| Ever since this club was created there has been some controversy surrounding various characters I decided to put on the character relations list. I'll say that I, for one, like it that way; it leaves many things open for discussion. Having received a few too many of the "Is such-and-such really a bad guy? ;_;" comments, I thought there should be a proper place for people to put such drivel. So if you're in question about certain characters, ask away here! Though I know half the time I'll be directing people to the spoiler on the club's main page... |
 What do you mean Beethoven wasn't so great?! |
| A villain is an "evil" character in a story so I don't think anti-heroes and antagonists should be in the list. The line between anti-hero and different types of hero doesn't really seem to be clear, for example, I find Light(Death Note) to be more of a Byronic hero than an anti hero, and Lelouch(Code Geass) to be more along the lines of a Tragic hero than an anti-hero. A lot of hero types can fit into the category of anti-hero so I don't think they should be called villains. For example: Spider-man, according to wikipedia, is a reluctant hero and an anti-hero but he's nowhere near evil. Antagonists shouldn't be considered villains either, even thou most of the time they are, sometimes, a villain may appear as the protagonist of a story, while the hero who opposes them may be the antagonist. In the case of Death Note, Light's goals were on the side of good, he was trying to create a Utopia(Making it so there would be no criminals) but it ended up being an Anti-Utopia(If you didn't notice the human misery, oppression, and violence...), so the end result was evil and L was trying to stop him which makes him on the side of good. Same theory with Code Geass, Lelouch and Suzaku are both trying to do something good but with different methods which makes them both look evil. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-hero http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-utopia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byronic_hero http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reluctant_hero http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragic_hero http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villian |
  |
ThisNameLies said: A villain is an "evil" character in a story so I don't think anti-heroes and antagonists should be in the list. This club was created for all of those. Did you even read the spoiler on the club page? Any of those can be put here. Thank you. Villains and antagonists often go hand-in-hand anyway. I don't see the problem there. ThisNameLies said: The line between anti-hero and different types of hero doesn't really seem to be clear, for example, I find Light(Death Note) to be more of a Byronic hero than an anti hero, and Lelouch(Code Geass) to be more along the lines of a Tragic hero than an anti-hero. A lot of hero types can fit into the category of anti-hero so I don't think they should be called villains. For example: Spider-man, according to wikipedia, is a reluctant hero and an anti-hero but he's nowhere near evil. The line between them is what anti-heroes are willing to do to reach their goals; they do obviously-not-heroic things. They're often misunderstood as being the bad guys. Light is not a Byronic hero or an anti-hero, he is a villain. He just happens to be the main character. I can't stand how people assume the main character can't be the villain. They have to dumb it down to "Anti-hero," which to me basically means "Villain Jr." Lelouch is a more dramatized version of Light, so the same could be said for him. Light is not a social outcast, doesn't have a dark past, and certainly doesn't have self-esteem issues. As far as I know, he's not self-destructive either. Simply having a 'dark' streak isn't enough to call these guys Byronic heroes. The qualities of a Byronic hero are not "willing to kill an indefinite number of people to reach their goal." It's just a "somewhat angsty hero" and a pretty select few actually fall into this category. And I fail to see how Spider-Man is an anti-hero. Goes to show what happens when you cite Wikipedia, I suppose. ('Course, I never read the comics, so don't listen to me.) ThisNameLies said: Antagonists shouldn't be considered villains either, even thou most of the time they are, sometimes, a villain may appear as the protagonist of a story, while the hero who opposes them may be the antagonist. Nevertheless, they often are evil. And if they're not, they're usually in the grey. L from Death Note ring a bell? It sounds like you unintentionally agreed with me in that paragraph. (Note that the whole "evil protagonist" and "good antagonist" happens very rarely. When it does, it seems to be along the Death Note lines.) ThisNameLies said: In the case of Death Note, Light's goals were on the side of good, he was trying to create a Utopia(Making it so there would be no criminals) but it ended up being an Anti-Utopia(If you didn't notice