I Wear the Black Hat...Villains and Their Necessity

I just finished this book recently. The sad part is, it sounded a lot more intriguing than it ended up being. Which, I guess, is partially my fault because I read WAY too much into the title and introduction.

I Wear the Black Hat: Grappling with Villains Real and Imaginary by Chuck Klosterman starts off with a simple question: "What is the most villainous move on the market?" Klosterman explores the question a bit, noting that murder is obviously wrong, human trafficking is terrible, and blowing up a planet is frowned upon. However, he notes that none of these deeds is really the "pinnacle" of villainy. He then argues that the most villainous act is tying a woman to the railroad tracks.

Honestly, this statement made me chuckle and think of watching Dudley Do-Right segments of Rocky and Bullwinkle as a kid. In fact, Klosterman actually DOES point out Snidely Whiplash, the villain of Dudley Do-Right, as his example. And then he explains why tying a woman to the railroad track is the most villainous act someone can commit: there is no reason to tie a woman to the railroad tracks. One does it for the pure intent of being evil. There are more effective ways to murder someone, if that is Snidely's goal, and there are certainly equally scary places to tie a lady to await her doom. There is no apparent gain for Snidely, yet he continues tying women to railroad tracks in nearly every episode he appears in. Snidely ties women to railroad tracks simply because he wants to. And that is what makes him villainous.

Unfortunately, the book took a downward turn at this point. I expected Klosterman to further explore commonly known villains: Lex Luther, the Joker, the Wicked Witch, heck, even the Big Bad Wolf. I thought the author would explore what makes these characters "villains" as opposed to simply "bad guys." But that is not where the book goes; it instead begins to explore examples of real people who have either become vilified, or who have managed to escape the lens of villainy, despite villainous acts. Some of the examples Klosterman uses are pop culture-related, but many were random and unknown to me. I had a hard time following the point of the book, and found myself skimming a good portion of it.

However, the overlying theme of villainy did give me some interesting food for thought, which is why I decided to talk about this book, despite the disappointment. Because, let's face it. We need villains almost as much as we need heroes. Villains keep stories moving. They make sure the main character doesn't get too comfortable. Without villains, books and movies would be boring.

Think about your favorite books, whatever they may be. Would the story be nearly as compelling without the villain to spice things up? No. Because villains add conflict to the story, and give us a reason to see the book through to the end. We love happy endings, and the ending often doesn't seem complete without the hero defeating the villain.

But sometimes, I think there is a tiny part of us that is cheering for the villain as well. Even if we hate what a villain does, there are many times when we respect a "good" villain. For example, there is a lot to hate about Voldemort, but at the same time, it was pretty ingenious of him to split his soul to protect himself for his anticipated triumphal rule. In the end, I wanted good to succeed, but I did love reading about the various methods Voldemort used to try and conquer the wizarding world. The same is true of many villains, both in books and movies. A few others that come to mind are the Joker (Batman), Big Brother (1984), Captain Hook (Peter Pan), and Count Olaf (The Series of Unfortunate Events), along with several others.

Some villains are meticulous in their schemes, and hatch elaborate plots to accomplish their ends. Others have a single goal in mind, and are willing to go to extraordinary heights of villainy to get what they want. Some want to rule the world. Some want chaos. Others protect their own ideal, and protect it fiercely, even if it is diluted. And it seems that the worst of all are those who have apparently no motive--those who (as Alfred says of the Joker in The Dark Knight) "just want to watch the world burn."

I appreciate authors who take the time to develop their villains, because they make a story that much more interesting. A well-thought-out villain often has more depth to his character than the main character of the story, and a disappointing villain can ruin an otherwise good story if he is not intended to be ridiculous.

Well, I have pounded villainy to the dirt now, but I would love to hear your thoughts! Who are your favorite (or least favorite) villains, and why?