Good and Evil.

[ALB2012]

The Spiraling Mind: Good vs. Evil – That Tired Ol’ Trope?

Now I am not sure I agree with this. Yes I tend to think many people think they do good things or even bad things for good reasons but there are evil people and evil situations in the world and they do not pretend to be otherwise.
However, that said, good and evil are relative. One person's terrorist is another's freedom fighter.

Now some people espouse capital punishment- either for societies revenge on the victim or to deter. Of course some people do not.

How does this relate to writing? Often there is a clear case of Good Versus Evil in fantasy. Sauron vs the fellowship, Voldemort vs Harry Potter etc. In many cases it is not as clear cut- I will probably get shot down for saying this but to an extent Star Wars- the films tell us the Empire is evil and the rebels are the good guys but they still use terror tactics, they kill, they steal, they destroy and the bring civil war. At the end the Emperor falls (at least for a while) and everyone is happy but the films end with that - so what next, someone has to be in charge and you can bet there are people squabbling over it, usually people who want power shouldn't have it. From relative if rather restrictive peace to civil war and upheaval.
Often there are shades of grey, including people doing what they believe is right, or what is needed, which are not always the same thing.

I do think in writing there is still a place for good and evil, most people like to root for the good guys and for them to be defined as such and cheer when the baddie gets his comeupance. The shades of grey can be ambiguous and misleading. Yet it is true often people look for others to blame, because they are powerless, ignorant or in some cases just bigoted and I think to an extent the good and evil argument reflects this- we blame the alien nazi zombies or the Dark Lord of Zog because we do.

So within my own writing the good guys are not actually that good, they kill, they steal they deceive but it is for a good reason, or at least they think so but at the end of it all will be war and upheaval. The "bad guys" also believe what they are doing is right, or a right. They are protecting the populace, they are maintaining the status quo etc etc, but in the end there will be war...


Anyway I am not sure that makes any sense at all. I did think it was an interesting article.

 

[Steerpike]

Whether you have clear-cut cases of evil people in the real world or not doesn't necessarily have any bearing on whether you can have it in fiction. It works fine for me, and I also enjoy the shades-of-gray stories. It is probably no accident that the most enduring works, as well as the most of the works of great popularity, have well-defined good-guy/bad-guy sides (Narnia, LoTR, Potter, Twilight, Hunger Games, and so on). In terms of popular appeal, Game of Thrones is probably the most popular on the "gray" side.

 

[ALB2012]

Yea think I was meandering a bit there. I think both work and often the good vs evil is just what is needed, the inner satisfaction when some bad guy gets splatted The real world is why we read fantasy and other fiction. If I want to see what the real world is like I will turn on the news.

 

[Shockley]

I think the broad idea of 'history is gray' is something that doesn't stand up well in the long run. Right now we might be able to look at something like Sri Lanka and say 'this is a gray issue' but three hundred years from now, chances are people are going to look back at that and find a clear 'good guy,' even if a country or two broadly disagrees with that interpretation.

Most events become caricatures or lose their gore. Alexander the Great, for example - few people get that worked up over Alexander, even though he killed many thousands of people and subjugated many nations and tribes to his idea of what 'culture' and 'civilization' was. Or more recently, Hitler - anyone arguing for the Nazis is quickly (and I daresay justly) smacked down as evil in their own right.

 

[emma]

The thing to remember about "good" vs "evil" is that the definitions are different depending on what side you're on and that historical events and facts tend to be written by the victors of the conflicts. To use the Hitler example...if he'd won what is know of historical events before his time would now be completely altered and lost in the historical "facts" the Nazis would have replaced them with. A hundred plus years later and no one would be alive to remember differently.

And while the idea of good vs evil can sound old and over done story wise...the truth of the matter is we tend to look at the things in our lives as good for us or bad for us and it seems natural that the fictional beings we write do so as well.

 

[JCFarnham]

The issue of whether true evil exists outside of fiction is a debatable one. Lets a grab modern example: Anders Brevik (to be honest I don't care if I spelt that wrong.) Most people would call him a serious piece of work, properly evil right? He commited a true horror. But in his mind, someone needed to be a martyr in order to change an evil he percieved. So to him he's the good guy. No one can say for sure, but I bet Hitler was twisted enough to reason his way to sleep at night...

Anyway, my point is very much echoing other opinions in this thread. It's all a matter of perception. Therefore, you could say that the question of whether your story is "shades of grey" or a "good vs evil" story, falls to the perceptions of your POV character. If they think in grey then its grey, but if they're strong good vs. evil then that's probably how your story will be painted.

That how I do it anyway, but I think even in those cases the story would have hints of grey in it. Between the lines. Who knows?

I think there is a place for it, just so long as you realise your characters need to be 3-dimensional as well. That particular blogger is on a bit of a rant......