the human misery, oppression, and violence...), so the end result was evil and L was trying to stop him which makes him on the side of good. Same theory with Code Geass, Lelouch and Suzaku are both trying to do something good but with different methods which makes them both look evil. No, Light's goals started out on the side of good. It didn't take long for him to become an egocentric mass-murdering freak who started killing anyone who came to catch him besides just criminals. L being on the side of 'good' is also mostly conjecture, due to the lengths he is willing to go to expose Light. Holding people in confinement in torture chambers and using people as pawns, and all that. He's no mass murderer, but he's no saint. I'm not too far into Code Geass, but as it seems to be a Death Note ripoff of sorts, I'm guessing the same idea applies. Of course, Death Note was, in my opinion, created to make the audience question the nature of morality. Thus the traditional 'good' and 'bad' sides have been all but erased, and everything is open for interpretation. ThisNameLies said: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-hero http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-utopia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byronic_hero http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reluctant_hero http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragic_hero http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villian I've read these already, thanks. I actually only found them helpful in determining which characters to allow into the club. Bottom line: Anti-heroes and antagonists are here to stay. That was my intention from the beginning. But it's fun to have these discussions. =P |
| What do you mean Beethoven wasn't so great?! |
Nerull said: Lelouch on the otherhand is fighting against an oppresive regime who wants to take over the world, granted his methods and motivations wouldnt exaclty be what you could call good and pure, but its clear that his cause has the morale high ground. I would 100% put Light in as a villian and i would whack in Lelouch as an anti hero and since in the spoiler it has that this club is for anti-heros too he fits right in Like I said, I'm not that far into Code Geass. At the very least, he seems like a maniac to me. Which means you're right, he would fit right in. =P Lelouch (am I the only one who thinks that is the dumbest name ever?) is a pretty popular 'good' bad guy though. I didn't even put him on the list originally. My verdict: Lelouch is just weird. >.> |
| What do you mean Beethoven wasn't so great?! |
Pryefly said: Yes, I did read it, I just don't agree with it.Did you even read the spoiler on the club page? Any of those can be put here. Thank you. Pyrefly said: Villains and antagonists often go hand-in-hand anyway. I don't see the problem there. Nevertheless, they often are evil. And if they're not, they're usually in the grey. Don't those two sentences mean the same thing? Just because they often go hand-in-hand doesn't mean they always. If they were the villain they would fit into the villain category without a need to fit into the antagonist category.Pyrefly said: I find him very close to a social outcast, did he look like he was an outgoing person with a lot of friends? He did have a lot of self-esteem issues, his whole motivation for killing is based on him finding it reassuring that he had power. About a dark past, I can think it's more of a psychological dark past than a physical one, like his follower Teru Mikami, which saw that other people were evil and wanted trouble makers dead but wouldn't do anything to stand up against them.(They were discussing this when they said when children talk about capital punishment in school.) Light is not a social outcast, doesn't have a dark past, and certainly doesn't have self-esteem issues. As far as I know, he's not self-destructive either. Not self-destructive??? He had to use self-deception against his own morals to achieve his goals(physically with the Death Note and psychologically by lying to himself again and again saying if he wins than he is right.) Anti-hero is a general term, it's basically a hero without normal hero attitudes and qualities but they should still be in the category of heroes and not villains because their overall goals are good. I think it really depends on what your criteria for "evil" is, from what you said I think you determine evil by What someone does, (L, Light, Lelouch, ect.) They did things that are considered evil by todays standards so I guess you could call them evil if you want. My criteria for evil is more based on Why they did what they did, for example, say someone killed someone important to you, and you killed them back out of rage, from the the point of what you did, you're evil, but from why you did it, I think anyone would understand why... unless you're someone that can't sympathize with other people. Same thing with Light, it's a fact that the criminals killed someone, so he