Evil for no reason but NOT cliche?

[Androxine Vortex]

I'm reading the Chronicles of Malus Darkblade. It's about a Dark Elf who gets possesed by a daemon and must retrieve 5 items of legend or his soul is lost. Now I know that I have heard a lot of fuss about villains being evil for no reason or being evil for the sake of being evil. I was even surprised that lots of people didn't like the Orcs in LOTR for that reason.

But I think it all depends on how you look at things. In this book, the Dark Elves are some really nasty people. They are extremly violent and literaly worship a God of Murder. It's funny though that when I read the story, the only reason for their violent cuture is by their creed that the strong survive and that they find power through pain. But these guys take it to extreme levels. They go around wearing flayed human skin as clothes, they have torture houses to bring slaves, and there are just so many assasinations tied into their bizarre politics.

Maybe it's just that I like the authors (yes two authors) that wrote this but for some reason when I read this I don't really question them. It's like, yeah it's very unlikely that a society like this would ever exist (to this degree) but sometimes I think it's best to just go along with it. I think sometimes cliche isn't always a bad thing, you know? I mean a restaurant opens by your house and you find out they sell burgers. Are you going to think it's cliche to sell burgers? No, you're probably going to order one!

I think sometimes authors are afraid that being cliche means being bad at writting. While some of this may be true in the sense of originality, it doesn't mean it will be bad. When I first heard that the Dark Elves in this story were going to be an evil, violent culture, I said, "Oh great, another one." But it was really well written. There were so many politics and customs involved that really brought their culture to life. One thing I really enjoyed was that the protagonist (Malus) wasn't portrayed as a bad-ass. If you look at him, you might think ooh hes really cool! He is, but he doesn't jsut strode around the battlefield killing everything without effort. The book clearly shows that he is a flawed character. He is despised by his entire family to boot!

I'm not sure if I had a "point" in making this thread. Maybe I wanted to hear your thoughts about "clicheness" or maybe I just wanted to go on about a really good book. Who knows? But with that being said, I do highly recomend this book!!

[Amanita]

Well, I wouldn't really call the set-up your describing "cliche". Usually, the "evil for no reason" people are the antagonists, a protagonist from a culture with moral beliefs different from most human ones is something quite different. If the dark elves were ugly, inhuman beings that could be killed by the heros with no remorse, this would be cliche.
There's one thing I've stumbled over in your description though. Why do they worthship a god of murder? Murder by definition is a term for unlawful killings, if the killings they committ aren't unlawful in their society, why would they call it that?
The second thing that would put me of is the fact that the character is the character's name. Seriously, a bit more creativity couldn't hurt with that one.

My opinion on cliches in general? I can't think of anything that would make any story where it's used bad. If used in an interesting and creative way, things that have been used plenty of time can be used well again. It gets problematic if too much of it get piled into one story though. Elves can surely be used well, but wise powerful elves having a feud with industrious dwarves that has to be overcome to win against some threat that might destroy the entire world? Not very likely a story I'm going to pick up. Too many of these things and a story feels like plagiarism even if, legally, it is not.
I absolutely hate the idea that fantasy has to include elves, dwarves, orcs and dragons to be fantasy as well. There's so much to it and people shouldn't limit themselves to this one path because one of the most famous authors used it.

[Kit]

If they worship a deity of murder, I would call that a reason for being evil. They are following their spiritual paths.

[Androxine Vortex]

If they worship a deity of murder, I would call that a reason for being evil. They are following their spiritual paths.

I guess so. I mean it's just sometimes when I'm reading it I often think to myself that it doesn't seam probable that they would just casualy comit all these various acts of evil. It's just so rooted into their culture I guess it just throws me off every now and then.

@Amanita
I actually thought the name was neat. In the Warhammer fantasy and 40K novels they tend to always make names resemble or be a spin-off of something else. Darkblade isn't like his literal last name

[Kit]

I mean it's just sometimes when I'm reading it I often think to myself that it doesn't seam probable that they would just casualy comit all these various acts of evil. It's just so rooted into their culture I guess it just throws me off every now and then.

Well, then you also have to get into the definition of "evil". To divert from the topic of that particular story (since I haven't read it), theoretically if behavior is that deeply rooted in a culture, perhaps that culture doesn't even consider it evil.

[Konstanz]

I assume you are not familiar with the Warhammer lore about the Dark Elves? Because there IS a reason they are twisted. It is a traditional story about one people turning into two (high elves/dark elves). The dark elves were tempted by Slaanesh (god of pleasure) and they were cast out. War ensued and the dark elves were driven into barren lands were they now live.

Slaaneshi worship was banned over the years (bad influence) although many still worship the god with orgies and torture. Now the culture of the dark elves is focused on proving their superiority by enslaving other races, torturing them etc. And it all has a very sadist touch.

So there is some reason for their "evil" ways. And I really loved the first omnibus (going to buy the second). Great books.

[ascanius]

Although I think I may be in the minority here, and I haven't read the books you mention I do have one thought. I seen nothing wrong with having evil without reason in a book/story. Think about it, even if we are given a reason why someone does something truly evil, child rape comes to mind, can you actually understand it can you actually forgive the perpetrator? That is my definition of evil in my books. I do think that there are evil actions and even though we try to explain them away to lessen their severity those action will always remain truly evil no matter how we try to explain them. But his is just my thought.

[SeverinR]

Most of the time evil has a reason, the reason just isn't specified.
If the author doesn't have a reason, there is a good chance it will seem random and unreal.

It does seem like the reason is the diety. This gives the evil a focus, and different events will be handled differently relating to the diety. They can be kind in one situation, and then be evil in the name of the god the next. With the victim totally unaware of the reason.

[Steerpike]

There's nothing wrong with having fantasy races that are simply inherently evil, however. Those that have an in-born tendency to it.

[Kit]

There's nothing wrong with having fantasy races that are simply inherently evil, however. Those that have an in-born tendency to it.

I dunno, I like to feel like there's a rationale of some sort for it, even if it's only "they want what you have" or "this is how their culture taught them to treat outsiders".

The whole "They're evil, just because they're trolls and trolls are bad" thing reminds me of very early fairy tales and baby books. It seems too simplistic.

Maybe I'm going off the deep end of political correctness here, but sometimes I wonder if that whole "They're bad, just because of what they are" thing that was common in stories/books/tv when we were kids is partly to blame for racism, bullying, etc. Kids get a message of "they're bad just because of what they are, and what they look like" so they learn to judge people too quickly based on what they are or what they look like.

I think we *should* look for a reason for their badness, as well as not taking it as a given immediately that they are bad at all.