Home For Fiction – Blog

Recently someone left a review on my Narrative Nods android app. Part of their review was about that user’s narrative not having a narrative antagonist, and therefore, as he said, he didn’t need the option.

That review got me thinking. I realized that there must be many authors out there who probably don’t understand the concept of a narrative antagonist. As I explained in my article on the types of fiction characters:

The antagonist, as the name implies, functions as the force keeping the protagonist from achieving the given goal. The antagonist actively keeps the protagonist from achieving his/her/their goal. In other words, the antagonist’s opposition is not a result of error, tragic irony, or other such literary device – see information on the character type of the opponent, below.

This seems straightforward enough. However, I also mentioned in that article that:

In most complex narratives, the author can achieve the most powerful effect by having a character play a dual role. For instance, the protagonist and the antagonist can be one and the same actual character. Imagine someone who half the time works toward some goal (say, to find peace of mind over a past trauma), only to undermine his own efforts due to fear or suspicion.

This is probably the part about a narrative antagonist that many authors misunderstand. So, let’s take a closer look at this.

There Is no Narrative without Narrative Tension

Are there narratives that don’t have a narrative antagonist? Before answering that, let’s first ask another question. Are there narratives that don’t have narrative tension?

The answer ought to have been “No, there aren’t”, but I’m afraid that there are. A vast number of mediocre books exist out there that are little more than simplistic, naive expositions of events going from point A to point C passing through point B.

In such books there is no tension because there is no narrative problem nor any kind of evolution. “John and Mary graduated from university together, then they got married and started a family. They lived happily ever after”.

That’s not a narrative.

A narrative would have been “John graduated from university but Mary had to abandon her studies because that’s what John wanted. They got married but she remained bitter about it, fact which poisoned their relationship. And then she met Nick”.

Or, here’s another narrative: “John graduated from university but Mary had to abandon her studies because that’s what John wanted. They got married and she loved him, not feeling bitter about abandoning her studies. And then he met Anna”.

What’s common in these two latter examples (which is absent from the first one) is that there is narrative tensionNotice how the feeling of tension arises primarily because the text reveals only implicitly what is going to happen, allowing the reader to figure out what "And then she/he met Nick/Anna" connotes. There is a narrative problem, a clash of interests, worldviews, goals and desires.

Where does a narrative antagonist fit in all that?

A Narrative Antagonist Is All about Narrative Tension

You can’t have narrative tension if nothing stands in the way of the protagonist. If your novel is simply a narration of a good guy having a lot of luck, making the right decisions, and receiving the rewards, something is terribly wrong.

Parenthetically, it is equally wrong (but for other reasons) to exhibit any of the dramatic mistakes Aristotle lists:

[Tragedy] must not be the spectacle of a virtuous man brought from prosperity to adversity: for this moves neither pity nor fear; it merely shocks us.

Nor, again, that of a bad man passing from adversity to prosperity: for nothing can be more alien to the spirit of Tragedy; it possesses no single tragic quality; it neither satisfies the moral sense nor calls forth pity or fear. 

Nor, again, should the downfall of the utter villain be exhibited. A plot of this kind would, doubtless, satisfy the moral sense, but it would inspire neither pity nor fear; for pity is aroused by unmerited misfortune, fear by the misfortune of a man like ourselves.

Aristotle, Poetics.

In order to have a proper narrative you need narrative tension, as we saw. And in order to have a proper narrative tension, you need an antagonist.

“But I Don’t Have a Narrative Antagonist!”

Yes, you do. This is the crux of the matter, and what you need to recognize in order to take your writing to the next level.

Many people – this sadly includes writers – tend to personify antagonism in a very simplistic, superficial way. Say the words “narrative antagonist” and people think of Darth Vader, Saruman, or The Joker.

They are antagonists, yes. But it’s possible – indeed imperative – to have a narrative antagonist without such a direct, role-to-character personification.

In most literary-fiction novels, the antagonist is not some caricatured figure that tries to undermine the protagonist’s efforts. Particularly in high-quality literary fiction, which is about introspection and the human experience, the antagonist is abstract or collective, but certainly present.

It could be the protagonist’s dark side, undermining their own efforts. It could be the protagonist’s family, or even society as a whole – Kafka comes to mind. Such stories don’t have a cartoonish antagonist lurking in the shadows. But they do have an antagonist, because they do have narrative tension.

And so, when putting together your own story, you better make sure that:

• You create a narrative with narrative tension.
• You identify the source of the tension.
• Finally, you link the source of the tension to a narrative antagonist, at least an abstract one.