Two protagonists in conflict with each other

[Jabrosky]

Before I begin, let me sketch out my core concept:

There is a river valley bisecting a desert which houses two fundamentally different cultures, one in the river's marshy delta and the other further upriver. The delta culture is populated by tawny Middle Eastern-type people (the Moonchildren) who worship a Moon God whereas the upriver culture has black people )the Sunchildren) whose deity is a Sun Goddess. At one point in history, the Sun culture conquered the Moon culture, unifying the river valley into a single kingdom (known as the Two Lands), and married the Sun Goddess to the Moon God. However, this "marriage" has since broken up due to dynastic decay, and the Sun and Moon kingdoms are at war again.

Enter the heroine Ouggiri, a Sun princess who fights for her aging father King Ajala. Her goal is to bring the Two Lands back under Sun control, a task she has inherited from her ancestors since the split. Her main antagonist will be Amelon, a prince of the Moonchildren who also fights for an aging parent, in his case his mother Queen Salome.

Neither the Sun nor Moon kingdoms are alone in the world; both have to recruit allies from neighboring polities. Here the Moonchildren have the upper hand, for Amelon has managed to court the mighty Thunderchildren across the sea to his favor. Ouggiri will have to figure out how to counter such a strong force, and then there is her lingering doubt that the war she fights is even justified...

Actually, that last clause brings to mind one of my challenges: I want the story to be a rather "gray" one, meaning that neither the Moonchildren nor the Sunchildren are more justified or morally superior to each other; it's not a simplistic "good guys vs bad guys" story. However, when I first conceived of this idea, I expected to tell it from Ouggiri's perspective, which would bias the story in her favor. Now I'm considering telling it with alternating PoVs, with Ouggiri as the protagonist for half the chapters and Amelon for the other half. In such a scenario, each protagonist would also be an antagonist. Could such an even-handed approach work, or do I need to pick a side in this dispute?

 

[bbeams32]

I wouldn't think you would need to take a side. I like the idea of alternating POV's, leaving it up to the reader to decide who they think is right/justified. Then, depending on who you plan on succeeding(if indeed you do plan one to win over the other), the end will have diverse emotional impacts based on who the reader feels is on the side of "good"...or something like that.

 

[Leif GS Notae]

I will admit, this is a tough hurtle to jump. Many people want a protagonist to suffer because it is often an escape from their lives and something they can identify with. If this story isn't handled well, it can turn off more people than intrigue them because they can't identify or they feel it is too much like their lives to dedicate time to read.

Suffice to say, you have a balancing act to do. I know I would put in a protagonist from one of your "conscripted" nations, someone young who is open to seeing this and still able to take on the burdens of punishment. This could also be a good point to your story, even those on the outside of your world can succeed and bring peace to warring cultures...

Best of luck, hope it all works out for you.

 

[ThinkerX]

The general situation sounds a great deal like real world ancient egypt a time or three.

 

[Mindfire]

The general situation sounds a great deal like real world ancient egypt a time or three.

I was going to say that. lol

 

[Jabrosky]

The general situation sounds a great deal like real world ancient egypt a time or three.

As a matter of fact, I got the idea from the historical conflict between Lower and Upper Egypt. According to Egyptian traditions, Egypt began as two separate kingdoms, Lower Egypt in the north and Upper Egypt in the south. Upper Egypt under Narmer/Menes conquered Lower Egypt, ushering in what's conventionally called the First Dynasty, but this conflict would resurface during the First and Second Intermediate Periods (each of which also ended with the southern faction conquering the north). However, even when the country was united, it was habitually referred to as the Two Lands in reference to this past division.

Even the racial difference between my Moonchildren and Sunchildren draws from this Lower/Upper Egyptian contrast. Some scholars used to claim that Lower Egyptians were originally more Middle Eastern or Mediterranean in appearance than Upper Egyptians, who conversely tended to be more Negroid or Black. I'm not going to get into how accurate this claim is, but I thought the idea of two different racial groups merging into one kingdom and then re-fissioning had potential for fantasy worldbuilding.

 

[Rullenzar]

I would make a comedy out of this. Have the whole story as a conflict between the two then when everyone thinks the conflict is about to be resolved in steps 'the third wheel' and he wins. Leaving the two the whole story was about to kill each other or kill the third party and team up or something.

First thing I thought of when I saw this thread is 'OMG THIS WOULD MAKE A GREAT COMEDY LOL.'

 

[Shockley]

Depends on how the story climaxes, I guess. If it turns into something where the Thunder Children are the actual bad guys (for example) and the two POVs have to come together against them, it could work. Otherwise, people will feel cheated when their favorite side loses.

 

[Mindfire]

Have you considered a peaceful resolution?