killed them back. The irony is that the criminals probably also had their own reasons for killing... Light did kill innocent people and he knew it was wrong too, that's part of the self-sacrifice that he was willing to do to achieve his goals. I think the criteria for villain should be someone that does things for evil purposes(like an anti-villain, he does honorable things but for evil purposes), villain being the opposite of hero, which is "characters that, in the face of danger and adversity or from a position of weakness, display courage and the will for self-sacrifice, that is, heroism, for some greater good, originally of martial courage or excellence but extended to more general moral excellence." I don't see how, anti-villain and anti-hero, being opposites can fit into the same category. Pyrefly said: I don't think it's possible Code Geass ripped off Death Note as both have pretty close air dates, unless you're talking about the Manga which maybe the makers of Code Geass read, I don't know.I'm not too far into Code Geass, but as it seems to be a Death Note ripoff of sorts, I'm guessing the same idea applies. Light, L, and Lelouch all sacrificed themselves for the greater good(moral excellence), even if their motivation, actions and other factors aren't selfless or good. Pyrefly said: I guess that settles the discussion, but wouldn't that destroy the purpose of the name of the club? We could put Haruhi Suzumiya into the list for being a romantic/anti-hero into this list if we wanted to as most different types of heroes other than traditional ones would fit into the category of anti-hero.Bottom line: Anti-heroes and antagonists are here to stay. That was my intention from the beginning. |
|
ThisNameLies said: Yes, I did read it, I just don't agree with it. And I'm totally OK with that. The whole point of that spoiler, and this discussion, is so I can justify my actions to people with different opinions. As long as you 'sorta' understand where I'm coming from, my job is done. ThisNameLies said: Just because they often go hand-in-hand doesn't mean they always. If they were the villain they would fit into the villain category without a need to fit into the antagonist category. Sorry, but I completely missed your point there. >.> To me, villain and antagonist are still two incredibly closely-related things. ThisNameLies said: I find him very close to a social outcast, did he look like he was an outgoing person with a lot of friends? He did have a lot of self-esteem issues, his whole motivation for killing is based on him finding it reassuring that he had power. About a dark past, I can think it's more of a psychological dark past than a physical one, like his follower Teru Mikami, which saw that other people were evil and wanted trouble makers dead but wouldn't do anything to stand up against them.(They were discussing this when they said when children talk about capital punishment in school.) Not self-destructive??? He had to use self-deception against his own morals to achieve his goals(physically with the Death Note and psychologically by lying to himself again and again saying if he wins than he is right.) To me, 'social outcast' means everyone hates and shuns someone. Light's a great actor, all the girls love him, and even some potential guy pals asked him to hang out at one point. He's antisocial by his own volition. If he's a social outcast, it's his own fault. There is something to be said about bullies who are actually insecure about themselves; when you think of Light in that light (no pun intended, I swear >.>) I can understand how he might have "self-esteem issues." He just always seemed really pompous. Since Death Note is the series that it is, I would say his motivations are one of the many aspects of the show that can be put up for discussion. I do still think that it may have started out that way, but eventually it went to his head and he honestly believed himself to be a figurative 'god' or whatnot. ThisNameLies said: Anti-hero is a general term, it's basically a hero without normal hero attitudes and qualities but they should still be in the category of heroes and not villains because their overall goals are good. A good motto for anti-hero would be "the ends justify the means." In some cases, at least. But a lot of villainous characters have that same worldview as well. I've said this before and I'll say it again: everything is open for interpretation. In mine, an anti-hero's real side is unclear, and he has potential to become either good or evil. At any case, they are certainly not strict "heroes," which above all is the one archetype I do not want in this club. ThisNameLies said: I think it really depends on what your criteria for "evil" is, from what you said I think you determine evil by What someone does, (L, Light, Lelouch, ect.) They did things that are considered evil by todays standards so I guess you could call them evil if you want. My criteria for evil is more based on Why they did what they did, for example, say