Evil hoards and stuff

Okay, let me preface this whatever-it-will-become post with my earliest ideas on the subject. My first thoughts when the larger question of villainous/evil/pedophilian fiction came up went to Lolita, a novel I still haven't read though I have seen two film versions. Part of me wants to say that James Mason (and later Cary Elwes) delivered such a captivating, torn performance that of course the end product may be justified as art. But that makes me think of what Rick said in class, about is this child pornography masquerading as art?, and I am not so sure. I mean, Sam's story about going home to the girlfriend's house where she keeps up a physical relationship with the wheelchaired stepfather who molested her as a child could be argued by some people to be in support of, or making allowances for the proliferation of child sexual abuse. But then there will always be those "some people" who try to make an argument for whatever agenda they support, using whatever forum or form they find most accessible. While I would consider Sam's story to be powerful in that it lets the narrator be flea-dipped into the extreme world of his female friend as he gains new perspective on the processes that molded her personality: "No, you're not like your mother at all" or however it is put, there could just as easily, perhaps, be a proponent of stepfather-to-stepdaughter incest who would point to this story as an instance of true human love, and it might be hard to disprove that claim, even if one was to protest that the female character was overcoming her mother's unending lack of charity with an ironic act of physical and spiritual self-sacrifice, or however her act might be described. And those wonderings got me to remember the insistance of generalized feminist theory which says, "Everything is political," which would mean that everything written (and conversely, everything read), is some kind of political statement (or act). And it is at around this point where things get cloudier for me, because as I remember, when I got into this being an artist thing, being political was what I did not want to do, and then I remember that when I started getting almost decent in the composition game I drafted a resolution to disassemble the student government at my school because they were forcing us to pay class dues to pay for the school dance (10th grade?). So, I don't know. If everything is political, even being apolitical is political, and I don't know where to go from there. The bottom line is somewhere around "I am not going to write to please anyone but myself." I mean, I can't write to please my grandparents, or my step-grandparents, who once said when I was in film school, "We can't wait for you to go out to Hollywood and make some quality, wholesome movies that we can all watch" (or something to that effect). And I don't know where the moral compass is going to take me. But I won't alienate the dirty, evil multitudes inside me just to please the chuchgoer in my family. As an artist, I cannot whitewash the messy ugliness that is just as much a part of my humanity as the rest. Maybe I can filter out the meanest bits of evil, to get to the balance we are looking for. But I can't write a story about happiness and puppy dogs and flowers without some hurt or want thrown in. Who can? And who would read that?
Oh yeah, I also thought of the Bill Shakespeare quote, "There is neither good nor bad, but thinking makes it so." That was part of the troubesome tip I was chewing on. I don't mean to sound like I am trumpeting the right to be heard for evil hoards, but I kind of am. But evil hoards all the time is just as boring after a while as happy sunshines all the time, so what do you do? Give it a name. All you can ask of yourself is that you did your best.