The Appeal of TV Bad Boys

In the past few months, I have become disturbingly aware of my inclination to develop bizarre infatuations with television characters that display immoral, and often evil, tendencies. I haven't come to any concrete conclusions about what these characters represent to me or why they have such a magnetic pull, but I am going to discuss why they remain interesting and sympathetic when by all reasonable standards, they should be abhorrent.

My first "bad boy" crush was Spike on "Buffy the Vampire Slayer." A platinum-haired vampire with echoes of Sid Vicious, Spike was a marked contrast to other Buffy villains. This was a character who actually enjoyed his machinations for world dominance, his twisted love affair with the vision-addled lunatic Druscilla, and a witty repartee with his enemies. A relief after the guilt-laden Angel years, Spike refused to apologize for his killer nature and the glee put into his schemes was refreshing. In later years, after a chip in his brain effectively muzzled Spike, he developed a hilariously pathetic crush on Buffy, proved he could be loyal, and ultimately endeavored on a quest to retrieve his soul. It was amusing to watch Spike's belabored attempts to romance Buffy without relinquishing his evil ways. And I certainly valued his unapologetic views on the nature of evil. That said, in Season 6 he did try to rape Buffy, and there's no excuse for that. But that doesn't mean that we Spike lovers didn't reason out motivations or excuse past behavior once Spike had regained his soul. Was that wrong of us?

My next serious crush was Logan Echolls, the smuggest rich boy in the "Veronica Mars" landscape, and described as a "psychotic jackass" in the very first episode. True, for the first half of Season One, Logan was pretty despicable, taunting, trashing, whoring and generally thinking he's the coolest cat in town. But he eventually displayed some honor and sense of fairplay, we learned he was physically abused, saw he had two horrible parents, and once he fell in love with Veronica, their were lots of glimpses into the raw and wounded boy inside. Again, a lot of his bad behavior became understandable. In addition to seeing the softer side, Logan is one of the wittier and most expressive characters on the show, often being handed my favorite lines ("Rode Hard, meet Put Away Wet"; "Annoy, tiny blonde one, annoy like the wind!"), delivered with gusto by the adorable Jason Dohring. So I can forgive him for being a rich, conceited asshole, right?

Most recently, it's Chuck Bass from my new guilty pleasure "Gossip Girl." He's slimier, intent on scheming destruction, master of the slow, evil glare, and could be accused of two attempted rapes in the very first episode. But no one else takes more addictively exuberant pleasure in their plans and put-downs. Again, Chuck gets some of the best lines ("He looks like Matthew McConaughey between movies"; "Don't eff with an effer"), and we finally got to see some heart buried underneath all that sleaze when he fell hard for resident Queen-Bee Blair, only to have his heart broken. (And let it be said that they had some smokin' chemistry!) He may be the king of the snobs, but like Spike, he acknowledges the advantages of his position, sees the world in shades of gray, and doesn't whine about the downside; he knows he's lucky. I guess I appreciate the honesty and the awareness instead of the "good" rich boys who consistently complain about all the strings attached to their wealth.

Don't get me wrong, I love the Jim's of the entertainment world just as much (and don't forget my undying adoration for Pacey Witter) but the characters I have explained above have HUGE cult fanbases, and are usually among the most, if not the most, popular characters on their respective shows, despite, or maybe because of their mean and unforgivable behavior. I guess it's comforting to know I'm not alone, although I do worry I'm complicit in a teenage pandemic of evil lust. Why do we love them so much?

It may have to do with the actors. James Marsters (Spike), Jason Dohring (Logan) and Ed Westwick (Chuck) are each one of the top actors on their show. Marsters is playing a peroxide-headed villain, but from week to week you pity him, sympathize with him, and even when the show veers into outrageous territory (you wouldn't think a show called "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" was capable of that), he is still convincing. Dohring can squeeze the most out of a dramatic encounter, but he's not a scenery-chewer; he does subtle just as well. And when you compare Logan to the absolute hot and cold woodeness of his counterpart, "good" rich-boy Duncan, it's not hard to see why Logan is the more compelling character. As for Chuck Bass, Ed Westwick is second only to Leighton Meester (Blair) in acting ability; he pulls of a sneer better than just about anyone I've seen. And again, side him up against his male competition, boring Nate (played to drowsy effect by Chace Crawford), and self-righteous Dan (Penn Badgley is cute, but his character is a bit morally-superior) and Chuck is by far the most fun to watch. (And it must be said, each of these "bad boys" has a virility that oozes from their every pore, and I'm not ashamed to say, I am not immune.)

So I guess it boils down to charisma; beats moral upstanding every time. Rest assured, in real life I don't go for the evil undead, the rich sociopaths, or the attempted rapists. I just enjoy a bit of moral ambiguity in my television shows. The good characters tend to get a little boring and their plotlines can stagnate more easily (although this happens to the bad ones too - just look at Christian Troy's endlessly recycled and crazy character arc on "Nip/Tuck"). I suppose I live vicariously through their "naughtiness," watching them say the mean, but clever things it is inappropriate to say in real life. The fact that I find them all physically attractive is just a bonus.