someone killed someone important to you, and you killed them back out of rage, from the the point of what you did, you're evil, but from why you did it, I think anyone would understand why... unless you're someone that can't sympathize with other people. Same thing with Light, it's a fact that the criminals killed someone, so he killed them back. The irony is that the criminals probably also had their own reasons for killing... Light did kill innocent people and he knew it was wrong too, that's part of the self-sacrifice that he was willing to do to achieve his goals. You made some great points up there^. You're an intellectual and I commend you. The last thing I want to do is give some great speech spelling out my morals for the world to see, but I'll say this much: I believe killing, good-intentioned or not, is evil. No one ever has the right to take another's life. Killing out of revenge is just pointless. It's not that I don't sympathize with people (though that is true to a certain extent), but that I am a realist who understands how this world works: it would be far too chaotic if people went around killing others and constantly being excused for it, because "they had their own reasons for doing it." Of course they had reasons for it. Otherwise they would be able to plead insanity. It's like saying everyone's reasons are right, all the time. I guess my point is, if general killing is ever justifiable, I don't see why we have morals in the first place. Thus, no point in having heroes or villains either. This is all made null by the fact that we're actually discussing fictional characters, but whatever. ThisNameLies said: Light, L, and Lelouch all sacrificed themselves for the greater good(moral excellence), even if their motivation, actions and other factors aren't selfless or good. Here is where I disagree. But that's OK. If we all had the same views we would be horribly boring. ThisNameLies said: I guess that settles the discussion, but wouldn't that destroy the purpose of the name of the club? We could put Haruhi Suzumiya into the list for being a romantic/anti-hero into this list if we wanted to as most different types of heroes other than traditional ones would fit into the category of anti-hero. At that I have to say LOL. The only reason the club's name is what it is, is because it is an oxymoron, and such literary devices fascinate me. It's also just cool, implying that the club members actually like bad guys. Besides, calling it "The Club for Villains, Antagonists, Anti-Heros, Anti-Villains, and the Like" is a bit of a mouthful. =P I haven't fallen prey to Haruhi Mania yet, but you know, you're right, we probably could add her if we wanted. Everything is open for interpretation. |
| What do you mean Beethoven wasn't so great?! |
Pyrefly said: Sorry, but I completely missed your point there. >.> To me, villain and antagonist are still two incredibly closely-related things. My point is we could add Akira Touya from Hikaru no Go for being an antagonist here if that is a criteria, which what he does obviously has no relation to being good or evil in the show, their just playing a board game and he's the main character's rival, I don't think that can be interpreted as good or evil either way. There are characters that fit the criteria for being an antagonist but not being a villain, just like not everyone has to be either good or evil. Pyrefly said: To me, 'social outcast' means everyone hates and shuns someone. Light's a great actor, all the girls love him, and even some potential guy pals asked him to hang out at one point. He's antisocial by his own volition. If he's a social outcast, it's his own fault. There is something to be said about bullies who are actually insecure about themselves; when you think of Light in that light (no pun intended, I swear >.>) I can understand how he might have "self-esteem issues." He just always seemed really pompous. Since Death Note is the series that it is, I would say his motivations are one of the many aspects of the show that can be put up for discussion. I do still think that it may have started out that way, but eventually it went to his head and he honestly believed himself to be a figurative 'god' or whatnot. Even if it's his own fault, he's a social outcast never the less. I can agree with his motivation and other things changing at some point, I think the point where he "Discarded his pride"(the Death Note being the source of his pride) was where his motivation and other factors of himself started to change. Pyrefly said: A good motto for anti-hero would be "the ends justify the means." In some cases, at least. But a lot of villainous characters have that same worldview as well. I've said this before and I'll say it again: everything is open for interpretation. In mine, an anti-hero's real side is unclear, and he has potential to become either good or evil. At any case, they are certainly not strict "heroes," which above all is the one archetype I do not want in this club. Maybe I'm bad