[Ntschotschi]

I think a central topic of fantasy is the struggle between "Good" and "Evil".
But what would you think are the typical traits of good or evil?
How do you differ between them (sometimes almost automatically), what are the roots of their nature?
On the other hand very often the most interesting characters are "grey" characters where you can't pass an easy judgement.
What would be your favorite "grey" character?
I just finished C.S.Friedman's Cold Fire Trilogy and was quite fascinated by the character of Gerald Tarrant.

[jiels]

Oh, I like this question! http://www.sffworld.com/ubb/smile.gif

Hopefully we will see some really good discussion.

hmm, typical traits, eh?
Well the first things that pop into my mind when discussing good and evil is selfishness.

It seems that good characters are ones that are willing to sacrifice their own desires for someone else. Good characters often put their friends or a cause ahead of their own desires. The best examples of what I mean would be Samwise following/serving Frodo and the death of Sturm. Both were very selfless acts thats meant so much to the people around them.

Evil characters on the other hand are only concerned about their own desires. The clasical example of the Arch Villian is a person bent on conquering the world and never considering how this will affect other people. These types will use anything to accomplish their goals often subscribing to the "Ends justify the means" mentality. Everything that is not "Them" is seen as not important and expendable. Sauron, Dread(from Otherland), Lord Foul, Torak, and Achilles(from Ender's Shadow) are good examples of what I mean.

Grey Characters that I love: Gerald Tarrant, Raistlin, Thomas Covenant, Croaker, Lady, and too many others to list. http://www.sffworld.com/ubb/smile.gif

[This message has been edited by jiels (edited October 16, 2001).]

[Alucard]

I think that good and evil often times is nothing more than perspective. I mean, do the bad guys really walk wround and think, "Hmmmmmm. I wonder what evil deeds can I commit on poor, helpless innocents today?" I seriously doubt it. It's more about two opposing sides fighting for two different outcomes, once you break it down.

But as in most stories, you need the people that you love to hate. So you take one of the perspectives and make it selfish, heartless, and managed by someone of the same nature. Now you've got your evil. Then you take your heroes, make their perpectives unselfish and otherwise beneficial to others. And now you've established your good versus evil conflict.

At least, that's one way to look at it. (And I'm sorry if I'm not making sense. It's 3:30 in the morning..... http://www.sffworld.com/ubb/smile.gif)

[Bardos]

That's righ, Alucard!

Those poor Trollocs in WoT! Everytime they get chopped to pieces and no-one cares... http://www.sffworld.com/ubb/frown.gif *sniff*

[Lord Soth]

See this is what i love about Martin! His book's a er like one massive grey area. With the exception of the Starks everyone else keeps 'phasing'. Doing good snd evil. In others words being real people!

He's one of those rare writers who has no fear of developing a convincing main character and then killing them off. We could quite easily see the whole book turn around with a Lannister coming out as a hero.

[jiels]

Hey Lord Soth,

That's a great idea! I would love to see Martin turn it around and do that!

Actually, I would love to see anyone do that. That's a great idea for a story. http://www.sffworld.com/ubb/smile.gif

(Damn. I can't stop smiling after reading that! lol)

[Barbarossa]

Most writers who use the venarable "Dark Lord" don't really bother to give their villains any motivation behind a genearl thirst for power.

Their evil deeds are somitimes shown in more detail, but more often than not, there is just a general threat of dark hordes looming (usually in the east).

The good guys don't fare all that much better usually. They often are a bunch of psychotic killers who slaughter left and right, but it's ok because we are told they are the good guys, and the evil minions deserve it.

I would lie if I said I never enjoyed books of that kind, but if I still like them it's mostly nostalgia as with the "Lord of the rings". Otherwise I've outgrown it.

My ideal villain these days wouldn't be black but dark grey, he should have a decent motivation, and ideally should be shown convincingly as thinking of himself as the good guy. After all how many people think to themselves: "HAW HAW I'm the dark lord, whar evil deed can we comit today.

On the other hand the ideal hero should be a lighter grey, with some serious ethical problems, who makes a wrong choice from time to time.

[Shehzad]

Need I say it again?

Matthew Woodring Stover

[Bardos]

Barbarossa, even in reality, there are power-hungry people (need I point-out examples from History and recent History?). But I too don't like the evil dark lord, like it's presented in the WoT and the Shannara books. Tolkien I'm not touching, 'cause he was the first to write about it; and before him there were people like R.E. Howard, who had no dark overlords in their stories --except from the occasional evil sorcerer.

Point is, I like power-hungry villains; it's a realistic enought motive, IMO. But I want them presented as characters, not as a nameless threat.
E.g., Anomander Render from Gardens of the Moon I think is a very nicely portraited villain with motives. I remember Azzaz (?) told me he's no villain, but personaly this is a true villain in my eyes; not someone totaly evil, but someone who has a vision and thinks that, in his/her opinion, is doing the right thing.

Another example is Kitiara uth Mattar (sic) from Drgonlance. Yes, she evil, but she has motives, personality; she is a complete character, not the nameless threat.

[This message has been edited by Bardos (edited October 17, 2001).]

[jiels]

It also seems that modern day sociopaths and psychopaths are replacing the typical arch villians of the past.

In William's Otherland, Dread is nothing more then a glorified serial killer/rapist with a twist.

Another example is seen in Martin's Song of Ice and Fire. The Hound's brother. I can't remember his name (Clegane? The mountain that walks?). He's is presented as a sadistic killer that is often found in modern fiction.

Do you think that these more modern ideas of villians are better, or more credible, then the old arch mage bent on conquering the world?



[This message has been edited by jiels (edited October 17, 2001).]