Writing Discussion--The Dark Lord

[jpskewedthrone]

Ok, I'm back from Readercon, which was a blast. It was the first time I'd gone, so I wasn't sure what to expect. Overall, perhaps a little too literary for me, but I enjoyed the panels I was on, spent a fortune in the dealers room, which consisted of ONLY booksellers, and had a blast meeting old friends and making new ones. Thanks for pbray, everyone made sure I actually ate during the con (clarkesworld, elaine_brennan, eiriene, and Sam Butler [who isn't on LJ, but who should be]). I got to meet with my agent (who gave me cookies!) and we discussed the new book, the paranormal horror novel I wrote before Skewed Throne, and future plans to take over the world. It was a good talk.

Unfortunately, the free access to the internet was either killed by excessive use or just eliminated by the hotel because of excessive use, and so I didn't get to post my weekly writing tip/discussion on Friday as usual. So I'm posting it now. This is a discussion based on one of the panels at Readercon, but I want to make it clear that this is NOT what was discussed at the panel. This is my opinion on the topic, and only my opinion, and I'm interested in what everyone else might think, whether you agree or disagree. So here we go!

Dark Lords and Other Pests

The idea behind the panel was to discuss the role of the Dark Lord--Archetypal Evil--in fantasy. In fact, we were supposed to discuss the positive aspects of having a Dark Lord, the reasons why it would be good to have a Dark Lord in the novel. And when we say Dark Lord here, we mean a force of Evil that is simply purely evil, where the author does not attempt in any way to give us "reasons" for why this person or thing is evil, they simply JUST ARE. And the more evil, the better. There are plenty of fantasies out there with Dark Lords. And I've enjoyed reading them.

But as for writing them . . . I'm not interested.

First though, let me give the reasons--the writerly reasons--why a Dark Lord appears in fiction, why we enjoy them, and why I think they're fine.

I think Dark Lords are, like everything, a product of the story. Whether you have a Dark Lord, and whether you try to explain why the person (or thing) is evil to begin with, depends on what type of story you're trying to write. Most of the stories I remember reading in which there was a Dark Lord were stories about the "good" characters, about their struggle to reach the Dark Lord or the object that will defeat them, and so the story itself revolved around THEM. It wasn't about the Dark Lord. In fact, the Dark Lord was simply there as an obstacle, or as someone who threw obstacles at the protagonists. They were the catalyst for the journey, but the journey itself was the important part, not the end result. And in fact, thinking about those stories, in most of them the reader and characters never even really meet the Dark Lord until the very, very end. The Dark Lord becomes a symbol of the completion of their journey, the end of their struggle. That's how the Dark Lord serves the story--as a symbol. So you have to ask yourself how the evil in your story serves the story. If it is simply as a symbol, as a resource for the main character's struggle, then there's no need to give reason for why the Dark Lord is evil. He or she can simply be the "Dark Lord", can be Archetypal Evil, and that's all that's needed.

However, if the story requires more direct interaction between the "good" characters and the "evil" ones, then having a Dark Lord probably won't work.

I don't think I'll ever write a novel in which there's a Dark Lord. I may, because I may have a story in the future in which the story is the protagonist's struggle and nothing else, and in that case a Dark Lord is necessary. But I doubt such a story will occur to me. Because I don't find that kind of story . . . interesting. In most of my novels, the interaction between the "good" people and the "evil" people is more personal, and as soon as their relationship becomes personal, you have to start explaining the motivations of them all, including the "evil" characters. And once you've taken that step, you no longer have a Dark Lord; you no longer have a symbol. You have a person (or an alien with their own reasoning that you need to make clear).

As a writer, I find the stories where there is emotional interaction between the good and evil characters more interesting. This interaction is obvious in The Skewed Throne--at all points, she's acting directly with "evil" characters. I'm thinking more in terms of the Mistress and Alendor here. (The rest of the characters were sociopaths and psychopaths and their motivations aren't interesting to me either.) In the second book, it's set up almost as a Dark Lord story--we don't see the evil characters until the end--but even then I couldn't just leave it as them being Dark Lords; instead, we get a chance to see WHY they're doing what they're doing. And hopefully it makes sense. The same thing is happening with the new novel: I have an "evil" character who's pushing the main "good" character early on, and without any thought, I started giving him a reason for why he acts the way he does (his relationship to his father). So he's not going to be a Dark Lord either.

