling corners–the heroine that’s alpha or amazingly beautiful or overweight or poor or anything that forces you–general you–to approach her as a character in her own right punts you out of the story.
Heroes can be multifaceted because we’re accustomed to the male gaze as dominant, so it’s easy–and sometimes more fun–to live vicariously through an anti-hero, who doesn’t receive the same censure a woman–fictional and real–does.
Evangeline, thank you for sharing your comment from Facebook here on the blog. Many insightful points here to ponder. I love this in particular:
“their own personal charisma and acting ability fills in the corners of the writing. With books, we’re filling in the corners with our own biases”
Many who group storytelling in fiction together with TV have missed this point. The idea of visual context conveying meaning vs. internal context filling in and coloring the nuances of a story are vastly different.This concept is crucial to understanding TV writing (anti-heroes included) vs. novel writing. At the end of the day, they’re constructed very differently, and the audiences are often not the same, which in turn means the perception of the story and characters will vary on a wider scale. As for anti-heroes? They’re all mashed up in there somewhere…and so are the women–sometimes.
Fabulous comment. Thank you!
Heather: Great subject. You mentioned Frank Underwood as a great antihero, and he is great. But then in your consideration of female antiheroes I saw no mention of Claire Underwood who I believe is Frank’s match in every way! Maybe I missed her name in the comments. Gone Girl immediately came to my mind also, as did Glenn Close’s character, Patty Hewes, in the T.V. series, Damages. Another male antihero that comes to mind is Erik (the tormented Phantom) of Phantom of the Opera.
Carol
Thanks, Carol. I did mention Claire and Gone Girl, actually. :) But Amy in Gone Girl, though complex, isn’t an anti-hero, but a femme fatale antagonist for the most part. Part of what I was trying to communicate in the article is our perception of what makes a male anti-hero vs. a female. Though technically they should be the same, they aren’t. Actually, Tamara left a terrific comment here discussing this very thing. Check it out. :) Thanks for your stopping by today!
Male: Talented Mr Ripley. TV: Rake.
Female: Oh, Heather, I LOVE Notes on a Scandal. That movie has been totally overlooked. :( To Die For, Mommie Deareast, Devil Wears Prada.
I wonder whether the gender situation exists because many female anti-heroes are not the main character. The female anti-hero tends to be the sidekick or the bane of the protag. Can’t be an anti-hero if you’re not the hero (protag)? Uh, Hit Girl in Kick Ass, for example?
Could go back to those Yungian archetypes of male & female, Venus & Mars stuff. Women build nests. Men hunt, sometimes go to war and otherwise fuck off. I do see a trend among my generation of a larger number of women admitting their mothers were bad people… and writing about it. Wonder, too, if that lady in Texas (in real life) who tried to kill the cheerleader so her daughter could get a slot on the squad is an anti-hero.
Honestly, I don’t really see a dirth of female characters in any “role” these days. Except maybe the Senate. I’d say fiction is ahead of the curve, actually.
I love you’re dressing out the anti-hero for us. Look at the work you did! Thank you!
Thanks so much, Randy. I see plenty of anti-heroes that are female (particularly as side-kicks as you mentioned) in TV, but not nearly as many in fiction. Certainly not in many genres. They exist, certainly–we can all name 4 or 5–but how many males can we name? I could name two dozen on the spot.
By the way, I love that you added a reference to hunter-gatherers. This is precisely where my mind goes. I’m a bit of an anthropology nut.
This makes for such engaging conversation! Thanks
Notes on a Scandal was a novel before it was a film. By talented British writer Zoë Heller.
I must read it! I adored the movie, twisted as it was.
Hmm. Either I don’t understand the definition of an anti-hero or I don’t like “morally flexible” characters. What I do like is learning that characters we thought were villains are actually complex and trying to do what they think is right (or at least fair) based on their own past. Disney has been exploring this theme a lot lately with ONCE UPON A TIME, FROZEN, and MALEFICENT.
Based on current trends, I actually think slush piles are going to fill up very quickly with “anti-heroes” (female and male) until agents and editors will be begging for old-fashioned righteous protagonists (who are still complex). But that’s just my opinion.
Isn’t that how it goes, Jen? We flood the market with one thing and the pendulum swings in the opposite direction. Thanks for stopping by!
In addition to the societal bias that says likeable women are sweet and dumb and likeable men are rough and tough, there are a couple of other forces at work.
1) Men write about men, women write about women.
Women write about women because we know women, and because if a woman writes about a man, people scoff that the style is too “feminine” and reads like “how a woman thinks a man thinks.”
