From: rob@hoster.eng.ohio-state.edu (Rob Carriere)
Subject: Re: Characters I Hate to Love
Organization: The Ohio State University Dept of Electrical Engineering
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 06:07:35 GMT

In article <1ausvdINNejc@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> sdh5@po.CWRU.Edu (Scott D.
Hurley) writes: 
>All right, let's get things straight Mr. Carriene, I have at
>no point deleted what you said, I merely did not feel like 
>going through the motions of typing it back into the computer.
>That's right, I don't have an editor service so whenever I want
>to directly quote someone I have to *type the whole thing back
>into the system*, and shifting back and forth between article
>cited and the one being written is *quite* tiresome.

1) My condolences (No, I'm not being sarcastic.  Nobody should have to work
   with equipment like that in this day and age.)
2) You said I had _altered_ what you said.  I hadn't.  Since I didn't know
   that you were working with stone knives and bearskins, it looked to me like
   you had elided the quote so as to able to claim that I had messed with your
   text.

>To define the 'evil' that we are using in this context, consider
>using the following *TYPE* of 'evil', which is commonly used:
>The self-aggrandizement and indulgence of one's ego, regardless
>of the price that others may suffer for one's acctions, wherein
>the primary motivation for one's deeds are self-satisfaction
>and enjoyment *without* or in *spite* of the consideration of
>said deeds' effects upon others.
>
>It may sound repetitive, but it is not.  Both the action *and*
>the motivation must be present.

Obviously.  OK, I'm happy now.  I wot of what he writ.

[Further discussion deleted.  Points agreed with.]

>[...] [F]or
>said  'villain' that we root for almost invariably has
>dared to reach where no one should (or more likely, could,
>prior to this achievement--but that's a different argument 
>altogether)--and succeeded, even if only in part. To use
>your own examples, McBeth siezed the throne of a kingdom
>and Faust learned that which had been forbidden to be known.

Forsooth.  The point being that without even trying, I dug up two examples in
the immediate historical and geographical vicinity of Milton, who was
supposedly unique in dealing with this type of villain.

I don't think you can make the argument stick in the general case.  If you
want to restate for the specific case of speculative fiction in the 20th
century, I think you're right, there has been such an upsurge as you describe.
The Electric Monk has already posted on that.  

>"Remember, Evil is *supposed* to be more tempting than good."
>The temptation lies in doing what no one dare--and the
>glory and fruits of succeeding, regardless of what the costs
>might be.

I still think `to suppose' is a weird verb here, but I'll quit being Gospodin
Dubious Participle now.

In part I think the phenomenon is simply SF coming of age (like the Electric
Monk said.) After all, Black Hat villains and White Hat heros get boring real
fast.  In part I think it is a reaction to the Official Position that the only
way to achieve anything is to cheat.

>P.S. *NEVER* ask for a philosophical definition of 'Evil'
>     from a History/English dual-major that has spent the
>     night preparing for an English Mid-Term by rereading
>     _Paradise_Lost_ while running solely on caffeine . . .
>    you have been warned.

Oh?  What would happen?  ;-)

SR
---