 

[Steerpike]

I disagree that it is always a matter of perception. An evil act doesn't become less evil because the person committing it perceives it as good. Would Hitler's gassing of Jews be less evil if we knew he had a rationale for it that let him rest his head at night? Would it even be less evil if a large portion of the world were to say he was right to do it? I don't think so.

 

[JCFarnham]

I disagree that it is always a matter of perception. An evil act doesn't become less evil because the person committing it perceives it as good. Would Hitler's gassing of Jews be less evil if we knew he had a rationale for it that let him rest his head at night? Would it even be less evil if a large portion of the world were to say he was right to do it? I don't think so.

Well, yeah, but you're somewhat missing my point (admittedly I can always state things more clearly). Of course it doesn't become less evil, but when we're talking about fiction, perception does matter. Who your point of view character is will/should very much dictate how things are viewed. To me at least. That's where the good/evil/shade of grey things comes in. I was trying to use a readily avaliable example to show something. Namely, we think these people are evil. They are. But why do they do these things?

That's the kind of thing fiction can explore you know.

 

[Xaysai]

I'm always more interested in evil in the more "gray area/perspective" sense.

Evil as in, "this evil thing wants to destroy us because it's just plain evil" doesn't really do anything for me.

I enjoy being almost forced to understand the evil deed from the perspective of the perpetrator.

In real life, I don't believe in the evil of a supernatural or biblical sense. However, I am forced to believe that evil does exist in the acts of humans, such as someone who forces a mother or father to watch while they rape and kill their young child.

 

[Penpilot]

I don't know that article felt a bit preachy. The author of the article doesn't like straight back and white morality in stories so she thinks everyone else should feel the same. She said literature should teach us something. Well I don't necessarily read to be taught something. Sometimes I read a story because it's fun escapism. Sometimes I like to visit a world where things are black and white, where good always triumphs and the hero gets the gal, or vice versa.

Why? Because sometimes life gives me all the gray we can handle, and I want to taste something different, something black and white. Just because a story has a black and white morality to it doesn't make it bad and just because as story is gray doesn't make it automatically good.

There's room for all types of stories in this world, from simple black and white to all things in between. They're all part of life and just because one hasn't seen it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. There are some people who do some pretty evil things without good reason and some people who do tremendously altruistic things to.

If the author of that article has a hard time finding stories with gray morality, I say she's not looking very hard. In some respects this is a golden age for TV. There are tons of shows like the Sopranos, Dexter, The Walking dead, Breaking Bad, etc where morality is firmly entrenched in the gray. And I'm sure there are even more in books and the movies.

Just because you don't like chocolate ice cream don't tell me it's a crappy flavor, because it isn't.

 

[Steerpike]

I think that's true, JC, but I think the reader will also overrule the viewpoint character's perceptions on good and evil according to their own values and beliefs. Take, for instance, the narrator of Lolita, one Humbert Humbert. I expect (or at least hope) that not many people will buy into his rationalizations for his affair with young Dolores Haze.

 

[Anders Ämting]

I write my heroes as good as you can reasonable expect a real person to be, and I write my villains as evil as you can reasonably expect a real person to be. It think that works out pretty well.

 

[SineNomine]

There is certainly a place, a growing one at that, for literature that delves into the shades of gray (...ugh...) of human interaction, particularly since delving into a more complicated and nuanced set of motives in protagonists, and especially in antagonists, adds verisimilitude. In fantasy though, it can get awkward, because of fantasy's link to the mythic and legendary. For better or worse, I think that ultimately it is tales that can be reduced down to good vs evil that end up being timeless and classic. There is something deep inside us that just CRAVES a hero you adore and a villian you despise without having to worry that the hero sometimes kicks a puppy and the the villian has this really interesting argument as to why what he is doing is right.

 

[Anders Ämting]

Alexander the Great, for example - few people get that worked up over Alexander, even though he killed many thousands of people and subjugated many nations and tribes to his idea of what 'culture' and 'civilization' was. Or more recently, Hitler - anyone arguing for the Nazis is quickly (and I daresay justly) smacked down as evil in their own right.

Important distinction: Hitler lost. Alexander is considered one of most successful commanders in human history.

History is written by the winners, indeed.

The issue of whether true evil exists outside of fiction is a debatable one. Lets a grab modern example: Anders Brevik (to be honest I don't care if I spelt that wrong.) Most people would call him a serious piece of work, properly evil right? He commited a true horror. But in his mind, someone needed to be a martyr in order to change an evil he percieved. So to him he's the good guy.

Sure, but there is more to being "good" than just thinking you are good. Just because you think of yourself as the good guy, it doesn't mean you're not monstrously wrong.

Most cultures tend to agree that being "good" involves upholding certain standards and virtues - being honorable, showing mercy, having a strong and accurate sense of justice, etc. What matters is how you conduct yourself, not your intention. (Hence: "The road to hell is paved by good intentions." It's a reminder that you will be judged by your actions, not by what you tried to achieve.)

Breivik killed a lot of defenseless, innocent young people. Even if he genuinely thought he was doing it for a good cause, it doesn't change the fact that he probably doesn't even know what words like "mercy" and "justice" actually means.