We also tend to write for women. And women, in general, like other women who are empathetic, generous, and self-effacing. They don’t like women who have the qualities admired by men–aggressiveness, intelligence, power. So we write about empathetic, generous, self-effacing heroines; not aggressive, intelligent, powerful anti-heroines.
2) Men are judged by actions, women are judged by characteristics.
If you make your hero a nice guy, but he never does anything, people will hate him for being weak and useless. If you make your hero a total jerk, but he rescues the puppy from the oncoming car at the last second, people will love him.
If you make your heroine sweet, she can spend the entire book hurting everyone around her with her stupidity and indecision and people will still love her. But if you make your heroine a jerk, she can save a million puppies from oncoming cars and people will still hate her.
The problem with anti-heroes is that they need to be likeable despite their bad qualities. You can accomplish this with male characters through their actions–they can redeem themselves if they take down the big baddie, side with the underdog, etc.
But it’s very difficult to accomplish this with female characters. Once people have decided she’s a brat or a bitch, that’s it. They’ll probably close the book before she has a chance to redeem herself, or they’ll complain that it’s not believable when she does. The only trick that works reliably is to make her a victim, because being a victim justifies everything. (Murder, torture, theft…oh, but she was raped, so it’s okay.)
Is it fair? Not at all. But it’s the way readers operate. You can try to break the mold and write anti-heroines as if they’re anti-heroes, but because we have such different ideals for men and women, you’ll have a tough time of it.
This read on society is precisely what gave me pause in considering writing a female anti-hero. And yet… I think this describes how some in society view the sexes. All readers/viewers are not the same. And I think there is a strong desire out there for female characters who move beyond this box where women are judged by characteristics and not action, where they have agency and aren’t simply victims. At a minimum, when I write female characters who are strong (not kick-ass strong, but strong in the same way that male characters are strong – overcoming adversity, finding the depths of the moral character, standing up for the weak, basic hero stuff), I get all kinds of readers who are loving that type of female character. These are heroic female characters… writing a female anti-hero requires making a character complex enough that the reader/viewer is moved beyond their biases, their initial box they want to put characters in, and brought along for that character’s journey. It’s challenging, but not impossible. And I think important work in some ways – if we can’t imagine breaking out of those boxes, then how will we do it in real life?
Tamara, I want to stand up SING after reading your comment. Yes and yes! This is precisely what the issue is and I couldn’t have said it better myself. This is why I’m a bit for being driven and aggressive, but a male is just considered assertive. It’s frustrating, but so true. Thanks for your comment here today.
Donna Tartt is a woman who writes “about” men. She uses first person from a male character’s POV in her novels.
Excellent question, Heather. And you’re not the only one asking it.
https://www.vox.com/2014/5/29/5761876/why-do-all-the-best-movie-villains-have-to-be-men
How timely! Thanks for sharing this, Dave.
Great points about how to craft your bad guys with tension. I would beg to differ, though, that Clare and Frank are anti-heroes. I think they started off as them but have devolved into antagonists. They both do such despicable things, with so little justification other than their own power-hungry ends, and I suspect that by series end one will so gravely betray the other, that he/she will turn on the other. There’s not much left that’s decent or redemptive about either character, which isn’t sustainable to the viewer or reader. I’m sure you didn’t watch ‘Sons of Anarchy’ which started with a son who was definitely an anti-hero, but after a couple of seasons became the very thing he was fighting against and just plain bad. We stopped watching because he was irredeemable by that point and without the hope of redemption there was no tension to the show, only murder and mayhem for its own sake.
Baxter, I agree with you that Frank and Claire are headed in a very dark direction, and one that may be irredeemable. If those Emmy-award-winning writers know what’s good for them they will throw in a few twists to soften these characters or you’re right–viewers won’t watch anymore. No one wants to root for an antagonist.
Baxter, I agree with you that Frank and Claire are headed in a very dark direction, and one that may be irredeemable. If those Emmy-award-winning writers know what’s good for them they will throw in a few twists to soften these characters or you’re right–viewers won’t watch anymore. No one wants to root for a bad guy.
Hi, Heather,
Thanks for sparking this great conversation!
Baxter, I’d agree with your assessment that Frank and Claire might be permanently lost souls. Frank and Claire have double crossed too many…and killed enough without significant remorse to qualify as irredeemable. But does that judgment of ours mean we will stop watching? I won’t.
Walter White, Lady Macbeth, Tony Soprano..they’re all lost. We don’t really believe they’ll change, but because of Heather’s point about the complex motivations and contradictions, we will keep returning with tiny faith that their sociopathy will reform. In other words, I think antiheroes are probably either narcissists or sociopaths, and for that reason they are compelling, irresistible charmers. We can’t say no to these survivors who find ways again and again to do business with us. Maybe they aren’t so bad…maybe they really do care…maybe they have half a heart…We let them kill us softly with these maybes.
