I'm a Villain and I'm Here to Monologue

Toothpaste said:

By which I mean each of my published books (the two out already, and the third out this December) have a villain monologue at the end. Often they are so long that they are a villain chapter (counting the pages of the ARC right now, my latest villain monologue is 9 pages). Now, it's usually more of a villain dialogue, with the hero asking the odd question here and there, but it really is the villain doing the lion's share of the talking.

Click to expand...

This is just another example of how you can do anything you want in your writing and make it work, as long as you do it well.

I say go for it as well!

The villain monologue is perhaps the best example of "all in the execution." I won't name any names, but there's a certain mystery series whose villains, while calm, collected, and savvy throughout the story, lose their minds in the endgame and confess their deeds to the police in a wild-eyed rant... because if they didn't, the hero would never be able to convict them. I have to admit, I think this is cheating. At least I feel cheated.

On the other hand, executed well, villain monologues can be the best part of the book. They can give the reader a hint of the villain's personality in a story told from the hero's perspective; maybe Voldemort breaks out the football playbook, but Aunt Petunia's monologue to Hagrid, when she explains why she's so angry at Lily, answered some questions about her character without distracting from higher priority problems. They're great for putting a last-minute twist on a plan the hero thinks he knows; like in the Fablehaven series, where Graulas combines 'villain monologue' with 'unreliable narrator' to such wicked effect. Plus, some genres practically require them. The audience may joke about how real bad people don't do that, but in the end, they expect them to be there and feel disappointed if they aren't.

So, I'd say, if you want to write a monologue, write a monologue. They are not inherently bad, and if you don't like it, you can always take it out later.

I've had monologues where the other characters don't want to hear, nor care, why the villain 'did what he did.' It's like shut up, crazy person, as they're dragging him out to the police car. Seriously.

But monomaniacal types do want the attention, which is sometimes one of the reasons they do what they do. So, if it's done right, I have no issue with it. Sometimes it's there just to pull all the loose ends together.

Ha, great thread and title!

Sometimes, you have to get out some information, and sometimes that means the villain has to talk for a while. This can actually be fun--the reader will expect big revelations. Give it to them. But it has to be set up properly. The reader should think, "Why didn't I see that coming?" not "Where did that come from?"

I've never had a villain in my stories. I've had unpleasant and morally ambiguous characters and at least one character who's a scumbag. But villains? Not really. So no monologues.

There was that one chapter, though, with an internal monologue where my character Nicole put together all the pieces and realized she'd been tricked...

I read the title of this thread and the first thing that came to mind was "I'm a reader and I'm going to skip these pages."

In my opinion, a monologue is lazy. It's silly coming from the hero (see Atlas Shrugged), and doubly so from the villain..that is, unless you're writing a James Bond book.

I hate the term "show, not tell" and think that term cliche, but your reader should know what the villains' plan, thoughts, or whatever by the plot. You don't need to info dump on it.

That's just my 2 cents. Here's your change. (And yes, there is no wrong or right way)

If I ever read "I'm a villain and I'm here to monologue" as a line of dialogue in a book, that book would become my favorite book of all time.

Just sayin'.

Debeucci said:

In my opinion, a monologue is lazy. . . . I hate the term "show, not tell" and think that term cliche, but your reader should know what the villains' plan, thoughts, or whatever by the plot. You don't need to info dump on it.

Click to expand...

For certain kinds of stories yes. But what about stories where the point is for the reader to be as involved in uncovering the mystery as the hero, ie: Typical Agatha Christie type books, or, you know, mine? Where hints have been dropped that can be pieced together, but more than not will be pieced together by the end by either the dectective or the villain?

I understand that people are adverse to info dumps, especially in modern literature. But to my mind an info dump is only one if it is unsuccessful. Otherwise said chunk of telling should simply be called another means of relating exposition.

I totally appreciate you don't like monologuing, you clearly aren't the only one , and you did preface your thoughts with "in my opinion" so I know you aren't trying to force anyone to think like you. But I need to address the "lazy" comment. I think there are other reasons and effective ways to write such a monologue. And because of its inherent cheese factor, and the fact that so many loathe it, it can be quite a lot of effort to write an effective one. Yes, I can imagine many new writers in an attempt to not have to do as much work, just deciding to write a monologue explaining everything. But that isn't the only motivation for writing one.

The stories you like might not be the ones that have the detective at the end wrapping everything up, but they are some of my favs. And a lot has to do with the monologue. As I read the character piece the puzzle together I get more and more excited realising what all the individual bits meant and what the whole picture turns out to be (tangent, makes me think of the Simpson's quote, "Oh, it's a donkey!"). I love that feeling. I love a good reveal.

Now of course a good reveal only works if you've set up everything else along the way, but again, that's evidence of not lazy writing.

At any rate. Had to say something.

swvaughn said:

If I ever read "I'm a villain and I'm here to monologue" as a line of dialogue in a book, that book would become my favorite book of all time.

Just sayin'.

Click to expand...

Yes. Me too.

I can't stand it when the villain spends three or four pages explaining why they did all the villainy things they did..."muahaha, I am a terrible person and this is why! When I was four, my dog stole my favourite blanket. From then on, I swore to take my revenge on the world! Then, when I was six..."

How do we feel about villain monologues where the villain is absolutely eager to share his plans and have them be known, because they have already come to fruition and he was never actually hiding his intentions in the first place?

More like proselytizing than monologuing, really. He’s not interested in gloating. He just wants you to understand and be a part of this brave new world he’s building. Once you see what he’s been working towards you’ll eagerly co-sign his manifesto. Right? You have to see reason, after all.