Voldemort vs. Grings Kodai
Nov. 25th, 2011 08:29 pmSo the other night I was watching the thirteenth Pokemon movie, Zoroark: Master of Illusions, and I got to thinking about the main villain of the show, Grings Kodai. It seems as though the movie was trying to do with him the same thing as Harry Potter had done with Voldemort- except that in Pokemon it actually worked!
So, just who is this Grings Kodai? Well, simply put, he’s a wealthy and influential business tycoon who can see the future, allowing him to increase his fortune. The reasons for that are rather complicated to anyone not familiar with Pokemon (basically, a Pokemon did it), so suffice it to say, his powers don’t last forever and have to be renewed (he’s terrified of losing them). When he first acquired those powers it caused great destruction; because of this, nobody who knows what’s going on will just let him waltz in there and replenish his powers- he has to force them out of the city where this power is located. So he enslaves a mother Pokemon (the eponymous Zoroark) by threatening her child and drives everyone away- leaving our plucky kid heroes to stop him.
Kodai is renowned for being one of only three villains in the Pokemon anime who are completely evil, since he’s sadistic and cruel.
Now, one interesting point about these two villains is that they both seem to represent death in some capacity- in Kodai’s case, he dresses in white, a color commonly associated with death in Japan and select other cultures, and the Pokemon companions he keeps are both ghosts. He’s also one of the only villains in the series who’s actually tried to kill the heroes, rather than merely put a stop to them. The difference is that it appears almost as though he’s supposed to represent death itself, whereas Voldemort represents an all-consuming fear of death and desire for immortality- which, paradoxically, can only be obtained through murder.
Well, with that out of the way, it’s Voldie bashing time!! XD
So, where does Pokemon succeed where Harry Potter goes wrong?
1. Backstories are only useful if they add depth and complexity- something neither villain has.
Now, Voldie has a backstory while Kodai does not. However, all Voldie’s backstory does is to show that he was evil from birth- so really, it’s a waste. In Kodai’s case, the fact that he has no backstory telling us how he made bad choices even as an infant and always had and always will actually makes him seem more believable, not less- because it’s easier to believe that some people are evil and sadistic than to believe that anyone was doomed to be a mass murderer from the moment of his conception. Voldie’s inherent evil is laid on so thick that you simply can’t take him or his backstory seriously.
Incidentally, Kodai’s mysterious past also means he’s a glorious free-for-all in fanfic- but I digress.
2. Not every villain has to look like a zombie!
There’s a difference between using visual cues to tell that someone is a villain and making him look completely unearthly just to illustrate his evilness. In Kodai’s case, while you can tell just by looking at him that he’s a villain, that has more to do with subtle details like the shape of his eyes, his clothes (see above), and (to a somewhat lesser extent) his Pokemon. Compare that with Voldemort, who looks like a smooth-skinned zombie with snake eyes and no nose! Again, you wonder how that guy’s managed to get around for so long without being killed with fire- or attract any followers (since he sure as hell doesn’t look like a good leader)!
Now, to be fair, Voldie was pretty when young (as our questionably-not-gay hero Harry frequently notes). However, when he eventually turns ugly it becomes increasingly clear that Rowling is pathologically incapable of subtleties of description.
And that leads me to a digression here to point something out: often villains (especially in anime and heavily visual media) are gorgeous, to symbolize how seductive evil can be. Pokemon is no exception to this rule, and indeed seems to have enforced it for as long as the franchise has been around. Whether or not you find Grings Kodai physically attractive, he’s clearly supposed to look refined and successful, producing the same effect.
On the subject of my personal favorite Poke-villain (who actually shares a voice actor with Kodai- though unlike Kodai he actually retains some shreds of humanity in how he operates, at least in the games), common fan assertions about him are something along the lines of “That guy looks just like Voldemort with blue hair yet he’s hot.” What they probably mean is that his charismatic personality (and probably his tortured backstory, too) win them over even if his physical appearance isn’t a factor. Voldemort could have been the same way despite his appearance (well, if it were SLIGHTLY less over-the-top anyway)- yet Rowling squandered that opportunity with her approach to his personality and back story, leaving him as a shallow plot device.
3. Villains won’t win over anyone, in universe or out, by being dicks to anything that moves!
You know how Voldemort was a bully from the second he knew what that word meant, and how he got people killed at the age of twelve with no regrets? How about killing so many people as an adult that people feared to speak his name- and then trying to take over and begin a new government? Wait, what?!