at explaining myself, but I think you're using a double standard(which I really can't agree with as it violates the rules of being equal in judging) for Anti-hero and Anti-villain, judging the anti-hero by what he does and judging the anti-villain by why he does it. Because anti-villains aren't the type that does evil things but their over all goals are evil, while the anti-heroes do evil things but their overall goals are good. Pyrefly said: You made some great points up there^. You're an intellectual and I commend you. The last thing I want to do is give some great speech spelling out my morals for the world to see, but I'll say this much: I believe killing, good-intentioned or not, is evil. No one ever has the right to take another's life. Killing out of revenge is just pointless. It's not that I don't sympathize with people (though that is true to a certain extent), but that I am a realist who understands how this world works: it would be far too chaotic if people went around killing others and constantly being excused for it, because "they had their own reasons for doing it." Of course they had reasons for it. Otherwise they would be able to plead insanity. It's like saying everyone's reasons are right, all the time. I guess my point is, if general killing is ever justifiable, I don't see why we have morals in the first place. Thus, no point in having heroes or villains either. This is all made null by the fact that we're actually discussing fictional characters, but whatever. I never said he was right, I'm just saying he isn't completely wrong, I had a another discussion about it here, I was taking the side against his actions, basically, my view on morals is more nihilistic(which means I don't really see why we have morals either), as I don't think reasoning will ever be able to tell what is truly morally right and wrong because everyone will always have different views of things and they will always change with the times. My conclusion is reasoning leads to paradoxes, like my screen name, and aren't completely true or false, like killing to prevent killing. Pryefly said: Here is where I disagree. But that's OK. If we all had the same views we would be horribly boring. I guess depends on what you call the greater good, to me, fighting against oppression, violence, and crime is what I consider to be a greater good than making sure everyone's happy with the result, but really depends, if you want everyone to be happy you're going to need some other way to make it happen other than doing it by force. As I don't think it would be possible to make everyone happy I find their actions more preferable to putting random laws and safety regulations trying to prevent anything bad from happening which just puts stress on people's lives to maintain. Pryefly said: At that I have to say LOL. The only reason the club's name is what it is, is because it is an oxymoron, and such literary devices fascinate me. It's also just cool, implying that the club members actually like bad guys. Besides, calling it "The Club for Villains, Antagonists, Anti-Heros, Anti-Villains, and the Like" is a bit of a mouthful. =P I haven't fallen prey to Haruhi Mania yet, but you know, you're right, we probably could add her if we wanted. Everything is open for interpretation. Well, I guess everything is really open for interpretation, I don't see how Honor contradicts with villain(as in Anti-Villian) but the fact that Heroes contradicting with villains is what's bothering me, (Anti-Hero, Anti-Villain). |
|
| I just checked the new tournament. I really don't understand how Cain Nightroad is a villain. |
Drunk_Samurai said: I just checked the new tournament. I really don't understand how Cain Nightroad is a villain. ...'cuz he's insane and goes on bloody rampages on his quest for world domination? That'd be my guess...I'm not the one that nominated him. I hope you're not confusing him with his brother Abel who's actually a really nice guy ._. |
| What do you mean Beethoven wasn't so great?! |
Pyrefly said: Drunk_Samurai said: I just checked the new tournament. I really don't understand how Cain Nightroad is a villain. ...'cuz he's insane and goes on bloody rampages on his quest for world domination? That'd be my guess...I'm not the one that nominated him. I hope you're not confusing him with his brother Abel who's actually a really nice guy ._. I guess I am ._. Didn't like that anime much anyway and hoped that one girl died. ._. |
| You can be an anti-hero and still be considered a villain. A villain is someone who makes the protagonist's job harder. This can be anything from teasing them (like Xellos in "Slayers") to flat out trying to kill them (like Sepiroth in "Final Fantasy VII"). They may not be the show's main villain, or the master-mind behind everything, but they can still be considered a villain simply by impeding the hero's journey/mission. Villains can even have changes of heart, like Makubex from "GetBackers". They don't have to always be villains, but they are someone who was standing in the way of the hero at some point in time. So yeah, a villain doesn't have to be a blood-thirsty killing machine. They can just be a bit misguided or annoying. |
