Many moons ago, a question was raised in my bookclub to name a character who wasn’t the villain of the story, but technically could be viewed as one because his/her actions consistently put the protagonist in harm’s way.
Dumbledore of the Harry Potter series was a favorite in my group.
Why?
Not only was he an incompetent administrator who hired terrible teachers (e.g., Snape should have been fired for tormenting his students), but he also perpetuated a hostile environment in the academy by a) fostering needless rivalries among the four houses and b) hosting those deadly games/challenges of wizardry to test the hero.
Kdramas abound with these technically-not-a-villain characters whom I consider to be villainous because they expose the heroes/heroines to great danger, upend their peaceful existence, or worse, abandon the good guys in their hour of need.
I can easily name seven.
1. from “My Demon,” this incompetent and compassion-less deity
source: soompi
And to depict this fake deity as a homeless/alcoholic/gambler is nothing but dumb virtue-signaling on the part of the screenwriter and director.
2. from “Doom at Your Service,” another fake deity
source: thesmartlocal.kr
There’s nothing as annoying as someone who speaks cryptically to sound profound. I dropped this kdrama because of her. She reminded me of a fortune-teller or those weird people who ask you for your birth sign to determine your personality trait.
3. from “Hotel Del Luna,” this bunch of fake sister-deities
To me, this Mago with her different personalities is a sign of mental disorder.
source: purple3dazzle
Lol. You can tell that many screenwriters of kdramas have a god/goddess problem.
4. from “Goblin,” Sunny
Ugh! What a narcissistic person.
It also didn’t help that I have an long-standing aversion for this actress: her face, her voice, and her brand of aegyo. She has a counterpart in Chinese drama, Esther Yu.
5. from “Extra-Ordinary You,” the unseen, faceless Comic Book Writer
This kdrama is an extension of that Shakespearean quote, “”All the world’s a stage, and all the men and women merely players. They have their exits and their entrances; And one man in his time plays many parts.” It explores what life will be like if all men and women are indeed just players (or puppets) on a stage.
Thus, all the characters act like puppets in a story that an anonymous Comic Book Writer is concocting even as they speak. In this sense, the Comic Book Writer is a virtual god. He/she can kill off the main characters and extras in the script for no rhyme or reason.
If a character dies on the “stage” (that is, within the plot of comic book) then the character loses existence and disappears forever. However, if a character dies in the “shadow” (that is, while on hiatus from the comic book) then the character loses self-awareness of being a mere player in an arbitrary and capricious world written by the Comic Book Writer.
6. from “Hospital Playlist,” Rosa, the widow of the hospital founder
Among other things which I won’t mention, I dislike her disloyalty to the memory of her dead husband, her rough physicality with her childhood friend, Mr. Joo, and her coldness to her religious children.
7. from “Reply 1988,” Kim Jung Bong
![Official] Ryu Jun Yeol ❤ Hyeri Official Thread (Junghwan & Deoksun of Reply 1988) - Page 730 - shippers' paradise - Soompi Forums](https://i0.wp.com/38.media.tumblr.com/647a070a06a9c4e363dbe761ea44f7eb/tumblr_inline_o00d9kFzzE1twmrsn_540.gif?ssl=1)
I told y’all that HE stole the chocolate Deoksun meant to give to Choi Taek.
What about you? Do you know of characters whose actions could qualify them as villains but weren’t generally viewed as antagonists in the story?
Who immediately springs to my mind, since I’m watching Doctor Slump, is the FL’s friend Hong Ran. She describes herself as loose lipped, but the pain her words inflict in turn on Ha Neul and Jeong Woo is deep, damaging the relationship of our OTP. Before Hong Ran told Ha Neul that Jeong Woo had turned down a job offer, she admitted she probably shouldn’t burden Ha Neul with that news while Ha Neul was struggling, yet Hong Ran did it anyway. When Hong Ran shared with Jeong Woo the news she’d just heard in the phone about Ha Neul and Kyung Min, she knew none of the motivation behind Ha Neul’s action. She also didn’t know Jeong Woo’s connection to Kyung Min. Jeong Woo is spurred to action based on incomplete information. He may have assumed, from glimpsing a photo of Ha Neul seated next to Kyung Min, that Ha Neul was a jilted lover.
