#it’s not bad for characters to be villains or have villainous traits

[mrfartpowered]

you don’t hate Howard, you hate fatphobic tropes

Here at Mr Fart Powered Dot Com, I’m a long-time hater of the “fat best friend” trope and a long-time lover of jerkass characters, so I think I’m uniquely qualified to comment on this LOL

The biggest critiques I see of Howard are as follows: he’s gross, he’s stupid, he’s selfish, he’s lazy. Below the cut, I deconstruct each of these four criticisms not as faults of Howard, but faults of the writing, largely as a result of fatphobia.

These are all traits associated with the fat idiot trope, popularized by Homer Simpson and Peter Griffin. Think about any other character who possess all of the above characteristics. Far more often than not, they’re a fat character. Plenty of non-fat characters possess any of those traits individually — selfishness, stupidity, laziness, and grossness are not exclusive to fat characters. Nor do they inherently make a character 'bad,' irredeemable, or otherwise unlikeable! But all too often, especially in dated media, we see this flimsy, weak writing apply to the fat villain...or the fat comic relief...or the fat best friend.

Howard falls victim to these ugly, annoying 'fat guy' tropes whenever the writing is in need of a cheap laugh, or when they need to make Randy look extra good. Howard does have unique, interesting traits, but they are painfully underutilized in exchange for role fulfillment as the comic relief.

Stupidity

Contrary to what the show wants us to believe, Howard is not a complete idiot. His intelligence may not be of the academic variety (and even this is debatable), but I would argue he is more clever than Randy. Of the two of them, Howard's got more common sense. Randy misinterprets almost every lesson the Nomicon gives him, while H quickly understands each riddle he gets the chance to know about. (See “a ninja’s choice must be chosen by his own choosing,” “don’t go in someone else’s house,” “when facing an unfamiliar foe, seek an unlikely ally.”)

You could argue against this point in Shloomp! There It Is, where he literally gets to see the lesson as it is presented in the nomicon and doesn’t get it. But I’d argue that this was  purposeful mischaracterization in order to further the plot, a point which will unfortunately recur in this essay. The writers care more about Howard as a tool than as a character, but instead of using the capabilities they build within him, they default to stereotypes.

Where conventional academics are concerned, we have one concrete example of his abilities: Howard is incredible at chess. It’s the iconic nerd game; it requires strategy, careful thinking, and the ability to predict your opponent’s moves. Who cares that he doesn't know the pieces' names? Who cares that he doesn’t abide by typical strategies? He can kick artificially-intelligent ass at the game, not to mention follow someone else's plays the way most people follow a football game.

And he's got street smarts that save Randy's ass on multiple occasions. He's more sociable, a better liar, and a quick thinker in stressful situations. Much of this particular point is pulled from @cunningweiner ‘s brain, who pointed out that Howard is really well-received by crowds (Heidi’s MeCast, the talent show, the Tummynator). Another interesting instance of this is Howard’s time as the Ninja — both the fake monster drill ninja, and the actual Ninja. He may not have accomplished his duties as a hero, but the onlookers Absolutely Ate Up his crowd work. He’s not the most physically willing guy around, but he knows how to appeal to an audience. His major flaw in remaining a well-liked public figure is that his ego gets real damn big, real damn fast. But he’s 15! If you blame a teenager for having empathy and esteem issues, I don’t know what to tell you.

Despite his emotional immaturity, Howard is wise beyond his years as a businessman. Before we move forward, I need to tell you: look at this section purely from a business standpoint. You have to forget morals, you have to forget standards, this is Disney XD meta and we are analyzing a man named Weiner, okay?

Okay. Howard embarks on a total of three business endeavors throughout this show, and each one is highly successful. Ninja Agent, weapon reseller, and McFist-o-plex manager. He embodied “work smarter, not harder” every time. Being an agent takes social skill and smooth talking, and clearly he appealed to a wide range of clients (not to mention earned their trust! What would you say if someone called you up and said “yeah, I manage Superman. Want him to appear in a commercial for you?”). Being a manager requires delegation skills and good memory. Reselling Ninja weapons is honestly just genius and I can’t believe he’s the first guy to do it.

Everyone around Howard, and Big H himself, views him as a dumbass. But time and time again, the episodes show us his mental capabilities! Imagine how much fun the writers could’ve had if they’d leaned on a lazy genius trope instead of a fat idiot.