As I’ve said before, it’s pretty unbelievable that Voldemort could get any real power, since he never so much as pretends to care about the well-being of anyone but himself.
Kodai, on the other hand, is successful in getting his way in part because he actually thinks to convince other people that he’s an honest, reasonable man. If he can frame a Pokemon for something he wants to cause, he will. Now think back to Voldemort. We see Voldemort do that exactly once (only it sort-of falls flat since Hagrid was actually dangerous and only got away with it for being Dumbledore’s darling) and then he just starts killing people to make himself fearsome and immortal and stuff. And then once he gets the power, he just sits on it!
Then there’s Hogwarts, where Voldemort, rather than try to appeal to the students that Harry deserves to be turned in for being a selfish prick, decides to impose martial law on the school and everyone in it. Smooth, that!
Though if I may say so, Kodai’s actions to appeal to the public sort-of fall flat only because the audience sees so little of them. It’s incredibly hard to buy him as anything other than a villain since apart from a single video recording, all we see him do is be evil.
Note well in all this, that Kodai is in no respects a subtle villain himself. He’s played with a lighter touch than Voldemort, but that tells you more about Voldemort than it does about him. Basically, the Voldie/Kodai comparison can be summed up in much the same way as Doug Walker compared the villains for two Titanic movies- sure, Kodai may have been a barely-human evil monster, but at least the Pokemon guys tried to make him look like a civilized gentleman so you could take him seriously. With Voldemort, on the other hand, not a chance- in fact, you’d think Rowling was delighted to make him as shallow and stereotyped as possible.
And... now to put my overall feelings in perspective...
Reaction I’m supposed to have to both these villains:
“OH MY GOD THIS VILLAIN IS SO EVIL AND SICK SOMEONE PUT A STAKE THROUGH HIS HEART RIGHT NOW!!!!!!”
My reaction to Grings Kodai:
“Yup, this villain sure is evil.”
My reaction to Voldemort (after finishing the series and reflecting on it):
“Oh, come on! How could anyone take this guy seriously?! He’s so flat!”
So, just who is this Grings Kodai? Well, simply put, he’s a wealthy and influential business tycoon who can see the future, allowing him to increase his fortune. The reasons for that are rather complicated to anyone not familiar with Pokemon (basically, a Pokemon did it), so suffice it to say, his powers don’t last forever and have to be renewed (he’s terrified of losing them). When he first acquired those powers it caused great destruction; because of this, nobody who knows what’s going on will just let him waltz in there and replenish his powers- he has to force them out of the city where this power is located. So he enslaves a mother Pokemon (the eponymous Zoroark) by threatening her child and drives everyone away- leaving our plucky kid heroes to stop him.
Kodai is renowned for being one of only three villains in the Pokemon anime who are completely evil, since he’s sadistic and cruel.
Now, one interesting point about these two villains is that they both seem to represent death in some capacity- in Kodai’s case, he dresses in white, a color commonly associated with death in Japan and select other cultures, and the Pokemon companions he keeps are both ghosts. He’s also one of the only villains in the series who’s actually tried to kill the heroes, rather than merely put a stop to them. The difference is that it appears almost as though he’s supposed to represent death itself, whereas Voldemort represents an all-consuming fear of death and desire for immortality- which, paradoxically, can only be obtained through murder.
Well, with that out of the way, it’s Voldie bashing time!! XD
So, where does Pokemon succeed where Harry Potter goes wrong?
1. Backstories are only useful if they add depth and complexity- something neither villain has.
Now, Voldie has a backstory while Kodai does not. However, all Voldie’s backstory does is to show that he was evil from birth- so really, it’s a waste. In Kodai’s case, the fact that he has no backstory telling us how he made bad choices even as an infant and always had and always will actually makes him seem more believable, not less- because it’s easier to believe that some people are evil and sadistic than to believe that anyone was doomed to be a mass murderer from the moment of his conception. Voldie’s inherent evil is laid on so thick that you simply can’t take him or his backstory seriously.
Incidentally, Kodai’s mysterious past also means he’s a glorious free-for-all in fanfic- but I digress.
2. Not every villain has to look like a zombie!
There’s a difference between using visual cues to tell that someone is a villain and making him look completely unearthly just to illustrate his evilness. In Kodai’s case, while you can tell just by looking at him that he’s a villain, that has more to do with subtle details like the shape of his eyes, his clothes (see above), and (to a somewhat lesser extent) his Pokemon. Compare that with Voldemort, who looks like a smooth-skinned zombie with snake eyes and no nose! Again, you wonder how that guy’s managed to get around for so long without being killed with fire- or attract any followers (since he sure as hell doesn’t look like a good leader)!