The guy Han Ji Pyung in Start-up fits the situation.
You show ambiguous characters, but I think even friendly characters to the protagonists can be antagonists. Because of stupidity, or because they have their own goals or fears, anyway, a close relationship, friendly one, can also mess and be an antagonist force. In some cases, on a regular basis.
In SJJ dramas we are rewatching, 9, W or MOTA, we have also another kind of “technically not a villain”: the high-concept itself is an antagonist force. Not even a god or a character, just a supernatural phenomenon with its own mysterious logic.
Thanks @pkml3. True, there are loads of characters who might as well have been all out villains for the amount of harm they caused. Unfortunately, they usually remained unaware of what nuisances they were and were still friends, family or mentors to the poor ‘victims’. The problem with them is that they are never called out for what they do or fail to do and so continually repeat the same fouls against the poor ‘victims’. Similarly because they are never called out, the victims never take issue with them.
I used to get more hot and bothered by such characters, but I’ve mellowed over the years LOL.
@WE, I agree. He would have been the character that came to my mind too as the annoying not-a-villain.
I like your take on the high-concept being considered an antagonistic force. Well, that’s what makes the drama, dramatic!!! LOL.
I might add the mother-in-law of Knight Flower, yes, my beloved ahjumma was quite a pain towards Honey Lee’s character.
In Dr Slump, besides Hong Ran, there’s Ha Neul’s mum. Her need to brag and her best intentions still hurt HN a lot. At least in this case, she realised her mistakes and apologised adequately, so I forgive her! 😂
In Marry My Husband, Ji Won’s trauma of abandonment caused her lots of grief since she blinded herself to the defects of Soo Min and Min Hwan just so that she would not be alone.
In Nine: Nine Times Time Travel it’s the attitude of Sun Woo who thought he could play god without any consequences that’s causing him pain.
In Healer there was the so-called mentor who abandoned Jung Hoo in that abrupt way. It embittered the young person for many years.
Sometimes they are the necessary evils, perhaps, to add the conflict in an otherwise blander version of the story. 😏
The reason Pride and Prejudice is so fun and I read is because Jane Austen filled the story with so many not-quite-villains. Mr. and Mrs. Bennet. The three younger Miss Bennets. All received Darcy’s disapprobation, and ours as well. But there’s also Caroline Bingley, frenemy, and Lady Catherine de Bourgh, a Karen for the ages.
There! You got it, @Welmaris. 🙂
That’s why I don’t mind Hong Ran, the loose-lipped bestie of HaNeul in “Doctor Slump.” For sure, she’s an annoyance but not to the level of the deities in MD, DaYS, HdL.
I consider her to be a “flat character” like the Mrs. Bennet, Caroline Bingley, and Lady Catherine de Bourgh — Maybe I write about the different types of characters and give examples for each just like I did with the scene transitions? But I’m not a literature major….
The way I see it, a flat character is one-dimensional, uncomplicated, and stereotypical, but he/she is useful for moving the story along. A flat character is NOT necessarily bad.
In fact, I actually prefer that secondary characters or sidekicks be flat so a) the attention isn’t unnecessarily diverted from the main leads, and b) I don’t get stuck with a ridiculous Chinese drama with 40 episodes because all the flat characters were given a subplot/sideplot/romance of their own.
It’s only bad when the MAIN protagonists themselves are flat characters.
Anyway, I give kudos to the screenwriter of “Doctor Slump” for concentrating all the necessary revelations/disclosure on one character. But I do hope the screenwriter doesn’t make the same mistake as the screenwriter of “Marry My Husband,” that is, add a half-baked villainess at the end merely to wrap things up nicely.
