The morals of a protagonist have a big effect on the nature of a story. A protagonist can be a compassionate soul whose only purpose in life is to help others and do what’s right, or they could be a sociopath who kills and destroys whatever they come across in pursuit of their goals. There are distinct advantages and disadvantages that appear when a protagonist is good, evil, or something in between.
On one end of the spectrum are the heroic types. These are individuals with fairly straightforward morals that most humans would generally identify as “good”. Admittedly, my own biases might come into play here since good and evil can vary from culture to culture. What I would consider basic good traits would be things like kindness, compassion, altruism, and trustworthiness. These people risk themselves to protect others. They’re the ones who always keep to their word and refuses to harm people unless absolutely necessary. These protagonists are often, but not necessarily, idealistic folks seeking to make a better world.
It can be nice seeing someone devote themselves to doing what is right even when the situation is dire. The biggest problem is that these protagonists can come off as rather generic. Helping others and doings what’s right can be rather cliché things to strive for and can give the impression that there isn’t much else to the character. I’ve also seen works where writers decide that making a protagonist a good person is a substitute for having an interesting personality or motivations. At the same time, it can leave me feeling optimistic to see good people striving to make the world a better place and these types of protagonists are easy to root for and sympathize with.
Evil protagonists are arguable more like villain protagonists. They may have one or two redeeming qualities, but nothing that really makes up for the evil they commit. It doesn’t really matter if someone never lies or is polite if they spend all their time murdering people and wearing their skins.
I actually haven’t personally consumed a lot of media featuring evil protagonists. I just have a lot of difficulty following the story of someone truly vile even if they’re up to interesting stuff. There’s always the sense that they should be getting their comeuppance at some point, but it feels rather empty to read an entire story about someone I don’t like purely to see them suffer at the end. There’s also always the possibility that an evil protagonist just gets away with their crimes which feels even worse. If a character doesn’t get punished for doing bad things they need to be likable enough that I don’t mind that fact, but this is particularly difficult with someone who is just straight up evil.
I think that part of the appeal of an evil protagonist is a kind of twisted desire to see the darkest parts of humanity. Perhaps, seeing evil up close and personal gives greater insight into people or it can be kind of cathartic to see someone else doing whatever they want regardless of the consequences. There is a kind of freedom in being evil that can be appealing to see.
Morally ambiguous protagonists tend to include a lot of anti-hero archetypes, but I feel that it is a very broad category. These protagonists can range from mass murderers who only kill bad people to individuals who simply have more self-serving motivations such as making money or simple survival. Morally ambiguous protagonists definitely have a lot more spice to them and are arguably truer to real life since most humans have a mixture of good and bad traits.
A downside of a morally ambiguous protagonist is that it can be annoying not knowing what label to put on them. Should I be rooting for this person or wishing for their downfall? I’ve personally experienced situations where I was doing both and it made me very uncomfortable which was probably the writer’s intention. There is also the possibility of a misfire. The writer intended for a protagonist to be morally ambiguous when in reality they’re just a hero who sometimes litters or a villain who occasionally recycles. There’s an attempt to play around with morality and add complexity, but it simply doesn’t work and the failure weakens the story as a whole.
My personal favorite variation on morally ambiguous protagonists is when they’re naturally inclined towards being evil and must fight against their own nature in order to do what is right. A good example would be the protagonist, John Cleaver, from “I Am Not a Serial Killer”. John is a sociopath with a lot of sadistic fantasies about murder and torture. He keeps these impulses at bay by having strict rules he follows, but has trouble sticking to these rules when an actual serial killer shows up in town and he’s the only one that can stop them. He does everything he can to do what’s right even when it makes him miserable. I like how it reminds me that people don’t need to have a pure and virtuous mind to be a good person.
The morality of a protagonist does a lot to shape a story. Good protagonists can be inspiring to watch, but can run into the trap of being generic. Evil protagonists can offer insight into the darker side of humanity, but lack sympathetic qualities. Morally ambiguous protagonists have an extra layer of complexity although they can be difficult to pull off. No matter what the morality of a protagonist it is important to keep their morals in mind and use them to enhance the story as a whole.