Now, to be fair, Voldie was pretty when young (as our questionably-not-gay hero Harry frequently notes). However, when he eventually turns ugly it becomes increasingly clear that Rowling is pathologically incapable of subtleties of description.
And that leads me to a digression here to point something out: often villains (especially in anime and heavily visual media) are gorgeous, to symbolize how seductive evil can be. Pokemon is no exception to this rule, and indeed seems to have enforced it for as long as the franchise has been around. Whether or not you find Grings Kodai physically attractive, he’s clearly supposed to look refined and successful, producing the same effect.
On the subject of my personal favorite Poke-villain (who actually shares a voice actor with Kodai- though unlike Kodai he actually retains some shreds of humanity in how he operates, at least in the games), common fan assertions about him are something along the lines of “That guy looks just like Voldemort with blue hair yet he’s hot.” What they probably mean is that his charismatic personality (and probably his tortured backstory, too) win them over even if his physical appearance isn’t a factor. Voldemort could have been the same way despite his appearance (well, if it were SLIGHTLY less over-the-top anyway)- yet Rowling squandered that opportunity with her approach to his personality and back story, leaving him as a shallow plot device.
3. Villains won’t win over anyone, in universe or out, by being dicks to anything that moves!
You know how Voldemort was a bully from the second he knew what that word meant, and how he got people killed at the age of twelve with no regrets? How about killing so many people as an adult that people feared to speak his name- and then trying to take over and begin a new government? Wait, what?!
As I’ve said before, it’s pretty unbelievable that Voldemort could get any real power, since he never so much as pretends to care about the well-being of anyone but himself.
Kodai, on the other hand, is successful in getting his way in part because he actually thinks to convince other people that he’s an honest, reasonable man. If he can frame a Pokemon for something he wants to cause, he will. Now think back to Voldemort. We see Voldemort do that exactly once (only it sort-of falls flat since Hagrid was actually dangerous and only got away with it for being Dumbledore’s darling) and then he just starts killing people to make himself fearsome and immortal and stuff. And then once he gets the power, he just sits on it!
Then there’s Hogwarts, where Voldemort, rather than try to appeal to the students that Harry deserves to be turned in for being a selfish prick, decides to impose martial law on the school and everyone in it. Smooth, that!
Though if I may say so, Kodai’s actions to appeal to the public sort-of fall flat only because the audience sees so little of them. It’s incredibly hard to buy him as anything other than a villain since apart from a single video recording, all we see him do is be evil.
Note well in all this, that Kodai is in no respects a subtle villain himself. He’s played with a lighter touch than Voldemort, but that tells you more about Voldemort than it does about him. Basically, the Voldie/Kodai comparison can be summed up in much the same way as Doug Walker compared the villains for two Titanic movies- sure, Kodai may have been a barely-human evil monster, but at least the Pokemon guys tried to make him look like a civilized gentleman so you could take him seriously. With Voldemort, on the other hand, not a chance- in fact, you’d think Rowling was delighted to make him as shallow and stereotyped as possible.
And... now to put my overall feelings in perspective...
Reaction I’m supposed to have to both these villains:
“OH MY GOD THIS VILLAIN IS SO EVIL AND SICK SOMEONE PUT A STAKE THROUGH HIS HEART RIGHT NOW!!!!!!”
My reaction to Grings Kodai:
“Yup, this villain sure is evil.”
My reaction to Voldemort (after finishing the series and reflecting on it):
“Oh, come on! How could anyone take this guy seriously?! He’s so flat!”
no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 01:52 am (UTC)Compared to the great villains, he just doesn’t…chill me, he doesn’t make me shiver in terror. It’s hard to fear a guy who has no nose, who gets beaten by an infant and who hasn’t really had a proper massacre in forever, since he’s obsessed with an adolescant. He has no plan about why he wants to rule, not enough background and frankly, I just wonder why anyone follows him.
Now, you want scary, give me Tom Riddle. That slick, handsome boy who fooled people, with wild eyes that kept people guessing. The guy who could lie to your face, and stab you in the back before you felt the blade. I understood an orphan wanting to shove his staff on everyone denied to him.
