The time has come again for another discussion post with Nara! And in signature Nara style, I'll include a short quiz as well. Because, why not? It's more fun that way :)
So today, we are going to be discussing villains in contemporary YA. By which I mean contemporary ROMANCE novels, not thrillers or murder mysteries etc etc.
When reading a dystopian or a post-apocalyptic or a paranormal, it's often quite obvious who the villain is. And the villain is almost always power hungry or sadistic or just plain evil. For example, President Snow in The Hunger Games. Or Lord Voldemort. Or the Volturi in Twilight. Or the aliens in The Fifth Wave.
But what about in contemporary romance novels? The villains are almost always much more subtle. Or at least, much more multifaceted than the ones in other genres. They may be mean or annoying, but there is often a reason behind why they are so, rather than them just being evil or ambitious. Often there is a reconciliation of bully and victim. And in fact, would you even call them villains in some cases?
Recently, I read The Promise of Amazing by Robin Constantine, and there was clearly an antagonist in this novel. This particular character was manipulative and to be blunt, a douche. But would I necessarily label him as a villain? I really don't know. In some aspects, he was, because he was the one introducing conflict and angst and generally just being a bit of a dick. But on the other hand, when I compare him to someone like Lord Voldemort, I don't know if he deserves to be called a villain.
In general, though, what do you think about villains in contemporary YA? Do you think it's necessary to have one in every book?
And now, unnecessary quiz time:
Who are the "villains" in these contemporary novels? Is there even a villain? In some cases, there's not really a right answer, I suppose. And some have multiple "villains". I'd like to hear what you think!
1. The Fault in Our Stars by John Green
2. My Life Next Door by Huntley Fitzpatrick
3. Anna and the French Kiss by Stephanie Perkins
4. The Sea of Tranquility by Katja Millay (not strictly YA, but still)
Click to read my answers- spoilers, so if you've only read certain books, make sure just to read the sections for those books :)
1. Is there even a villain in this book? Van Houten? Is he a villain for obstructing Hazel and Augustus' happiness in Amsterdam? But then again, his refusal to help them was the catalyst for those two truly getting together. So maybe he's not the villain. edit: in comments, many people have been saying cancer is the villain, which reminds me of the quote that says something to the effect of "even cancer isn't a bad guy. All cancer wants to do is survive". Makes you think, doesn't it.
2. So first off, we clearly have Clay. That guy...so damn manipulative and slick and just ugh. But then we also have Nan. Don't know if she's a "villain" per se, but she's definitely pretty horrible to Sam. And what about Sam's mother? Would you consider her to be a villain?
3. Again, is there actually a villain in this one? Perhaps St Clair's dad?
4. Obviously the guy who broke her hand.
2. So first off, we clearly have Clay. That guy...so damn manipulative and slick and just ugh. But then we also have Nan. Don't know if she's a "villain" per se, but she's definitely pretty horrible to Sam. And what about Sam's mother? Would you consider her to be a villain?
3. Again, is there actually a villain in this one? Perhaps St Clair's dad?
4. Obviously the guy who broke her hand.
Huh, interesting. I've never really noticed the villains in contemporary or rather I have, but I didn't call them villains. They mesh in my mind as normal people because although they start conflicts in the story, they are the same as many people you would meet in life. So, bad but not power hungry Voldemort type. One that stands out in my mind, probably because he is very similar to the traditional villain, is Mr.Wickham from Pride and Prejudice.
ReplyDelete-Mari @ The Sirenic Codex
Yeah that's quite true. Contemporary "villains" don't really seem so much like villains because it feels like they're the type of person you could meet in real life. Whereas you wouldn't really be likely to meet Lord Voldemort haha.
DeleteOohh interesting! I've never really considered this before, because Contemporary books just usually involve a struggle between the two people involved in the romantic relationship, and maybe one or two involving bullies at school, or strict parents, or other people that just generally make the protagonists's life harder. But I've always thought that villains were exclusive to fiction, because they manage to do things that aren't humane, and as such it's hard for me to picture them as real people who walk this same planet, or in this same day and age for that matter! So yeah, I don't think we really have so-called "villains" in contemporary (bot of course that's just me).
ReplyDeleteQUIZZES YAY!
1. Hmmm. Van Houten? I dunno, really, he didn't seem like much of one. :/
2. This is Clay, I think! And maybe Sam's mom? I'm not sure, they just weren't all that supportive.
3. Is there even one?! Maybe St. Clair's girlfriend, since she's the "rival", but she didn't do much. And the other girl whose name I won't mention because of spoilers who has this thing for me-- but she didn't do much wrong either!
4. I don't know this one. Haha!
Anyway great post Nara, as always ;)
I definitely agree! It's not too often you see actual "villains" in contemporary. It's more so you just have random people introducing conflict but not really being evil per se.
Delete1. Yeah I said possibly Van Houten, but not really as well :P
2. True that. The only reason I'd say that Sam's mum is a villain is that she stops her from seeing Jase. THAT IS TOTALLY A CRIME.
3. yeah I didn't really feel like there was a villain in this one either
I've read so few contemporaries that it's difficult for me to answer this. I think there probably are villains, but they're just not as extreme as they are in some other genres. I would say that the "villain" is just the antagonist, which could be any person that gets in the way of what the protagonist wants. Sometimes that might mean that the antagonist is a facet of the protagonist's personality. (I'm thinking about antiheroes here... like Sam in Before I Fall. She was the main character... but she was also kind of the villain in her own story. Yeah, I know that one isn't strictly contemporary, but it's also not full-on fantasy with a classic "villain".)