Grossness

I don’t know about you guys, but I can’t think of a single thin character who relies on gross-out humor. Take, for example, Total Drama, a franchise with a bodily diverse cast and a heavy emphasis on gross-out humor. I mean, there’s an entire episode in the original season where every single character pukes onscreen. TD overall utilizes irreverent humor, but while grossness is a major player, it is not the only source of comedy.

And then you’ve got Owen, the only fat character in the original cast. His whole shtick is being fat, greedy, and nasty. Other characters will fart and burp and overeat — all things that Owen does frequently — but they also have other gags. Maybe they’re bitchy, or they’re geeky, or they’re a literal convict. Owen does not enjoy the luxury of character depth. He is only good for grossing out the audience. (Side tangent: Owen has notably made me laugh out loud a handful of times over the course of the four seasons he featured in. But guess what! Every single one of those laughs was begotten from a rare moment when, instead of farting or burping or eating something he shouldn’t, the writers stepped outside the ‘Owen zone’ and gave him a joke unrelated to his fatness. Fatphobic humor is truly a plague.)

I know I’m being a bit heavy-handed, but I want to emphasize how similar that is to RC9GN! Randy does schnasty shit too sometimes, but he gets to be funny in other ways. Grossness is Howard’s primary mode of comedy. During my first watch-through of the show, I remember being outraged at Howard’s tendency to eat Randy’s food, which, of course, was followed by digestion noises or farts. I was too angry to write down which episodes, but I counted four separate instances where they used that exact convention specifically to get Randy angry at Howard, thus catalyzing the episode’s storyline. (At some point I will have to go back and fact-check that, but we’re 900 words deep at this point and this has been in my drafts for over a month, so we move forward for now okay!!)

 We do get to see flashes of other humor from Howard, especially into Season 2! His cleverness and apathy make for hilarious setups. But even these instances are undercut by something foul. An example that comes to mind is Fear Factor, a perfectly fine episode — one that I love quite a lot — except for the very last gag. Really? Howard gets to be normal-funny the entire episode, until the last minute? The idea that his biggest fear is running out of food literally only works because he is fat. Had this joke been given to any other character, it probably wouldn’t have even made it to storyboards. Even worse, if Howard had not been fat, this joke would never have been conceptualized in the first place. It is almost as if the writers are trying to hit a quota of gross-out jokes for Howard. At a certain point, my anger morphed to pure disappointment. That’s how disheartening it is to see.

Selfishness

Okay, Howard Weinerman is selfish. I'll give you that. But just because he's self-centered does not make him a bad person. May I bring to mind Gumball Watterson, Marcy Wu, Louise Belcher? All are textbook examples of selfish characters, and frequently act in their own best interest, but are ultimately good people. I mention them as proof that characters can have negative defining traits without sacrificing the audience’s sympathy. 

Here's where I really get frustrated with RC9GN’s writing... They want to portray Howard as a jerk with a heart of gold — such as in Debbie Meddle — but they always undercut his few selfless moments with a gross-out gag, or a rude offhand comment, usually directed at Randy. Sometimes, Randy will reciprocate, in which case I give it a pass. There, the grossness or general assholery showcases their friendship, instead of putting Howard down for a stale laugh. 

But like I said, that’s the ‘sometimes.’ The ‘often’ is every time we see him almost embody the ‘heart of gold’ part of his attempted archetype, only to be thrown out the window for a lame gag. A specific example is in “Bro Money Bro Problems,” where Howard has cash to spare for once. He immediately opts to spend it on Randy!….until Randy shloomps into the nomicon, then comes out to find that Howard spent everything he had on the Food Hole’s dinner menu. Sure, this was used to set the rest of the episode in motion. They run out of money, but they need more, so they go out and sell ninja weapons. But here’s the thing: for the rest of the episode, Howard spends his money on both him and Randy, rather than just himself, effectively making that dinner menu joke inconsistent with his characterization.

“Well how else would they set the episode in motion?” They could spend it all on arcade games. Or they spend it all at the boardwalk both times. OR, they are just excitable teenagers who realize, hey, this shit is lucrative! Let’s go get rich! Boom. Fixed your episode, fixed your Howard, fixed your fatphobia.

Laziness

Over and over again, the show tries to tell us that Howard is a lazy piece of shit. Other characters regard him as such, and honestly, so does Howard himself. But I would argue that he is no lazier than your average teenager — not to mention, no lazier than Randy! The difference is that for Howard, the writers intertwine his laziness with his alleged stupidity. They try to convince the audience that Howard is too stupid to care what’s going on.