What bothered me the most was Tom Riddle had a pretty much better upbringing in a somewhat decent orphanage. There were trips to the sea side and Mrs. Cole seemed like a decent woman as much as possible, and Tom Riddle was given a nice life. Yes, it was grim, but this is during the depression and the start of a War, I guarentee all of London was grim.
Why make him into a snake-faced cretin? Evil is most frightening with a human face. The greatest monsters in history are people just like me and you.
no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 02:01 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 02:13 am (UTC)Imelda Staunton did an amazing job making her a human evil, but imagine a pretty young lovely woman who smiles gently? Or even the grandmotherly sort?
Subtle, it's a good thing.
no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 08:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 05:13 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 05:18 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 05:21 am (UTC)(This is especially true in D&D. Having a villain who can be out and about without anyone being suspicious of them is a great way to make the players paranoid.)
no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 06:57 am (UTC)I can see a JKR villain a mile away.
Ugly, fat, pale, bony...
no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 04:38 pm (UTC)You are definitely right about JKR's villains. Even Umbridge is pretty obvious, though she is certainly more effective than Voldemort. The funny thing is that I was never frightened by Voldemort, even when I was an HP fan. JKR might have written all sorts of stuff about how irredeemably evil he was, but I never got that cold, creepy feeling about him like I have for better written villains. Voldemort is no Sephiroth. ;-)
no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 05:36 pm (UTC)Rangers Apprentice is awesome. It's written for the same audience as Harry Potter, and it has the same cliche elements, but the friendship is more real, the girls are more empowered and the stakes are higher. They do have a Dark Lord, but he isn't the only villain, and many of the other villains are pretty frightening.
As a Hebrew speaker, Sephiroth makes me giggle. Keep imagining him as a giant tree.
*Amazing story btw. My mum had been thoroughly tired of my chatting and had wanted to sleep. The person across the hall had taken out a copy of Harry Potter, which had been advertised in England a bit. I made my big cute eyes and asked if I could read it. The woman laughed and said "It's a very long book, over 200 pages. You think you can finish it in 4 hours?" (I looked much younger than my age) Them's fighting words. I made a bet that I could finish it in two and did so, before giving my review to the staggered lady. "It will never take off." My family has never ever stopped reminding me of that.
no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 05:56 pm (UTC)also..."It will never take off..." I think that speaks more for your good taste as a young reader than anything. There are plenty of popular things that don't deserve to be. I mean, look at Twilight! ;-)
no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 06:52 pm (UTC)And yes, One Wing Angel the Score helps a lot. Merciful Gods, is that scary! It's a steam roller of death and power. Voldemort should invest in Sephiroth's costume designer and orchestra.
Awww, thanks. I figured if so many people liked HP, there must be a lot of good in it and I still want to learn from her, but according to my mother, here was what 12 year old me didn't like. (She remembers my ranting better than me)
1. The Dursleys are silly. No one is that horrible. If they were real, they would be in a psych ward.
2. Hogwarts is a bad school. I wouldn't want to go there. Unfair punishments, bad classes and no music, art, gym, languages, literature, or math (I counted magic as science)
3. No good villains, besides Snape. Draco is boring and yes, I saw Quirrel a mile away
4. Teachers are stupid. If all my teachers wanted to give me riddles, I doubt I would solve them so easily.
5. WHy does everyone like Gryffindor? Sorting house makes no sense. why are all bad people Slytherin?
6. Harry just defeated the Dark Lord. I wonder if there will be a better villain. WHo cares, I'm bored, I want something else to read.
Hahaha, yeah. Twilight baffles me in its popularity. I do love JKR's world building, and there's a lot of Good in Harry.
In Twilight, I just wanted Buffy to do a road trip from Sunnydale and cull the Cullens.
no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 07:03 pm (UTC)As someone who's training to be a scientist, and goes to a science-driven school, I take offense to that one ;)
Seriously, though, magic can't be science because science involves learning the scientific method. All these kids ever do is rote memorization- the basic instructions are given to them and not questioned (Hogwarts strikes me as a bit vocational-school-esque, actually, only nobody learns anything that would be of value to anyone over the age of ten).
no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 07:31 pm (UTC)Yeah, if my niece (I have no kids yet) was in a school like Hogwarts, I'd be furious. The students do not know how to think, this is the spell. How does the spell work? What modifications are needed in different things? For instance, in chemistry, I doubt I'd pass if I didn't understand why hydrogen and oxygen make water.
Why do these charms make this effect? How does transfiguration deal with taking a living creature and turning it into a non living object? Does that mean you're murdering the porcupine when you turn it into a pin cushion?
