@richard does evil to you means as the real definition of the word or as in spanish perverso? which can be translated as evil, wicked or else. It's more like a psycological meaning, for that kind of personality.
if you understand tell me...i am making no sense out of this also...still you can not say that i am not trying.
I don't get what is wrong with them being evil? Evil as in choosing the do negative things to full fill there goals in stead of positive things.
The reason I say kaname is evil is cause he uses negative options to reach his goals more often then positive options. To determine a person you take in there negative and positive and weigh them against each other.
LOL I am sorry Richard but when you are talking options which were the options that Kaname had in the first arc? tell me examples and how you reach this conclusion.
I know an option not to interfere at all; to take Yuuki, turn her to her pureblood status and have fun at an exotic paradise. Then nobody would label him as the magnificent b******. See my point?
I am sure that Zero would found a way out of this mess; after all what kind of hero is he, if he expects uncle Kaname to come and take his hand?
As it happens right now, Takuma had proposed that option to Kaname to take Yuuki and live happily ever after... Sara was happy to fulfill his role and kill all purebloods, not to mention Ichiou too from the past...given these two as options (since they were collaborators from long ago), why did he interfere in the first place i do not know? see my point...
options as you say...
as far as me listing some my meaning of good and evil is different from your own so they wont mesh, you seem to use a literal translation to base your good and evil while I use positive and negative actions weighed against each other.
sadly Richard, i see that you have nothing concrete to say, other than your own personal definition of evil...but communication is based on mutual understanding of the definition of words..that's why there are definitions, otherwise we can not communicate. If i start sharing my own personal "definitions" of right and wrong we shall never talk about a real thing..
Since as you say you are not good in expressing things the way you mean it, i would suggest to try the common terms that are understood by everyone...a much better way to communicate your meaning. Try to find the correct terms that do communicate the meaning. Otherwise this can not work. Both parties have to try...i can not make it through interpersonal meanings i am sorry.
A good person is not always good and an evil person is not always bad.
then you are speaking about actions...that evil(?) actions do not characterize a person as being bad neither good actions characterize a person of being good.
For me it would be the other way around since evil in its common definitions has far too strong meaning - immoral in order not to characterize a person...
bad actions do not characterize a person as being evil neither good actions characterize a person as being a saint.
Let me see examples;
when Kaname kills Shizouka is a bad action but he does that to protect Zero and Yuuki, since Shizouka wanted them all at her disposal. In a far greater scale if Kaname had allowed to Shizouka to have it her way, someone else should kill her to free Zero that would be Zero or Yuuki herself
So the action of killing her is bad (as an action) but Kaname is not evil.
In the same view Zero kills the vampire that was at the auction (without giving him a chance to apologise or to further arrest him) so this action is bad. Well since Zero was not in reality protecting anyone at that time and he had captured the vampire, could we characterize him as evil? (where is the balance of the action here?)
Ichijou kills his grandfather but his grandfather was a manipulative b****** all the way so is Ichijou evil?
Still this having nothing to do with the initial question of your post.
Kaname may fit the description that you gave because the balance is in the intentions and what there is to protect or how many things depended upon his decisions or actions.
From your definition as described above: However, it's true that his penchant for manipulation at the expense of others means it's common for him to be a Villain, Villain Protagonist, or at least an Anti-Hero, but purely heroic examples exist.
For me an additional reason that Kaname can not be the villain of the script is because there is no hero that can antagonize him. If there was a hero perhaps i would see a villain but i do not see a hero.
If he is the anti-hero then which are his selfish reasons
to act so?
Instead I found this one that typically matches far more Kaname's ways;
Completing a triangle with the Action Hero and the Science Hero, the Guile Hero is a hero who operates by playing politics and manipulating the bad guys. The Guile Hero trades swords and guns (or science and technology) for charm, wit, political and/or financial acumen, and an in-depth knowledge of human nature. The Chain of Deals, along with the Social Engineering and Gambit Index tropes are all at the Guile Hero's fingertips. Often, a Guile Hero will manipulate the other good guys and a whole bunch of innocent bystanders as part of their scheme to bring down the Big Bad, though they'll take care to ensure the other characters aren't truly harmed in the process (and if they fail, they'll be very sorry). The Guile Hero is likely to be a politician or a businessman, and engage in Battles of Wits.