So, think about your story and its needs and then decide whether you need a Dark Lord or not. I'm not seeing many Dark Lord stories being published anymore (as opposed to 20 years ago), and the main reason I think is because, like me, the authors don't find such non-personal interactions between the characters as interesting as the personal ones. Or maybe it's the editors who don't find them as interesting. I think the Dark Lords have their place though.

So what do you guys think about Dark Lords? Are the stories where they appear as interesting as those where the evil has a backstory, a reason for why they are what they are? As readers, which type of story appeals to you--the ones where the Dark Lord is just pure evil, or the one where you see why they're evil?


And now, to go write. It's killer hot here (and will be for the next few days) but now that I'm back from the con I need to get back in the writing groove for Novel in 90. Next con will be Confluence in Pittsburgh, but that's 3 weeks away. That's 3 more chapters I need to write before then. Later!

Comments

[chichiri-no-da.livejournal.com]

I agree 100% ^_^;

I've read quite a few stories with Dark Lords, and some of them are excellent stories - Lord of the Rings comes to mind. But the dark lord itself is never interesting. In fact, as I'm sitting here I can't think of an example with a dark lord that doesn't also have an antagonist whose motivations ARE more than just "hi, I'm evil". The dark lord doesn't seem to be enough on his own to carry the story.

In LotR, you have Sauron, sure. But you have many other antagonists throughout the books, from Saruman to Denethor, and that doesn't even include the internal struggle Frodo has to go through.

The other example that springs to mind is Fifth Element, which had a big dark force that was going to destroy the universe and which was basically just a force of pure evil. But the actual antagonist through the movie was Gary Oldman's character Zorg, who did have human motivations - though he wasn't developed as well as I'd like.

I'm the kind of person who when I get into a story, I love looking at the the bad guys, and taking them apart and seeing how they tick. (*points to icon for example*) I don't find dark lords to be interesting at all, because there's nothing there to analyze. A really good villain is scary because he IS human, and it's especially scary when he's so human that you could see yourself doing the things that he did, in his position, with the right pushes.

A dark lord isn't like that. It's more like a force of nature. And some really good stories have been written about people against forces of nature, but no one ever identifies with the storm. And even in those stories there's usually other antagonists, because otherwise the story becomes just a whole lot of running around trying to escape the earthquake.

Frankly, it occurs to me that if you write a story with a villain and don't bother to understand as a writer why they're evil - just say, "well they do it, and they're evil and that's why" - you're doing your novel a disservice. Villains are so much more engaging when there's a reason for what they do, and why would you deliberately create a whole character who's not going to be engaging? It seems like a waste of effort to me, because it's like you've put a hole in your story that you're going to have to make up for in other areas. Like by creating other antagonists who DO have motivations.

Um, I'll stop rambling now. Definitely need coffee.

[jpsorrow.livejournal.com]

There is a difference between a Dark Lord that is human and a Dark Lord that is, as you say, a "force". I honestly don't believe that a novel in which the Dark Lord is strictly human (with powers) can work. I'd want the explanation for why they became so evil, why they reached that point of pure evil . . . and then of course they wouldn't be a Dark Lord.

However, novels with Dark Lords who are forces, rather than human, those I can see working.

[onyxhawke.livejournal.com]

:: headdesk ::
:: headdesk ::
:: headdesk ::

I can't believe i forgot Readercon was this weekend. I hadn't planned on attending the con, but i did want to stop in and see one or two people,

[jpsorrow.livejournal.com]

Next year, I guess. . . . Or at least, next con.