And again, thousand pardons!
no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 08:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 08:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 11:45 pm (UTC)Let's say you need 2/3 of a cup of aconite juice for every 2/7 of a cup of crushed spider eggs for 10 people, how much do you need?
Yes, Snape could do it, but how many students could?
no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 08:47 pm (UTC)Just curious, but what branch of the sciences are you studying?
And I definitely agree about the trade school thing. I mean, Hogwarts doesn't really encourage any sort of branching out into things besides magic, let alone creativity. No wonder these people need to employ goblins at their banks- they apparently can't even do basic math.
In a place where rote memorization is the only method of learning, I suppose it makes sense that Hermione is considered to be really smart. She certainly doesn't seem interested in problem solving, or any other aspect of intellectual life.
no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 09:00 pm (UTC)A good example of how science is NOT rote memorization comes from the notes my cell biology professor last semester had for reading a research article. He says that you can't possibly take everything in in one go, so what you should do is first read only the title and try to come up with a list of possible experiments based on what of the title you understand (nothing else). You're supposed to make guesses the whole way through, until you've gleaned all useful information from the main body. And then once you're done with your close reading YOU'RE supposed to critique the experimenters' methods and conclusions, and propose ideas for where to take the experiment from there (in school, obviously just for your own experience).
We also designed our own experiments in the lab that came with that class.
So basically Snape would feel right at home in a class like that, but Harry and co. wouldn't last ten minutes.
Incidentally, Hogwarts isn't even a GOOD vocational school- how much of what they learn is actually useful?
no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 09:06 pm (UTC)Good point. I wonder when turning a mouse into a teacup would come in handy. Maybe if you ran out of tea cups? I wouldn't want to drink out of it though. Eew. I think that most of the stuff was just put in to be fun and whimsical, not to be practical. Practicality is considered boring in the WW.
New Headcanon!!
Date: 2011-11-26 10:07 pm (UTC)Re: New Headcanon!!
Date: 2011-11-26 10:16 pm (UTC)Re: New Headcanon!!
Date: 2011-11-27 06:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-11-29 12:49 am (UTC)She is capable of solving Snape's logic puzzle though - although that may be one of the odd bits in the first book, like Hagrid not understanding why Voldemort didn't try to recruit Lily, or Snape taking a point off Harry without any reasonable excuse (is Snape showing favouritism to Seamus here?).
no subject
Date: 2011-11-29 01:03 am (UTC)Or JKR is just really inconsistent about characterization and I am giving her too much credit.
As an aside, I wonder what it says that Hogwarts' super special security system could be so easily beaten by a bunch of children. It kind of makes all of the professors look incompetent.
no subject
Date: 2011-11-29 01:37 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-11-29 01:54 am (UTC)I'm a grad student. A friggin' grad student should inot be better at being a villain than a (supposedly) super powerful evil overlord. Gah!
no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 08:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 08:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 11:42 pm (UTC)And after 10 years...you'd think the terror would be down a bit.
no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 11:49 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 08:31 pm (UTC)There's also clearly something going on with Tom's mother, who is the active and influential parent in his story (and even once you think you've learned it all, there's still another doozy to come). And while the old mentor is very vehemently suspicious of all women (witches!), and for a while it seems like the book is supporting him, it grows increasingly clear that he's deeply screwed up in a lot of ways and isn't entirely rational on some topics, and he kind of does a Sam Gamgee with not trusting a trying-to-be-good young witch when he really ought to have to do some good. Even Tom realizes the mentor does some incredibly shady things (especially in the third book, where one girl who's kind of a secondary protagonist points out the OMGWTFBBQ aspects of his behavior while Tom is still trying to rationalize it so he won't be so freaked out), and eventually that he's just plain gotten old and weak and can't be relied on anymore to save the day. The series isn't finished yet, so I'm still preparing myself for it to end disappointingly DH-style, but right now I'm enjoying it.
no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 11:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-11-27 06:42 pm (UTC)The British and US versions have different titles and covers, but I don't think it matters particularly unless you have an aesthetic preference. (I know the US versions have copious interior illustrations, but don't know whether they're different in the UK. I like both sets of covers, so I expect the interior illustrations would be just as cool even if they are different.)
no subject
Date: 2011-11-30 05:40 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-12-01 01:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 05:29 am (UTC)I've always thought Voldemort looked like Michael Jackson after he'd had all that surgery, but without the hair and with red eyes. They've both got dead-white skin, flat faces with almost no nose, and freakishly abnormal features. I did a side-by-side comparison of photos, and the resemblance is amazing.