The Guile Hero could be a good analog to the Manipulative b******: the Guile Hero is unambiguously a good guy with the same goals as any Action Hero or Science Hero. While some other heroes may be unhappy with being manipulated by the Guile Hero, it is made clear to the reader that this character both has a heroic goal and is not (usually) Jumping Off the Slippery Slope into becoming a Well-Intentioned Extremist.
The Guile Hero combines elements of The Chessmaster, the Trickster Archetype and The Strategist without having to be all of these. A Guile Hero isn't necessarily The Chessmaster: the Guile Hero is simply a hero who uses wit, charm, and skill to mislead and set up the bad guys, while The Chessmaster is often devoted to grander schemes, and is always at the top of the food chain. A Manipulative b****** tends to be more personal and controlling in his manipulations. A Guile Hero need not be a master manipulator; "guile" can mean "shrewdness" instead of "deceit". The Chain of Deals is just as valid a tool for these characters as the Batman Gambit, and a Guile Hero may very well be a grown up High School Hustler.
In the Five-Man Band, the Guile Hero is most likely to be The Face of the troupe and/or The Smart Guy though a particularly bright Leader or Lancer can also fit in. If The Chick uses her emotional influence to the extreme and combines it with quick wits and words, she can also grow into one. The Guile Hero is also frequently a Sixth Ranger, and if Sixth Ranger is also a Guile Hero they tend to be Sixth Ranger Traitor.
Compare the Young Conqueror, which is a young example of this trope taken Up to Eleven with a side of Take Over the World ambition as well. May overlap with Good Is Not Dumb. Compare Silk Hiding Steel when a Proper Lady feels like plotting. Very, very rarely will this overlap with Small Steps Hero, due to the latter being unwilling to sacrifice innocent parties—but manipulating the villains is just fine.
and since we are referring also to hero - that means action is involved let's go and see who is the character that can be characterized as hero alltogether;
An Action Hero is a form of protagonist who primarily uses combat to achieve his goals in a story. If there's something in his way, his main response is to beat it up. This could be because he doesn't have the patience or skills for any other method, or because he just doesn't have the time. But then again, maybe he actually does try other methods first but it always seems to turn out that Violence Really Is the Answer.
[quote] The Hero can do all the unrelated fighting on the side that he wants, but if he doesn't use it to accomplish his primary goal then it does not make him an Action Hero. Likewise, a character can be a Badass, or show skill in combat, without actually being an Action Hero. If a character never seems to be working towards anything in particular, coming up against problems or facing trials, and generally acting as a Satellite Character, then this trope cannot apply to him.[
Now i see that violence is used, cunning also, i see that a hero can take many forms and can have multiple ways (manipulation included to achieve its ways) but all these of course mean that he is working for a greater purpose.
Let's see another definition of hero;
Joseph Campbell, a famous scholar who spent his career creating a hero archetype from the mythology of many cultures, once said, “a hero is someone who has given his or her life to something bigger than oneself.” A hero by definition is a person who acts beyond their duty to help or save others, often sacrificing him or her self in the process. The hero can be defined by current events, fictional heroes, and historical heroes in wars.
So what really makes you to chose the particular definition that you used about Kaname? and as an additional question i want to ask about Zero's role...as a description where is he as a hero? which are his goals? his intention to be sacrificed? or his altruistic attitude?
if you show me a hero here, perhaps i shall see a villain or an anti-hero.
And now that i read all the above quite enlightening things, thank you Richard i know that your initial thread would have a use, i can say with certainty that if not Kaname then this script has no HERO. So perhaps we should start from scratch? where is the hero?