 |
Ashuri said: You can be an anti-hero and still be considered a villain. A villain is someone who makes the protagonist's job harder. This can be anything from teasing them (like Xellos in "Slayers") to flat out trying to kill them (like Sepiroth in "Final Fantasy VII"). They may not be the show's main villain, or the master-mind behind everything, but they can still be considered a villain simply by impeding the hero's journey/mission. Villains can even have changes of heart, like Makubex from "GetBackers". They don't have to always be villains, but they are someone who was standing in the way of the hero at some point in time. So yeah, a villain doesn't have to be a blood-thirsty killing machine. They can just be a bit misguided or annoying. Just being a hassle to someone doesn't make a person a villain. What you depicted is an Antagonist! What if the protagonist is the Evil Mastermind? There's no such as the protagonist is good and antagonist is evil. True, a villain doesn't have to, actually, even hurt or kill someone to be considered one. You can have a story, in which, there's no villain at all. |
     |
ThisNameLies said: Even if it's his own fault, he's a social outcast never the less. I can agree with his motivation and other things changing at some point, I think the point where he "Discarded his pride"(the Death Note being the source of his pride) was where his motivation and other factors of himself started to change. I think "outsider" may be a better term for Light then "outcast". Light had an immense intelliegence and strong moral convictions which would set him apart from other people. Despite his popularity, he probably didn't really relate to others. An outcast would be someone who is rejected by society. An outsider doesn't have to be rejected. He just has to stand apart from it in some way. Pyrefly said: At any case, they are certainly not strict "heroes," which above all is the one archetype I do not want in this club. I can't stand those types of heroes who practically have the sun shining out of their ass! For me to like a character, he has to be at least somewhat conflicted or morally ambiguous. ThisNameLies said: Maybe I'm bad at explaining myself, but I think you're using a double standard(which I really can't agree with as it violates the rules of being equal in judging) for Anti-hero and Anti-villain, judging the anti-hero by what he does and judging the anti-villain by why he does it. Because anti-villains aren't the type that does evil things but their over all goals are evil, while the anti-heroes do evil things but their overall goals are good. I see it this way. An anti-hero is a protagonist who is morally ambiguous. An anti-villain is an antagonist who is morally ambiguous. Light is an anti-hero as far as I am concerned. Pyrefly said: The last thing I want to do is give some great speech spelling out my morals for the world to see, but I'll say this much: I believe killing, good-intentioned or not, is evil. No one ever has the right to take another's life. I am sorry if you are offended by what I am about to say, but I just don't understand that persepective. There are a lot worse things you can do to a person than kill them. By murdering someone, you are just doing something to a person that is going to happen to them innevitably anyway. You are just making it happen faster. As for how Light killed most of the people? Very few of them died bad deaths. They just went into cardiac arrest and died almost instantly. Hell, that is pretty merciful considering what some of those criminals have done. Pyrefly said: Killing out of revenge is just pointless. It's not that I don't sympathize with people (though that is true to a certain extent), but that I am a realist who understands how this world works: it would be far too chaotic if people went around killing others and constantly being excused for it, because "they had their own reasons for doing it." Of course they had reasons for it. Otherwise they would be able to plead insanity. It's like saying everyone's reasons are right, all the time. I guess my point is, if general killing is ever justifiable, I don't see why we have morals in the first place. Thus, no point in having heroes or villains either. The law and morals are not necessarily on the same side. The law exists to make things run smoothly. It is the way it has to be to maintain order in society. That doesn't make it morally wrong or right. And I the point of having heroes and villains is to have a story. If you don't have a protagonist with something opposing them, then you really don't have much of a story. Pyrefly said: This is all made null by the fact that we're actually discussing fictional characters, but whatever. Fictional characters often have something to say about reality in some way. Discussing them is far from