Well, yeah, but you're somewhat missing my point (admittedly I can always state things more clearly). Of course it doesn't become less evil, but when we're talking about fiction, perception does matter. Who your point of view character is will/should very much dictate how things are viewed. To me at least. That's where the good/evil/shade of grey things comes in. I was trying to use a readily avaliable example to show something. Namely, we think these people are evil. They are. But why do they do these things?

I don't think their motivations are particularly interesting - again, they do evil evil things mainly because they either cannot comprehend or do not care about basic human virtues: "It's okay to kill innoncent people for my cause, because I can see no actual value in showing them mercy or kindness," etc. Any human who doesn't value human life can become a killer for the sake of something he does value.

They are people whose values have turned out wrong. If anything, exploring exactly what's wrong with them is more interesting than their goals and ideals.

 

[atkogirl85]

Have to admit I had a bit of a giggle while reading the blog.

Seriously? Blaming entertainment media's 'forced' use of good & evil for society's issues? haha. People's attitudes, fear, trust etc of others is formed by experience, actions and life... I can't see anyone reading LOTR or watching an action flick and suddenly thinking it's 'me against them' or 'everyones out to get me' and so on.

Without the element of good vs evil literature and film would be pretty darn boring. Watching an old man teach a woman how to feed her kids sound like ZZZ-ville to me... and almost everyone else. And for those who what that happy-happy growth journey muck - That is what Chick Lit and Chick Flicks are for!!

And as for whether evil exists in the real world? Of course it does. Evil is defined as morally wrong or bad; immoral; wicked/Profoundly immoral and malevolent. Serial Killing Sociopaths... peadophiles... Serial Rapists... I don't think anyone would try to justify the 'goodness' or 'perceived right' of those examples. They would still be evil even if we had been ruled by hitler, i hope

overall, pretty funny funny

 

[JCFarnham]

They are people whose values have turned out wrong. If anything, exploring exactly what's wrong with them is more interesting than their goals and ideals.

Exactly my point

 

[Shockley]

Important distinction: Hitler lost. Alexander is considered one of most successful commanders in human history.

History is written by the winners, indeed.

I think the important distinction is that Alexander wasn't a total waste of human life who did evil things. He conducted war, which is not great, but he was very peaceful and conciliatory once his campaigns were concluded.

A better example might be Napoleon. Napoleon lost, but is generally regarded as a more positive figure than the men who took him down - the Duke of Wellington and Von Blucher.

 

[ALB2012]

I agree the article was pretty one sided. Yes the media portrays good and evil and them and us, of course but this has always been the case. What would you rather watch, the hobbits defeating Sauron, the young Jedi defeating the wicked Emperor and redeeming his father, James Bond defeating Blofeld or some fluffy film where some guy says to the downtrodden wife, "here grow vegetables to feed your kids."

I live action films, I like fantasy and sci fi and I want my fights to be exciting, realistic maybe not. Sometimes the escapism of Arnie beating the snot out of some henchies or the armies of middle earth beating the Dark Lord are what I need. It is a means to escape from the grey humdrum.

 

[ALB2012]

I wrote that about 3 times. It has been a hard week and I think my brain has left. Apologies if it was gibberish, when I am tired I find it difficult to get the scrambled thoughts in my head to coherent sentences.

 

[Feo Takahari]

I don't think you can make evil interesting unless you in some way play off the idea that it's an aberration. This is not to say that you can't write an interesting story with a deadpan portrayal of an evil villain, only that the villain won't be what makes it interesting--he'll just be a smarter stand-in for disease, disaster, or whatever other impersonal force you might use to menace your heroes. Nor is it to say that you can't make an evil villain interesting at all--Monster (the manga, not the movie) does a very good job of portraying just how creepy a legitimately evil villain is when surrounded by selfish, greedy, or otherwise more human villains.

(Then again, my definition of "evil" is a lot stricter than most people's . . .)

P.S. To expand on that: In Eternal, I wrote an antagonist who enslaves, tortures, and murders men, women, and children for the sake of her twisted ideology. I didn't consider her evil--after all, she'd convinced herself she was serving the greater good. Nor would I portray a character as evil who did horrible things out of greed, or even for the sake of pointless vengeance. To me, evil is when people harm other people with no purpose and no excuse other than that they can, and the people who commit great evil are rare enough and horrific enough that we shouldn't trivialize them.

P.P.S. I suppose I might be reaching in saying that killing for an ideology isn't evil--my impression is that, say, Klansmen who kill black people feel the same sick glee as the kinds of torturers and murderers I typically call evil. Still, there's also some faint kinship to what small children feel when they kick over anthills, and I don't want to call that evil, so I need to place a dividing line somewhere, and I (somewhat arbitrarily) put it at there being not even the thinnest excuse. I have no objection to people writing about Klansman-level "evil", since that's something that's common in real life--I just don't call it evil.