@Packmule3, I loved to read as a child and in my youth; because of that, I chose British/American Literature as my college major. All the work I did to earn my B.A. degree killed my love of reading. Nowadays, belonging to a book club and having an assigned reading list raise my anxiety level. I’m coming up on my 45th college reunion this year, so I think it’s fair to say I’ve been scarred for life. (Although I’m tremendously grateful for lessons learned due to my Humanities minor.) All this to say, I may not eagerly deep dive into character analysis on this thread.
As for your not having earned a degree in literature, @Packmule3, you can adopt Lady Catherine de Bourgh’s mindset. I paraphrase: “There are few people online, I
suppose, who have more true enjoyment of literary studies than myself, or a better natural taste. If I had ever learnt, I should have been a great proficient.”
@Pm3, Hello.
I’ve read lots of articles about characters. And I lost the link to the one I found interesting. Or maybe I copied it I-don’t-remember-where.
It’s a mess because the terminology is rarely respected. Are we talking about type, role, function, archetype? Generally, people who write or speak in videos get confused. So I searched and found this article which gives a clear definition:
https://www.masterclass.com/articles/guide-to-all-the-types-of-characters-in-literature
However, what interests you here is probably something else: the importance of the character.
This is how dramalist classifies characters, and it’s pretty consistent: Main, Support, Guest.
This makes it possible to classify the protagonist, the love interest and the antagonist together as a Main character.
This decouples importance from function.
Otherwise, logic dictates that some people only see the protagonist as the main character. And most of the time, a movie has only one protagonist. Kdramas often have two protagonists, maybe three. I prefer to decouple that: Main and Protagonist are two different things.
A character’s importance reflects both his screen time and what he is allowed to be, do or want.
The list is short, and corresponds to that of dramalist, with an additional category. I give an estimate on the description in a screenplay (not a rigid rule to follow).
Categories of importance.
1. Main, Principal, Primary, Major.
They have a want, a need, and change over the course of the story, with the exception of static characters who rather change the people around them.
Complex, in-depth psychology, well-developed background.
Description: 3 lines.
2. Support, Secondary, Side.
Allies or enemies. They also have a purpose, may conflict with main characters, and all sorts of functions. They live, sometimes have a B-plot and a change arc.
Moderate psychology, limited background.
Description: 2 lines.
3. Minor, Flat, String, Guest.
Barely have a goal, if not a single task, on auto-pilot, always do or say the same thing and don’t change. They can be recurring characters, but little screentime.
Simplistic psychology, no background.
Description: 1 line.
4. Background, Extra.
No purpose of their own, they’re part of the scenery, just like the trees, the street, the cars.
They can be the passers-by in the street, the cab driver, the bookseller, the policemen in the brigade.
Often, we only see them once. Sometimes they have a few lines of dialogue.
Description: 1 word.
With this, you need to be flexible enough to know whether you’re putting a character in one category or another. Having too many characters in one category is problematic, in any case:
– main, few secondary, and many minors. The audience will say that the characters are too stereotyped.
– Main, lots of secondary, few minors. The story scatters in all directions, showing too many scenes with the secondaries.
– Several main, secondary, minors. Impossible to focus on the main, you have to eliminate secondaries and use minors instead. Or downgrade a main to secondary.
@Pm3: So you’re right when you say you’d rather have less developed, flatter secondary or minor characters. It’s a necessity. Even in a kdrama with a longer screentime.
A criticism I was reading on W: someone complaining that the secondary characters aren’t developed enough. It’s a bit like saying the author shouldn’t have done a good job. It’s by cutting time on these characters that she can gain time for the main characters and the dense plot.
Another example of drama: Strong woman nam soon. Too many secondary characters, each with their own story, focusing on things that aren’t really interesting.
Counter-example, US series 24: Lots of characters of any importance. Used to support the concept of the series: everything takes place in real time. A focus other than on the hero as he moves from point A to point B is imperative. However, the subplots all involve tense situations, and are linked to the main plot.