Compare Rowling's histrionics with this passage from another book featuring the most evil villain I've ever seen in a novel. It's from The Iron Dream, by Normal Spinrad, a satire of Nazism that takes place after Europe has been devastated by a nuclear holocaust and most people have become genetically mixed with other species.
...[T]here emerged from the cabin of the steamer a figure of startling and unexpected nobility: a tall, powerfully built true human in the prime of manhood. His hair was yellow, his skin was fair, his eyes were blue and brilliant. His musculature, skeletal structure, and carriage were letter-perfect, and his trim blue tunic was clean and in good repair.
Feric Jaggar looked every inch the genotypically pure human that he in fact was. It was all that made such prolonged close confinement with the dregs of Borgravia bearable; the quasi-men could not help but recognize his genetic purity. The sight of Feric put mutants and mongrels in their place, and for the most part they kept to it. (Chapter 1; later in the book we find out Feric is 6'6"/198.12 cm tall.)
Those two short paragraphs convey more about racism and its dangers than 4200 pages of JKR's ranting. Speaking of subtlety.
If he can frame a Pokemon for something he wants to cause, he will. Now think back to Voldemort. We see Voldemort do that exactly once
Actually, it's twice, since he frames a house elf for the murder of Hepzibah Smith.
no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 05:35 pm (UTC)It isn't clear if anyone was framed with the early deaths caused by the DEs, I think those remained mysteriously unclaimed, like the deaths of Bertha Jorkins, Broderick Bode, Amelia Bones and others. And once they started flying the Dark mark over attack sites there was no more framing.
no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 04:54 pm (UTC)Perhaps that was supposed to be Lucius Malfoy's job. In the movies, at least, he was gorgeous (Jason Isaacs! Yes!). He was reasonably intelligent, too. He would have been a much more effective villain than icky Voldie.
no subject
Date: 2011-11-26 07:05 pm (UTC)Voldemort is a bad villain because-
Date: 2011-11-27 05:13 am (UTC)This is why I think Dumbledore, who does corrupt and recruit youth, is the scariest villain of the Potter books. Umbridge comes a close second, because she is real. We've all met someone like that. It's impossible to take Voldemort seriously.
*Actually, after thinking long and hard about HBP, here is what I thought Voldemort wanted from Harry. I knew - it was glaringly obvious - that Harry was the last Horcrux. I thought Voldemort also knew. He would, I thought, try to possess Harry and take him over, body and soul. Then he would BE Harry - Harry's soul would be expelled from his body, and Voldemort would take over. But this could only happen if Harry willingly invited Voldemort in. I expected Voldemort to play up Harry's self-pity, self-righteousness, and hatred of Snape in order to get Harry on his side. The only way Harry could defeat him would be by consciously rejecting him and loving his enemy. I expected Harry to die for Snape.
Oh, well.
The White Witch was an awesome villain. I had nightmares about her when I was little. I also had nightmares about IT in A Wrinkle in Time. I cannot imagine any child having nightmares about Voldemort as he appears in the final book.
Re: Voldemort is a bad villain because-
Date: 2011-11-27 05:42 am (UTC)That would be really cool! It's too bad you're not writing HP fanfic any more. That would be a wonderful story--with real Christian morality, no less!
I was never the kind to have nightmares from reading, but Tigerclaw in the first Warriors series is a scary and creepy villain. He's smart, deceptive, ruthless, and evil. His plan to wipe out Thunderclan in book 5 is more horrifying and brilliant than anything Moldyshorts comes up with.
Re: Voldemort is a bad villain because-
Date: 2011-11-29 01:04 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-11-29 01:04 am (UTC)This can work under certain conditions. The obvious one is to play up the villain's inner humanity; the Phantom of the Opera and his derivatives (including my namesake in Doctor Who) are good examples of this approach. Alternatively, go all the way and make them elemental forces of evil; Count Orlok from Nosferatu, the Joker, Darkseid, Emperor Palpatine, Sutekh the Destroyer... these characters have presence, competence, and their fatal flaw makes sense. Voldemort, unfortunately, isn't human enough to fit in the first category and is too human, and too incompetent, to fit in under the second (fear of death and inability to understand whatever supposedly-heartwarming deus ex machina Rowling's come up with this time don't spring from the same source and can't be smushed together to make something appropriately mythic).