[kythiaranos.livejournal.com]

I prefer writing human villains, myself; I want to know why people do what they do. I think Dark Lords have been done to death--LOTR had one, so everyone had to have one. Tolkien's Dark Lord had a history, though, that went beyond the bounds of the trilogy. I don't always get that sense with other iterations. And for my money, Saruman is a far more interesting villain. But that's just me.

[jpsorrow.livejournal.com]

I think that was the trend. The only books with Dark Lords that I remember come immediately after the resurgence of fantasy on the markets. And most of those novels were clones of Tolkien. I think once everyone got over the cloning, we shifted away from the Dark Lords into the more interesting and complex villains.

[kythiaranos.livejournal.com]

There's definitely been a move toward more depth in the characters, at least in adult fantasy, which is to the good. One of the things I really liked in your first book was the complexity of the characters--they were a complicated bunch, which really held my interest.

[wldhrsjen3.livejournal.com]

I agree - when I was a kid I liked the Dark Lord type stories where the evil was so cut and dry and they could vanguish it. But now that I'm (marginally) more mature, my world views have become more complex. I recognize that evil is often an insidious thing and can masquerade as good, and I realize that even decent people may have a threshold of tolerance beyond which their characters may resort to desperate and "evil" actions. So now I gravitate toward stories where the evil characters interact with the good characters on a more integral and personal level, stories that explain the motivations and the triggers for the evil characters as well as the good characters.

To me, stories like this are more interesting and, in a way, more realistic.

[jpsorrow.livejournal.com]

Much more interesting, because the reader can relate to the more human villain, maybe even sympathize with them. Which is where it gets really interesting.

[kythiaranos.livejournal.com]

I think what you said is very true--most people, as they get older, stop seeing the world as cut-and-dried. We realize that people in general are made up of good and evil impulses, so stories of some invincible outside evil force become less satisfying.

[jennifer-dunne.livejournal.com]

I think the other thing is the ending... a Dark Lord, by his very nature, can never be *destroyed*, merely temporarily defeated and forced to withdraw. But you can't have a world without evil. And where there is evil, there will always be a Dark Lord, of greater or lesser potency. On the other hand, with a more human-scale enemy, the defeat can be absolute. The enemy can be vanquished, and once fallen, will never rise again. Another evil lord may rise, to fill the vacancy, but that's not guaranteed. It's possible that something in the vanquishing is such that no evil lords will ever come to power ever again.

If you want your heroes to have an unquestioned victory, they have to have a human-scale opponent.

[jpsorrow.livejournal.com]

Oooo! I hadn't thought about this aspect of it. But I agree.

[melissajm.livejournal.com]

I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that not many people seem to believe in the Devil these days?

[jpsorrow.livejournal.com]

Hmm . . . that's an interesting idea.

[mikandra.livejournal.com]

I agree with these thoughts.

I have just finished a book which is a Dark Lord story. Actually, the Dark Lord is a Dark Lady, but the same thing here - she is not particularly interesting and isn't a character as much as an obstacle, a personification of a threat. Her henchwomen, though, are real characters who can be made to sway. The personal interaction happens at this level. The Dark Lady merely symbolises all evil. She's not a person, but a spirit which can never be destroyed.

I started off writing this book without such a character, but found I needed one to focus the plot and direction. The plot involves getting people to work towards a common goal.

May I also add that this is a kids book (8-11yo)

[jpsorrow.livejournal.com]

That's usually how a Dark Lord novel works: henchmen, who are characters with dimension, are thrown at the protagonist in order to impede them. That's where the interaction with evil comes into play.

[partly.livejournal.com]

In most Dark Lord stories (including Lord of the Rings) I'm not sure if the Dark Lord could be considered a "character", rather they are an obstacle or a goal.

In order to make a Dark Lord story interesting, its necessary to make all the other characters interesting enough to fill the void. If human characters are following the Dark Lord, then their motivations need to be well defined, even if the Dark Lord is just an elemental force of evil.

In the piece I'm currently working on there isn't a Dark Lord, but there are definite sides of good and evil. The characters themselves are three dimensional, though, and their motivations and goals keep them from being clearly black or white. Or I least that what I'm aiming for.