However, this trait is unique from the other three, because I think this one manages to give him depth. Or at least, in my heart of hearts, it has the potential to do so. This characteristic lends to Howard’s most clever jokes, I think, because ultimately:

Howard is capable, but apathetic.

From the earliest episodes, it is established that he aims for minimum effort, maximum benefit. There’s the bit where Randy asks Howard to come up with the plan for once, and they both laugh at the idea of Howard doing the heavy lifting. Or even all the way into “Mort-al Kombat,” he says people are ‘really handing him the answers today’ when Randy puts in the work to get Howard ungrounded.

But just because Howard prefers not to do any work, doesn’t mean he won’t! And when he does put in effort, the results show that he is damn good at what he does. His time as Le Beret more than proves this point: from his ability to work under the radar, to the plans he forms, to the knowledge he has about Mort’s job & McFist Industries that allows him to get all the cool equipment he uses. We also see his skills and capability in “Debbie Meddle” (the ninja dummy), “Viva El Nomicon” (learning Spanish quickly), “Secret Stache” (commitment to the bit), “The Ninja Identity/Supremacy,” and more.

He very much operates under the mindset of ‘work smarter, not harder.’ He’ll get the job done if he has to. He’ll excel at the job if it benefits him. This is a really interesting character mechanic that would have been so much fun to explore. Like I said so many times above, though, the writers most often choose to undercut his abilities in favor of comedic expense.

Conclusion

Howard, in comparison to Randy, is obviously a lot harder to root for. Overall, Randy is a more conventional character with conventional flaws. Like most duos in media, the sidekick juxtaposes the hero — I would even argue that Howard, in some ways, is Randy in reverse. Randy is highly moral, but still has a lot of learning to do skill-wise; Howard is already extremely capable, but also very amoral. Because of this, the narrative places Randy at a higher value than Howard — which, yknow, fair enough! He is the protag, and that’s a great setup for a protagonist. But simply by virtue of being fat, Howard is not treated with the same level of respect as other sidekick/best friend characters.

For all his quirks and flaws, Howard is not a supremely unique character. His basic core aligns with so many other characters. But because the writers lean on his fatness, instead of leaning into his potential and his complexities, it is much harder to root for him — and it strips him of originality. I love this show with all my heart, but I would be lying if I said I didn’t mind the way it treated Howard. He had so much potential, even as the show was airing, and I will forever be upset that the crew squandered it on fatphobic tropes.

[wyvernne]

it kills me that so many people portray diluc as indiscriminately cruel. he may be cold, and even curt at times, but he’s genuinely a gentleman and it’s so obvious in his voicelines that he cares about others.

[alicentes]

I didn’t sit here for years tryna stay calm and silent while listening to your bad takes on gale (who grew up oppressed, in poverty and then witnessed his entire district getting wiped out then rightly went to fight in the rebellion because it was his inlg chance of tearing down the system the wanted him and his family dead) being a “terrorist war criminal who is single handedly responsible for killing innocent people including prim and who is the REAL villain of the hunger games” just for y’all to turn and start stanning and defending actual facist dictator and child trafficker Coriolanus Snow because you saw a young hot version of him.

[unovaslankiite]

Prolly gonna be my one and only rwde post (cus the fanbase is rancid and I'm not rlly a rwby fan, just a person who watches the show): some of you rwby fans are too comfortable using your queerness as a shield to silence BIPOC voices about the racist writing and your 'precious' bigoted CRWBY. You guys unironically act/think that just because you have to deal with queerphobia; you are IMMUNE to being bigoted yourself and you are INCAPABLE of parroting bigoted beliefs. Cus I know there will be a dumbass ant1-rwde posters who will try to drown out this post by saying its 'lies from the EVIL RWDE!!!': You would rather weaponize your queerness to bash on BIPOC voices, while claiming to care about our voices. You would rather be complicit with the racist writers and their racist writing, just because your racist writers gave you a queer ship. There is no shame nor issue in projecting the abused you suffered onto the characters, however you refuse to see through the characters and their writing through a BIPOC lens. You do not get the right to impose your perspective of the characters at the expense of BIPOC voices, you do not get to twist our voices to be alt-right bigots because we called out RWBY's rampant racism. You do not get the right to say you give a shit about BIPOC and have #BLM in your bio when you fervently defend your bigoted company. You do not get to pretend to care about racism when you buy merch off of your bigoted company. My fellow BIPOC (especially the queer BIPOC): why are you guys so comfortable dismissing your fellow poc about their discomfort with RWBY's racist writing? BIPOC are not a monolith with the same opinions about racism in media; but some of you guys are weirdly comfortable with turning a blind eye to your fellow BIPOC getting dogpiled by the white fandom. We can and will disagree, you not agreeing as a BIPOC about RWBY's racist writing is not what I take issue with. The issue lies within you upholding the racial colourblindness in the fandom; like how the fandom was ok with throwing the racism under the bus in favour of queerness, you are ok with throwing your BIPOC peers under the bus for white queerness. Sincerely, a POC who has been watching the fandoms rampant racism problem ever since 2019.