Here's what I'm thinking. Maybe Ouggiri and Amelon see each other as "worthy opponents" rather than actually hating each other. They're royalty, so they're probably rarely on the field of battle, and therefore they're more likely to view it as a sport or chess game. Then, Amelon gets the upper hand by allying himself with the Thunderchildren. However, the alliance is dangerous because the Thunderchildren are notoriously untrustworthy. They then betray Amelon and kidnap him and Ouggiri, causing the two aging monarchs to blame each other for their children's disappearance. The war becomes more heated, and the Thunderchildren are more easily able to manipulate the older monarchs into making foolish decisions that will weaken both sides, perhaps by spreading false intelligence about the location of their children. Meanwhile Ouggiri and Amelon meet each other in captivity and discover that they don't really hate each other. They escape together, and rather than go back to being enemies, they decide to restore the marriage of their two nations. Their friendship becomes love over time.

I think portraying Amelon and Ouggiri in the war as chess masters facing each other over a board rather than sworn enemies will work well to be entertaining and create conflict while avoiding upsetting the reader.

And if you want, to avoid making the Thunderchildren too villainous, since you're going more for grey here, you can have the thunder general in charge be a genuinely honorable man who's forced into the kidnapping by his superiors, but hates it and develops a fondness for his captives over time, treating them rather well even though his men don't. Then when they escape, he turns a blind eye to it and tells his men not to bother too much about it.

A good culture to base the Thunders on if you don't have one would be the Hittites, Greeks, or Assyrians, all of which were known to come into conflict with Egypt various times. The Assyrians additionally had a long history of brutality (and genocide) in their culture.

 

[Jabrosky]

Maybe Ouggiri and Amelon see each other as "worthy opponents" rather than actually hating each other. They're royalty, so they're probably rarely on the field of battle, and therefore they're more likely to view it as a sport or chess game.

While you have some great ideas, the problem is that both Ouggiri and Amelon ARE the sort of characters who lead their men on the field into battle. It's supposed to be an action-packed story.

 

[Mindfire]

While you have some great ideas, the problem is that both Ouggiri and Amelon ARE the sort of characters who lead their men on the field into battle. It's supposed to be an action-packed story.

Well even that isn't a problem. There are many known cases of generals on opposite sides of a war admiring each other's prowess. During World War I, when the Red Baron was shot down, he was given a funeral with full millitary honors... by soldier's from the opposite side! General Patton of WWII was an open admirer of the German General Rommel (one of the few generals who refused to carry out Hitler's extermination orders.)

If your protagonists are both honorable people who march with their soldiers on the field of battle, they can still see each other as worthy opponents. They might even feel that they might have been friends under different circumstances. Have you considered having them face each other personally and find out that they're equally matched in martial as well as mental prowess? That would make an interesting scene.

 

[Shockley]

One of my favorite novels is the Romance of the Three Kingdoms, which has a lot of situations that remind me of what some people are trying to push you to. The biggest one is the story of Yang Hu and Lu Kang. Yang Hu was a Jin General who was a commander, I believe, in Jing Province. On the other side of the river was Lu Kang, a Wu general. They fought a number of battles against one another (all ending in Lu Kang's favor, despite Yang's superior armies), and eventually settled into a stalemate. Here's a summary of the event, from the fantastic kongming.net:

Following Sun Xiu’s death, the cruel tyrant Sun Hao rose to the position of Emperor. Sun Hao commanded Lu Kang to camp at Jiangkou and invade Xiangyang. Before Lu Kang could gather the force to launch such an expedition however, the Ruler of Jin, Sima Yan, heard what Wu was planning and sent the old, veteran general Yang Hu to protect the city. Yang Hu regarded Lu Kang highly, and Lu Kang admired Yang Hu as well. Both Yang Hu and Lu Kang respected each other’s camps and neither one of them dared to attack the other unexpectedly. On one occasion, Lu Kang and Yang Hu both sent out hunting parties on the same day, but Yang Hu gave strict orders to his troops not to cross over to the Wu border and hunt there. One day Lu Kang sent wine to Yang Hu and to return the favor Yang Hu sent medicine to Lu Kang when Lu Kang fell ill. Lu Kang’s subordinates warned, “This medicine is surely harmful: It comes from the enemy!” Lu Kang knew his rival was honorable however and replied, “No, old Uncle Yang Hu would not poison a person. Do not doubt his chivalrous intentions.” After drinking the concoction sent by Yang Hu, Lu Kang felt much better and so relations between Yang Hu’s soldiers and Lu Kang’s were always good.

The piece I'm quoting comes from Lu Kang's biography, so it doesn't mention that they fought a number of battles (which Lu Kang won almost every time) and that most of the Lu clan died after his death, when the army that Yang Hu had commanded flooded into Wu and destroyed it.

Of course, there are other meta-examples. My favorite of, course, is Harold Godwinson and William the Conqueror. While the big story is Harold Godwinson getting killed at Hastings, the lesser known history between them involves a period of time where Harold lives in Normandy and fights in William's army. They knew each other, were fairly friendly, etc. The throne just came between them. That's not even getting into Saladin and Richard the Lionheart.