PDA

View Full Version : The Tao of Xykon (spoilers fixed)



Charles Phipps
2008-04-17, 01:14 AM
For me, I actually like Xykon a great deal more than Redcloak. Redcloak has the pretty standard "Knight Templar" motivation where he's so committed to bettering his people that he's lost sight of the fact that he hurts them more with his actions than he's benefiting them. Let's face it, Redcloak got all of his nieces and nephews killed plus now a third of the Hobgoblin City that he marched en masse to Azure City.

For me, though, Xykon takes the cake as the best villain in the comic because Rich has managed to imbued the stereotype of the Evil Overlord with enough nuance that he actually becomes a deconstruction of the trope. I think part of it is the fact that, despite everything, I *GET* Xykon without a bit of difficulty. Which is weird because I see a lot of other people have serious issues in getting into Xykon's head.

For me, Xykon makes total sense when you actually accept his philosophy at face value. Xykon wants to be the Evil Overlord. It's actually all detailed in Start of Darkness comically and I won't spoil it but the simple fact is that motivation isn't really all that far removed from our world. In real life, there's plenty of kids who grow up impoverished who want to become gangsters (Goodfellas parodies aside) and in certain parts of the world, those who genuinely dream of a glamorous life as a drug kingpin. In the context of Xykon, he desires to be the Big Bad Guy.

I think a lot of people have difficulty with Xykon because he's a genre aware character like Elan. Elan is a bard and Xykon is a Big Evil Overlord. However, Elan WANTED to be a Bard and Xykon wanted to be a Big Evil Overlord so they know all of the tropes. A lot of the nonsensical elements of his character suddenly become entirely sensible. The key is to realize that half-the time, Xykon isn't being crazy for it's own sake, he's in-character.

(I remember the scene from Pulp Fiction where Jules and his partner kick down the door. They insist on getting into character first)

Part of what people have trouble with regarding Xykon and the quest for the Snarl is that its almost immaterial to Xykon. He's trying to conquer the world only as an excuse to continue his life as an Evil Overlord. Xykon just wants to take over the world because it sounds like a fun way to annoy good guys. I expect if he won, he would rule for a few years, get bored, then leave it all behind to conquor something else. Hell, I fully believe if he conquered the world with the Snarl he'd immediately set his sights on Heaven.

Honestly, were it possible, I'd not like to be James Bond. I'd prefer to be a Bond villain. Oh yes, I might die in the end at the hands of James, but I'd get a kickass pad and my own selection of beautiful assassins with a weird monster henchmen well before I died. That would be worth it.

It's why Xykon doesn't even need to watch Redcloak to constantly out think him. He knows that the Goblin will always think he's going to go to the goal when it's the journey that matters. Redcloak can't understand that Xykon lives the "Do nothing" lifestyle....he just does it by enjoying every moment he can with his Undead Hordes of Awesome.

Tempest Fennac
2008-04-17, 01:20 AM
While that is a good point about Xykon, this thread should really mention that it contains huge SoD spoilers in the title.

lemonhoney
2008-04-17, 01:38 AM
For me, I actually like Xykon a great deal more than Redcloak.

I stopped there because I saw the bolded "Start of Darkness" below. But I can tell you I pretty much agree with that line 100%. :smallbiggrin:

Shadowcaller
2008-04-17, 01:58 AM
Well I just dislike Xykon because he killed his own parents because they let a wizard into his room, but thats just me.:smallannoyed:

Tempest Fennac
2008-04-17, 02:32 AM
In Xykon's defence, Xavion was really irritating and snobbish. Also, he at least made sure his parents would never do anything like that again.:smalltongue:

Charles Phipps
2008-04-17, 03:05 AM
Well I just dislike Xykon because he killed his own parents because they let a wizard into his room, but thats just me.:smallannoyed:

Well to be fair, there's no indication that he didn't raise them as undead later. I confess though that Rich seriously miscalculated with the first scene if he intended Xykon to be written as pure evil.

When I was six years old, if I had my dog died and then he rose up as the undead...I would say "OMG, THIS IS THE COOLEST THING EVER!" Because that's how kids think.

Seriously, what 6 year old boy DOESN'T want an undead abomination against God as his pet?


While that is a good point about Xykon, this thread should really mention that it contains huge SoD spoilers in the title.

Fixed.

Tempest Fennac
2008-04-17, 03:29 AM
Thanks.

If I'm honest, I never wanted a pet zombie, but I see what you mean about how small children think. Rich's idea was presumably to show Xykon starting off as quite innocent while becoming a monster later on, hence the coffee scene; until then, his evil acts seemed to be more "careless" a lot of the time (eg: when he killed the Lizardfolk because his name was too long).

Charles Phipps
2008-04-17, 04:36 AM
Well if you want to overthink the joke.


Basically, Xykon gets a very warped view of death from a very young age if you have a beloved pet come back as an undead creature. Let's face it, a pet dying is often the first encounter many children have with death. Xykon basically got his favorite pet back because of necromancy, which means he's going to grow up viewing it as a very good thing.