[enixamyram]

You know one of the weirdest things about the Toxic side of fandoms I've seen? It's the way they try to treat all shows like they're supposed to be setting examples for the audience.

Take Hazbin Hotel for example. I have seen so many people pulling up a single bad trait that Chaggie or Huskerdust may or may not have and use that as the sole reason why they shouldn't be together at all. Which is so dumb but also bizarre because real life couples have their own good and bad qualities and having one possibly negative aspect about your relationship is more often not a reason you should immediately break up.

But sometimes fans and trolls act like these characters need to be in Disney-style-picture-perfect romance otherwise they're unhealthy and shouldn't be together. Like they seem to be under this really strange idea that all entertainment should be educational for the audience and if they're not setting a good example then it's bad TV.

It's so weird.

[spicedfink]

Someone posted their opinion on tophabe and I'm not going to @ them since people are apparently being weird but it did make me want to voice my tophabe take because tbh it made me feel insecure and like I needed to explain myself because they were right and so real for what they said.

My thing with (s2) episode 8 is first off I can only process parts of it at a time because that episode made me uncomfortable Second is there is one major factors I take in when thinking about tophabe and a few minor factors: The biggest thing is Joan the canon end game love interest as far as we have been shown tried to point blank kill everybody which is objectively worse. As for minor factors I'll use bullet points: - Cleo also manipulates Abe not to that degree but for longer - All the cast are kind of bad people but the show only framed Topher's actions as bad which I found weird when I really thought about it then they said Harriet was a theater kid and I stopped caring about what the writing was meant to convey - Him giving good advice first in s2e8 reminds me of how I used to give a friend of mine bad advice as a joke when they kept ignoring my real advice and for some reason they took my joke advice seriously. - Topher wasn't in the classroom with Abe so he didn't know the teacher had been hitting on him so it feels like he's just making shit up on the spot - I don't see how Topher would have seen this working. Like it shows him being right there when it starts but like how? I know it's just because the plot said so but the actual "go sleep with this gross person" seems more like a "oh Abe would never actually do that" line of thought - like it reads more as "if I can get Abe insecure he won't ask Joan out" then "Abe will defiantly go for this" (still shitty but less) - It's a cartoon and their actions are exaggerated - s2e8 was such a horribly done episode all around that I can't do anything other than cherry pick it - poor mental health is hardly an excuse but man do I believe his therapist isn't doing him any favors (which is why I have his change therapist in my fanfics) - The fact they're still shitty high schoolers meaning they all have the most room for growth and I'm projecting my own journey of because and actual good person and figuring out my sexuality onto him (obviously wasn't his level of shitty but I said dumb shit and did weird emotionally charged things thanks to how I was raised and poor mental health) - Episode 1 of season 2 Topher got the t-rex arms so I attached myself to his character right then and there ("he's autistic just like me") - I like happy things. The show gave a character who they made clear was suppose to be disliked and bullied for being horrible and didn't show him do anything actually that bad until episode 8 out of 10. And before that ranges from normal weird teenager things he'd logically grow out of, trying too hard to be socially accepted and being mentally ill??? Like no. No I'm personally not going to think this character is a horrible person incapable of growth... And this is why my serious non one sided tophabe headcanons are all for when they are older because I really think Topher would, you know grow up and regret his past actions. Also since I see Topher as queer: internalized homophobia and the such are a bitch (speaking from experience)

I don't actually have a good reason for why Abe would like Topher back past I just think it'd be fun. If Abe gets with Joan and is friends with Cleo I think he should still be friends with Topher though

[sonknuxadow]

am i really the only person on earth who doesnt like zomom because he falls into like every negative stereotype about fat people ever invented. sometimes i feel like im reaching because i never see anyone else complain about it ever

[langernameohnebedeutung]

Honestly, for me, one of the more ... uninspired and a little bit grating takes on problématique characters with sad backstories is: "well this other character experienced this and worse and they're not out there killing people!"

i mean, good for them, but I don't think we need a "best practice" approach to trauma