pointless. ThisNameLies said: I guess depends on what you call the greater good, to me, fighting against oppression, violence, and crime is what I consider to be a greater good than making sure everyone's happy with the result, but really depends, if you want everyone to be happy you're going to need some other way to make it happen other than doing it by force. Screw that! Some people just plain don't deserve to be happy anyway.] ThisNameLies said: Well, I guess everything is really open for interpretation, I don't see how Honor contradicts with villain(as in Anti-Villian) but the fact that Heroes contradicting with villains is what's bothering me, (Anti-Hero, Anti-Villain). The name of the club IS slightly misleading, but I agree. Being a villain doesn't make you dishonorable. I suppose being evil and honorable is a bit of a paradox, but it isn't unheard of by any means. |
| I think this characters aren't evil ones: - Rem http://myanimelist.net/character.php?id=1905 - L http://myanimelist.net/character.php?id=71 - Kallen Stadtfeld http://myanimelist.net/character.php?id=558 |
   |
| so what you call characters like picolo and vigeta ???? evil to good characters |
 |
ThisNameLies said: Pyrefly said: To me, 'social outcast' means everyone hates and shuns someone. Light's a great actor, all the girls love him, and even some potential guy pals asked him to hang out at one point. He's antisocial by his own volition. If he's a social outcast, it's his own fault. There is something to be said about bullies who are actually insecure about themselves; when you think of Light in that light (no pun intended, I swear >.>) I can understand how he might have "self-esteem issues." He just always seemed really pompous. Since Death Note is the series that it is, I would say his motivations are one of the many aspects of the show that can be put up for discussion. I do still think that it may have started out that way, but eventually it went to his head and he honestly believed himself to be a figurative 'god' or whatnot. Even if it's his own fault, he's a social outcast never the less. I can agree with his motivation and other things changing at some point, I think the point where he "Discarded his pride"(the Death Note being the source of his pride) was where his motivation and other factors of himself started to change. I define social outcast by the word itself, someone who was rejected (cast out) by the general populace, whether it be the entire world's populace or a single middle school's populace. Light I feel did the reverse and rejected the general populace. In the end I suppose it depends on what you define a villain as or if you go deeper what you define evil as S: (n) villain, scoundrel (a wicked or evil person; someone who does evil deliberately) - WordNet (n) evil, immorality, wickedness, iniquity (morally objectionable behavior) (n) evil (that which causes harm or destruction or misfortune) "the evil that men do lives after them; the good is oft interred with their bones"- Shakespeare (n) evil, evilness (the quality of being morally wrong in principle or practice) "attempts to explain the origin of evil in the world" (adj) evil (morally bad or wrong) "evil purposes"; "an evil influence"; "evil deeds" (adj) evil, vicious (having the nature of vice) (adj) malefic, malevolent, malign, evil (having or exerting a malignant influence) "malevolent stars"; "a malefic force" As for my definition (not like it matters much XD) I think FMA hit all seven of the main causes of evil: Lust, Glutony, Wrath, Envy, Sloth, Pride, and Greed "In the Book of Proverbs, it is stated that "the Lord" specifically regards "six things the Lord hateth, and the seventh His soul detesteth." namely: A proud look A lying tongue Hands that shed innocent blood A heart that devises wicked plots Feet that are swift to run into mischief A deceitful witness that uttereth lies Him that soweth discord among brethren (lol Madara has six of the seven pegged XD) While there are seven of them, this list is considerably different from the traditional one, the only sin on both lists being pride." - Wikipedia Those characteristics seem to also have brought a fair amount of conflict into the manga/anime we love so dearly, good thing to otherwise there wouldn't be any good plots XD P.S Sorry for long post V_V |
♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ |
More topics from this board
Sticky: » Favorite villains! ( 1 2 )Pyrefly - Mar 27, 2008 |
91 |
by NiessanStrife
»»
May 22, 2022 4:49 AM |
|
» First order of business...(names) ( 1 2 )Pyrefly - Mar 5, 2008 |
58 |
by portisHeart
»»
Jan 7, 2014 4:38 AM |
|
Sticky: » Regarding picturesPyrefly - May 4, 2008 |
3 |
by Poppy_Dream
»»
Feb 9, 2010 1:42 PM |
|
» MAL Villains Tournament: Round 2, Match 4 CLOSED ( 1 2 3 4 )Pyrefly - Sep 11, 2008 |
168 |
by makube-x
»»
Sep 13, 2008 5:04 AM |
|
» MAL Villains Tournament: Round 2, Match 3 CLOSED: Winners--Hollow Ichigo and Revy ( 1 2 3 )Pyrefly - Sep 5, 2008 |
140 |
by rikli
»»
Sep 6, 2008 2:01 PM |