Have you ever liked a villain more than the hero? Who and why?
I have always preferred the villain.
Not in the cheap, poster-on-the-dorm-wall way. Not because of the dominatrix vibes— leather looks good in low lighting— or because a monologue about destiny is more interesting than a speech about believing in yourself. I prefer the villain because the heroine keeps asking me to pretend I am someone I am not.
You know the one. She sings to animals. Birds land on her finger as if they have been waiting all morning for the privilege. Mice stitch her a dress. Squirrels pause mid-scamper to receive her wisdom. She is luminous, unguarded, and permanently slightly out of breath from all the hope. My own mother talks to the squirrels we see out the window. She does it with genuine warmth, the way some people bless the mail. I would never. I watch the same squirrel, note that it is fat and opportunistic, and go back to whatever I was doing. That is the distance.
I am, for the record, extremely optimistic. A vibes gal. I am generally whimsical. I believe in second chances, late-night plans that should not work, and the possibility that something beautiful is still unfolding even when the evidence is mixed. I am not cynical. I am just not going to perform enchantment on command. You are far more likely to find me rolling my eyes and swearing under my breath about the thing that is actually happening than composing a verse about how the forest loves me.
The classic heroine often feels like a demand. Be bubbly. Softer. Be more grateful. Be astonished by ordinary animals. Let the world rearrange itself around your goodness. The villain, by contrast, rarely asks you to lie about your temperature. They are allowed to be irritated. They are allowed to want something specific and then pursue it with unpretty competence. They notice the machinery. They do not pretend the castle is kind just because the lighting is flattering.
That is the real seduction. Not evil. Attention.
Heroes in the old template are frequently written as if awareness itself were a moral failing. To see the cost of the system, to name the bargain, to refuse the song—that is framed as corruption. Villains get to keep their eyes open. They get strategy. They get a private language. They get the dignity of not having to make every feeling edible for an audience of woodland creatures.
I do not actually want to poison the kingdom. I want permission to be complicated without being recast as the problem. I want a character who can love the world and still find it faintly ridiculous. Who can be hopeful and still say, out loud, that this particular meeting, this particular speech, this particular expectation that I will melt at the sight of a deer is nonsense.
There is a version of “relating to the villain” that is just edgelord cosplay. That is not what I mean. I mean the relief of a figure who does not require me to flatten my voice. The heroine’s sweetness is often a costume the story needs her to wear so the plot can stay simple. The villain’s sharpness is frequently just the story admitting that people have interiors.
My optimism is not the singing kind. It is the kind that survives the eye-roll. It is the kind that swears, then keeps going. It looks at the squirrel and thinks: impressive little opportunist, truly, and also I am not having a conversation with you. That is not bitterness. That is proportion.
So yes. Give me the one in the darker coat. Not because I want the throne (although I do). Because I want the room to be a person who can see the joke, keep the hope, and still refuse to perform a duet with the wildlife. The forest can keep its chorus. I will take the character who notices the wiring.