[gunkbaby]

feel free to disagree with me on this word vomit but: i dont think hori is the best friend for shuu - at least, not to begin with. she has character development that is worth talking about. she is a very good foil to him, but i feel like people often forget that hori and shuu work together because they are both sides of the same coin.

i feel like her and shuu suffer from the same issue - neither one is willing to admit that they actually mean something to each other.

i think this is actually more obvious in hori. Perhaps just my bias talking, but when i read the light novel, hori seems to look at shuu most of the time with something of an invisible eyeroll. he is only ‘fun’ when it benefits her camera. one could argue that this viewing of shuu as someone only interesting when hori views him as photogenic or when he is attempting to do something ridiculous, is perhaps more demeaning than hori being referred to as a pet. pet implies a level of affection, that seems condescending, but still maintains that level of admitting to a form of affection - even if it isn’t necessarily appropriate.

their relationship mirrors a motif i have been talking about a lot lately in relation to shuu - the relationship of a wild animal and a wildlife photographer.

im not saying she doesn’t care for him - whilst in re she claims she wants him to be fun and interesting again, i understand that she does genuinely care for shuu. but in a sensec their friendship is sort of passively parasitic, and whilst we might blame shuu for that, when viewed through the lens of a photographer and a wild animal - one’s existence becomes the other’s plunder. it is symbiotic in a sense. where am i going with this? idk. word vomit!

i think hori is difficult to characterise accurately because of her lack of canon characterisation, but i think often, we criticise shuu more than hori, when really the narrative around them makes a point of them being direct parallels. shuu’s gain from their friendship, prior to :re, seems somewhat more genuine.

[birchbow]

Thank you for PoF it literally rewired my brain a normal amount eons ago when I first read it. Every time I make a new character for anything and I start to worry maybe they're just a little too unhinged, I remember PoF, and know that I'm valid and so are my insane little horny characters 😌❤️

I am so excited that you say this because it's important to my heart! Insane little characters with strong wild opinions or reckless horniness or huge blind spots or weird personality quirks or frequent fuckups they often learn very little from are the heart of stories that keep my interest and provoke reaction from me as a reader!!!!

Let every character be a character!! I have never been more bored as a fanfiction reader than the other day, when I read a fic where only the villains were allowed to be rude or irrational or petty or angry without immediately apologizing in uniformly articulate and modern "I've learned what people are supposed to say in apologies" speak. Because they're a Main Character! They're a Good Guy! But sometimes good guys and main characters are going to fuck up!! Sometimes they're going to be bizarre! Sometimes they're going to be at odds with other characters who are Good Guy Main Characters, over things that may or may not be a big deal for their characters!

Listen!! Sometimes I write a character talking shit and I'm wincing the whole time, not just because they're being an asshole, but because I know they're going to double down on it later! Because they just,,, don't think or feel the same things as the person they're being an asshole to! Do I the author agree with one more? Probably! Do I necessarily have to resolve "and this one was right, so the other one apologized"? No! Characters conflict with the other characters! It's uncomfortable to write sometimes! But my level of comfort or discomfort with the uncomfortable is part of writing stories where THINGS HAPPEN and goddammit I am out here for things happening otherwise what is even the point. >8U

[legofemme]

what annoys the fuck out of me with one-note 'bad people' characters is that none of the people writing these characters ever put thought into how they got to that point. Like yeah, sure man you can write a character whos violently transphobic to fit your narrative but can you tell me why the character is transphobic. Can you tell me how they got to such a hate-filled state other than just saying 'well theyre a bad person' . No bad people in life are born bad, and these types of writers refuse to acknowledge it because it means theyd have to approach the topic with the nuance it actually deserves. And that scares them

[worstsequence]

[transfemlogan]

im thinking So Hard abt how roman & logan were treated in the earlier years of the fandom.

[synonymsforstupidity]

'Kris being an outcast who likes freaking people out means they must be a Bad Person™️ and thus taking their free will and piloting them like a puppet is actually Good™️ morally speaking'

How about I eat your skin how bout that

[bumbleblurr]

gives shockwave sympathetic traits but also won't let him escape the consequences of his actions

[thewriteadviceforwriters]

Crafting Compelling Morally Gray Characters: A Guide for Fiction Writers

In literature, there is often a clear distinction between good and evil. Heroes are portrayed as virtuous and villains as wicked. However, in recent years, there has been a rise in the popularity of morally gray characters - those who do not fit neatly into the categories of good or evil. These characters are complex, flawed, and often make decisions that challenge the reader's moral compass. In this guide, I'll help you explore the art of crafting compelling morally gray characters and how to make them stand out in your fiction writing.

