Randall Flagg - Characterization

Characterization

A common characteristic of Randall Flagg is his embodiment of evil. When Stephen King was first creating his vision of Flagg, he based him around what he believed evil to represent. To King, Flagg is “somebody who’s very charismatic, laughs a lot, tremendously attractive to men and women both, and somebody who just appeals to the worst in all of us.” This idea is carried into The Stand, Flagg’s first appearance in literature. Here, Flagg is characterized as the personification of evil set against Mother Abagail, the personification of good. The character of Tom Cullen describes Flagg as having the ability to kill animals and give men cancer simply by looking at them. Cullen goes on to refer to him as the demon Legion as well as the Lovecraftian entity Nyarlathotep. Stephen King wanted Flagg to represent a "gigantic evil", though the character was supposed to taper off by the end of The Stand. King stated, "I think the Devil is probably a pretty funny guy. Flagg is like the archetype of everything that I know about real evil, going back all the way to Charles Starkweather in the '50s — he is somebody who is empty and who has to be filled with other people's hates, fears, resentments, laughs. Flagg, Koresh, Jim Jones, Hitler — they're all basically the same guy." Though Flagg was never intended to represent Satan, that did not detract from what King sees as his ultimate goal. King notes that it does not matter who sees him, or how they see him — Flagg can appear differently to each individual — but that his message is always the same: "I know all the things that you want and I can give them to you and all you have to do is give me your soul."

Apart from King’s interpretation, literary critics have noted Flagg’s penchant for evil. Tony Magistrale sees Flagg as a Shakespearian villain, comparing him to such Shakespeare villains as Iago, Edmund, and Richard III, even going so far as to say that Flagg is an antihero. Magistrale states that Flagg’s evil is based on his ability to cause conflict where it has never been before, and destroy things simply because they are united; though he seeks power, that power is just a resource for him to achieve a higher degree of destruction. Heidi Stringell finds that Flagg truly is “an embodiment of pure evil” and that King sees good and evil as “real forces”, and that Flagg’s representation of pure evil is validated by the fact that “he is a killer, a maker of mischief, a liar, and a tempter”. To Stringell, Flagg’s disappearance at the end of The Stand shows that “evil ultimately leads nowhere”. The author goes into further detail when she calls Flagg a “generic hybrid” of the character archetypes “the Dark Man and the Trickster”. To her, it is the combination of these two characteristics, both found in different cultural realms, that force people to face their own “flawed humanity” with the “amorality” Flagg represents.

Douglas Winter believes that Flagg actually epitomizes the Gothic villain — an “atavistic embodiment of evil” — as his appearance is indistinct, malleable and a “collection of masks”. Flagg symbolizes “the inexplicable fear of the return of bygone powers — both technological and, as his last name intimates, sociopolitical”. Like other Gothic villains, Flagg’s plans seem to fail at every turn, while seeming to need to convince others of his importance. Winter states that Flagg is a Miltonic superman who receives his strength from some dark, mysterious source. He compares Flagg to J. R. R. Tolkien’s Sauron, from The Lord of the Rings, in that both collapse when directly confronted. Alissa Stickler describes Flagg as a “contemporary medievalist interpretation on the themes of evil, magic and the (d)evil figure”. Stickler likened Flagg’s presence to that of Merlin whispering in the ear of Arthur; she notes that Flagg is politically powerful in both The Stand and The Eyes of the Dragon, but that he uses his power differently in each novel and challenges the depictions of evil and witchcraft that was common in medieval times. First, she explains that there does not appear to be a higher power to which Flagg “must appeal to his abilities”, as there typically is with the traditional evil. Flagg appears more as a “humanesque evil”, which ultimately works against him as much as it does for him. Flagg’s supernatural knowledge is far from infallible, and that customary depiction of black and white is replaced with an “acceptance of a shadowy gray area”. She states that even though Flagg appears “terrifying and supernatural”, thanks to King’s narration, there are no absolutes. Stickler concluded that Flagg represents the medieval monster of both past and future, which challenges and at the same time supports the perception of the literary Middle Ages.

Flagg’s representation of evil has its detractors. In his essay "The Glass-Eyed Dragon", author L. Sprague de Camp criticized Flagg's appearance in Eyes of the Dragon, saying that Flagg was one of the least believable characters in the book and that he was too evil to be credible. According to de Camp, absolute evil is hard to believe in and, where men like Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin believed that they were actually bettering the world by their actions, Flagg only enjoys causing destruction and chaos. The author goes on to say that Flagg fails to see that there are no advantages in his actions.

Walter's eyes widen, and for a moment he looks deeply hurt. This may be absurd, but Callahan is looking into the man's deep eyes and feels sure that the emotion is nonetheless genuine. And the surety robs him of any last hope that all this might be a dream, or a final brilliant interval before true death. In dreams — his, at least — the bad guys, the scary guys, never have complex emotions.

Representing evil is not the only characteristic seen by critics. Joseph Reino commented that Randall Flagg presence in The Stand was "Stephen King's version of a pestilential Big Brother". Tony Magistrale revisited the character in a second book, this time comparing him to Norman Mailer. Here, Magistrale states that in The Stand Flagg gives the reader an “illustration of King’s jaundiced perspective of modern America”, as he presents the natural consequence of worshipping technology and sacrificing “moral integrity to the quest for synthetic productivity”.

Flagg's backstory as a victim of rape and the impact that it has on his characterization has been discussed. Patrick McAleer argues that Flagg's situation is the most sympathetic out of all of King's characters, and that his brand of evil could be of retribution; "n suspending any disbelief in the possibility that reprisal is a reaction to rape, the life of Flagg becomes one that looks to strike a balance for the sexual crime committed against him. And although Flagg's possible search for justice and balance is that which becomes imbalanced and even prejudiced, the mitigating factor here is that Flagg is not an originator of evil - he is just caught up in its web as another wronged individual seeking justice." McAleer compares Flagg to the character of Satan from Paradise Lost, suggesting that he too may be a "fallen angel who has a valid case supporting his devilry." While pointing out that Flagg can be seen "relishing in evil deeds at almost every juncture", McAleer states that no judgement can be passed without the full story and context explaining his actions.