ReplyDeleteYeah I'd agree that the villain is just the antagonist, but they're definitely not as villainous as fantasy villains haha. Antiheroes are rather interesting! I mean it's true that they're the antagonists, but at the same time, I wouldn't necessarily call them villains per se. I suppose it depends on the book though.
DeleteI've only read Anna and the French Kiss...I think there were at least two major villains/antagonists but I am so horrible with names. One is St Clair's girlfriend and the other the boy who spread rumors about Anna.
ReplyDeleteI kind of prefer villains/antagonists in contemporary books. Like you said they are multi-faceted, they can be morally ambiguous such that they are not entirely evil but not that good either and therefore more interesting.
Read Books and Blog | Addicted to Films
Was there a boy who spread rumours about Anna? Was that Dave? Can't remember...it's been a while I suppose.
DeleteThat's true. But the purely evil ones can be interesting as well haha. Like Lord Voldemort.
I haven't read any of those books yet-don't kill me ;) But I do love this topic, it's so true that there is almost always an antagonist in a book and it's something that is definitely more subtle in a contemporary read.
ReplyDeleteWHAAT!? *shakes head disappointedly*
DeleteYou seriously need to read TFIOS soon. THE MOVIE IS COMING OUT ALISE!!
Hmm this is interesting! I don't think I've really considered characters like that in contemporary books to be actual 'villains'. Like you said, they can usually be more complicated than that. I do find most contemporary books are largely character-driven though, so I guess that is reflected in the antagonists. Great post! :)
ReplyDeleteI think it really depends on the book. I mean, surely there are some contemporary romances with actual villains. I guess a lot of NAs do (abusive parents, ex boyfriends, debt collectors etc etc)
Delete1. The Fault in Our Stars by John Green - villain in this one is probably cancer. Or Van Houten. But like you said, everyone is deeply flawed and deeply human, so I think "antagonist" is a better description.
ReplyDeleteI read Anna and the French Kiss a while ago, so I can't remember enough to say. But this is a great question!
Antagonist is definitely a better word for it. Villain somehow makes them sound too evil haha.
DeleteI've never really thought about contemporaries having villians, I guess it's kinda true. I've only read TFiOS- cancer or that Peter dude?
ReplyDeleteGreat post, hun! <33
Either of those works! I completely forgot about cancer lol
DeleteOkay, for the sake of arguing, despite that quote in the edits of the TFiOS answer, I WOULD say that cancer is obviously the villain because it wants to survive at the expense of it's host. You could actually compare it to Lord Voldemort inhabiting Prof. Quirrell so... yeah. Also, in Nastya's mind, the guy who broke her hand is the victim, but the ending really puts it up in the air whether he was really a villain or just a victim himself... so I'd argue that one's less obvious.
ReplyDeletelol yeah, I never said that cancer wasn't the bad guy :P just putting that quote out there.
DeleteGood point about the SoT one though. There was the whole mental break thing wasn't there- and the whole is he less of a villain because he's remorseful etc etc
Interesting post, definitely Peter Van Houten amiright? Or usually it would be the other love interest wanting to steal the girl/guy away.
ReplyDeleteJeann @ Happy Indulgence
I'd probably say Van Houten as well, although I wouldn't call him a "villain" per se. And yeah, definitely love rivals!
DeleteThis is an interesting conversation, and while Contemporary is the only genre I avoid in YA, I do think a villain whether in the form of a person or thing (cancer) makes the tale more engaging. Wonderful discussion :)
ReplyDeleteThey most definitely make things more interesting! I mean, if you had no conflict whatsoever in a book, it'd be pretty boring :P
DeleteSuch an interesting question Nara! I think for contemporaries, it really depends on how the narrator of the book depicts the "villain" as. Since the villain doesn't have, say, supernatural powers (Voldemort) or a complete control of the government (President Snow), it really depends on how the "villain" is depicted as since most contemporaries tell the story of everyday people. I mean, in contemporaries, if you're a bully? Villain. Don't let the main character do something? Easy, the main character will depict you as a villain, etc.
ReplyDeleteNow onto the quiz:
1. THE MOM.
2. The BFF (I'm forgetting A LOT of names here :P)
3. The Bully
4. Never finished that one :P
Overall, awesome thoughtful post Nara!
P.S. I adore your quizzes. ;D
Interesting thoughts! It really is relative. If the MC thinks the person is evil, then we're going to think they're evil.
Delete1. THE MUM?! lol has it been a while since you've read the book? The mum is a great mum!
2. True.
3. Was there a bully? Can't remember...
4. o.o seriously?! But it's so good!
Thanks Kelly :D They're fun to put together!
"in contemporary romance novels? The villains are almost always much more subtle" - Yes, and, like Kelly said, these "villains" are "ordinary people" not presidents/dictators or evil overlords so we don't really see them as VILLIANS, they are just the bad guy/crazy ex/antagonist/bully. And in most cases, they can and do redeem themselves by the end of the book. Correcting their behavior is... easier for them to do and it's more realistic than when villains decide to suddenly give up their villain-y ways (out of love for the main character or some other cheesy reason). Or at least that's how I see it.
ReplyDelete1-2 - haven't read them
3. Anna and the French Kiss by Stephanie Perkins - well, I want to say St.Clair's ex, but she didn't really do anything "villainy"...but wait, there was that "other guy"... oh, I don't know...
4. The Sea of Tranquility - the guy who hurt her! But in the end he wasn't the..."evil" she thought he was, so...
Great post!
I definitely agree. It's easier to forgive some bitchiness than you know, murdering hundreds of people for example. Somehow it seems easier for contemporary "villains" to reverse their villainous ways.
Delete3. the other guy? Dave? Or Toph? lol don't even know.
4. Yeah true. I'd probably call him more the antagonist rather than a "villain"