What Are Morally Gray Characters?

Morally gray characters, also known as morally ambiguous characters, are those who do not conform to traditional notions of good or evil. They may have both positive and negative traits, and their actions may be motivated by a mix of good and bad intentions. These characters often blur the lines between right and wrong, making them more relatable and intriguing to readers.

Examples of Morally Gray Characters

Some well-known examples of morally gray characters include:

Severus Snape from the Harry Potter series: Initially portrayed as a villain, Snape's true motivations and actions are revealed to be more complex and morally ambiguous.

Jaime Lannister from A Song of Ice and Fire series: Known for his arrogance and incestuous relationship with his sister, Jaime's character evolves throughout the series, showcasing his internal struggle between his duty and his personal desires.

Walter White from Breaking Bad: A high school chemistry teacher turned methamphetamine producer, Walter's character is constantly torn between his desire for power and his moral compass.

Why Are Morally Gray Characters Compelling?

Morally gray characters are compelling because they challenge the reader's perceptions of right and wrong. They are not easily categorized as heroes or villains, making them more relatable and human. These characters also add depth and complexity to a story, making it more interesting and thought-provoking.

The Power of Relatability

One of the main reasons morally gray characters are so compelling is because they are relatable. They are not perfect, and they make mistakes, just like real people. This makes them more human and allows readers to connect with them on a deeper level. When readers can see themselves in a character, it creates a stronger emotional connection to the story.

The Element of Surprise

Morally gray characters also add an element of surprise to a story. Their actions and decisions may not always align with what the reader expects, keeping them on the edge of their seat. This unpredictability makes the story more engaging and can lead to unexpected plot twists.

The Exploration of Morality

Morally gray characters also allow for a deeper exploration of morality in a story. By challenging traditional notions of good and evil, these characters force readers to question their own moral compass and consider the gray areas of morality. This can lead to thought-provoking discussions and a deeper understanding of complex moral issues.

How to Craft Morally Gray Characters

Crafting morally gray characters requires a delicate balance of positive and negative traits, as well as a deep understanding of their motivations and internal struggles. Here are some tips for creating compelling morally gray characters in your writing.

Give Them a Strong Motivation

Every character, regardless of their moral alignment, should have a strong motivation for their actions. For morally gray characters, this motivation should be complex and not easily defined as purely good or evil. It could be a desire for power, revenge, or even a sense of duty. This motivation will drive their decisions and actions throughout the story.

Show Their Flaws and Vulnerabilities

Morally gray characters are not perfect, and they should not be portrayed as such. They should have flaws and vulnerabilities that make them more relatable and human. These flaws could be physical, emotional, or moral, and they should play a role in the character's development and decisions.

Create Internal Conflict

One of the defining characteristics of morally gray characters is their internal conflict. They are torn between their good and bad tendencies, and this struggle should be evident in their thoughts and actions. This internal conflict adds depth to the character and makes them more relatable to readers.

Avoid Stereotypes

When crafting morally gray characters, it's important to avoid falling into stereotypes. These characters should not be one-dimensional or defined solely by their moral ambiguity. They should have unique personalities, backgrounds, and motivations that make them stand out as individuals.

Show Their Growth and Development

As with any well-written character, morally gray characters should experience growth and development throughout the story. They should learn from their mistakes and make decisions that challenge their moral compass. This growth and development will make them more dynamic and interesting to readers.

How to Make Morally Gray Characters Stand Out

With the rise in popularity of morally gray characters, it's important to make yours stand out in a sea of similar characters. Here are some tips for making your morally gray characters unique and memorable.

Give Them a Distinctive Voice

A character's voice is an essential part of their identity. It should be unique and reflective of their personality and motivations. For morally gray characters, their voice should reflect their internal conflict and the complexity of their moral alignment.

Create a Strong Backstory

A character's backstory can provide valuable insight into their motivations and actions. For morally gray characters, a strong backstory can help explain their moral ambiguity and add depth to their character. It can also create empathy and understanding for their decisions.

Use Foils to Highlight Their Morality

Foils are characters who contrast with the main character, highlighting their strengths and weaknesses. For morally gray characters, foils can be used to showcase their moral ambiguity and challenge their beliefs. This can add depth to the character and create interesting dynamics between them and other characters.

Morally gray characters add depth, complexity, and relatability to a story. By challenging traditional notions of good and evil, these characters force readers to question their own moral compass and consider the gray areas of morality.