I’ve been thinking a bit lately about Vane and Zalski. Vane is the protagonist of The Magic Council, and I just adore him. He’s not perfect, but he’s a hero at the end of the day–because he’s selfless. He strives to live up to the example of worthy role models, has a deep sense of gratitude as an orphan to those who have cared for him, and is determined to fulfill his duties and responsibilities. He has a deep sense of honor.

In that, he isn’t unlike his uncle Zalski Forzythe-the villain of book one of my trilogy, The Crimson League.

Honestly, Zalski and Vane are quite alike in temperament: they are both melancholics–verbally intelligent, deep thinkers, and principled.

This is where you see the distinction between temperament and character. They are not at ALL the same thing.

Though similar in temperament, Vane and Zalski make very different choices. Zalski was raised the son of a duke, but I envision he had good, honest, loving parents. Certainly, his father was an upstanding, honorable man who set him a good example and was present to him as he grew up.

Despite his wealth and noble birth, Zalski heard and experienced some indirect social injustice as a child. He loathed that he couldn’t practice magic publicly. He chose to brood on this and let it turn him bitter and vengeful.

Like Zalski, Vane was raised by honorable, good people who set him a good example. He was raised poor, though, and he suffered real, personal hurt as a child for having been born a sorcerer–something Zalski never experienced.

Objectively, I think Vane has more justification to turn bitter and hateful. By far. But he doesn’t do that. You see some flashes of the potential for it, and every time, Vane smothers the temptation. He refuses to let resentment or a victimhood mentality fester.

Vane chooses another path. That’s what I love about him. That’s what makes his story so powerful for me.