Posted by Terry on March 26, 1998 at 14:45:51:
In Reply to: Re: Comments on Vance Villains posted by Richard Simms on March 24, 1998 at 15:19:38:
There are several models for Vance protagonists (as opposed to heroes, which presupposes some positive moral virtue). I must credit Per for pointing this out to me.
One is the upstanding, strong, silent, modest, shy around women hero in the true sense of here. They are also mature, unattached (none are married that I can think of) usually leading quiet useful lives. Sklar Hast (Blue World) is the prototype here.
Another are the rouguish scamps: Cugel, Zamp, etc. These guys are morally bankrupt* braggards, immodest, and forward (but usually unsuccessful around women). In fact everything that the strong silent heroes are not. However, the stories the scamps appear in are comedies. We never take Cugel seriously (well, I did see someone harrumph here once about him. Obviously no sense of humor!) and the outcomes for the scamps are (as far as I can remember) that they end up with nothing but the shirt on their back ususally.
Finally there are the young heroes who, if Vance has enough time as in Durdane, grow into the strong silent hero. These younger heroes in the making are unusually clumsy around women, though they seem intelligent, handsome, earnest, modest and, one would think, fine catches for any lass.
Vance is on record saying that his audience fits into this latter category, but one must not think that he is pandering to his audience. No indeed!
*One might note that both Zamp and Cugel are allowed their moment of true heroism: both rescue acquaintances, road companions. Cugel cannot say why - something like "It was a whim and I don't know why I did it."
Does anyone care to categorize Vance villains for us?
Terry