These personality types engage us and require a kind of moral fortitude to resist that is very hard to maintain. The only solution for any sanity in real life is to leave them. But the rest of the world sees the charm and doesn’t know about the incident in the Metro station (poor Zoey) and so it’s hard for Congress to impeach Frank Underwood on the grounds of being a sociopath. He knows how to pay off enough people to keep them in thrall.
And because these personalities are full of drama and adventure, we rarely say no. We want the crazy rollercoaster fun they promise, real life or imaginary. Claire Underwood states it best: she married Frank because he promised that life with him would “never be boring.”
And so I believe there are a ton of male and female antiheroes in our literature, TV, etc., ones we have to follow because they give us the rollercoaster we crave. In real life, we may have ditched the drama queen BFF or divorced the toxic hot mess a long time ago, but safe inside our homes with the remote or set of pages, we’ll let these dysfunctional geniuses take us for another ride.
Lyn
I’ll keep watching as long as it’s a roller coaster and not a downhill plunge!
Interesting post! I wrote an upper-middle-grade book with an anti-heroine and editors told me she wasn’t likable and wouldn’t sell. She wasn’t supposed to be likable! I gave a good reason for her being such a control freak, and she grew over the course of the novel, so I didn’t really see the problem.
I think you are right that men are allowed to be like that in novels, but women/girls–not so much.
Great conversation, Heather!
I love all my manuscripts, but the one which has my heart features an anti-heroine. She’s a strong-willed, self-destructive force of nature who literally rides into a small town and shakes up the power structure. I have no idea how she’ll be received by others because of the female anti-heroine thing–too easy, as you say, for them to be labelled a bitch and dismissed as unlikable, especially in a romance–but it almost doesn’t matter. I won’t abandon her.
I love anti-heroes, most of my main characters are so. I’ve written a hard science fiction series based on an anti-heroine. It isn’t yet available in English (the first book will be published at the end of this month), but readers in Italy loved it mostly because she was so egoist, complicated, etc. They said she was just like a real woman. :D
Some of them liked the story even if they almost hated her but she made the story credible.
I think that’s the point. Heroes are rare in real life, while if you could see inside people’s mind you’ll find out anti-heroes are everywhere. Many of us would be anti-heroes, so it’s easier for us to identify in them.
MANY SPOILERS FOR THE SHOW VIKINGS. DONT READ IF YOU HAVENT WATCHED AND PLAN TO. Also this is very long.
I consider the formidable Lagertha from Vikings to be an anti-hero compared to most women (not including Emily and Elizabeth) portrayed on tv shows. She is pretty partial to violence and adventure. She is an equal warrior to the men on the show. In the second season, she plotted to kill her second husband (although he was a drunk, abusive, and horrible) to become a powerful Earl. Also, there is a scene where a horrible torture called “Blood Eagle” is being performed and she is the only female/only of 2 people that looks on calmly and doesn’t look away or sickened. She is also willing to allow young children to be killed (she doesn’t do it herself but she doesn’t stop it) because she knows its in the best interests of her family. She participates in watching human sacrifices to her gods. She’s very confident in her sexuality and not above using it in certain situations to make a point. However, this is rare and usually just a prelude to her putting someone in their place. She is often a force to be reckoned with if a person crosses her.
However, she is also fiercely loyal, independent, beautiful, and kind. She protects her family first and foremost. She was in a very equal and passionate relationship with her first husband. She doesn’t allow her son to be disrespected and her scenes with her daughter are heartbreaking. Her son respects her not just as a mother but as a powerful women who can take care of herself. In battle, she even constantly looks toward her son to make sure he is safe. She doesn’t take any crap from men and she leads her people with wisdom and compassion. She particularly looks out for the women she leads. She is in no way portrayed as catty or petty towards other women. She’s loved and respected by most people.
She came back to rescue and restore her first husband (Ragnar) to power even after she left him because he insulted and humiliated — her words– her. She did this in part because of her feelings for him, their son, her loyalty to Ragnar, and the people that Ragnar is Earl over. In fact, she is still popular with his/formerly her people after years of being away. She also didn’t bad mouth Ragnar to her son despite the way he treated her. P.S. It might not seem like it but I love Ragnar too as a character.
All in all – she is a favorite character for many and not even the protagonist. The protagonist is Ragnar – her first/ex husband. She is also based off a real woman along with Ragnar Lothbrok in Norse legends. She is also a total badass. A person will be pulled in by Ragnar as a character but will stay for Lagertha who is such a boss.