Tag: good and evil

E is for Empire

terran_empireAlmost every far future science fiction story has a galactic empire of some kind.  From Dune to Foundation, from Star Wars to Firefly, there’s always someone trying to rule the galaxy, often in a way that makes life difficult for the protagonists.

Why?  Rule of drama, of course, but also because it gives the story a truly epic scope.  Just as the classics such as Homer’s Iliad and Tolstoy’s War and Peace are as much about entire civilizations as they are about the people characters within them, so it is with science fiction, especially space opera.  Combine that with science fiction’s forward-thinking nature, and you have the potential for some truly amazing stories about humanity’s destiny among the stars.

But why empire?  Because even if we make it out to the stars, we’ll probably still take with us all of the baggage that makes us human.  Science fiction may be forward looking, but history repeats itself, and you can’t have a clear view of the future without understanding and acknowledging the past.

Not all galactic empires are evil, but most of them are.  We shouldn’t have to look further than the real-world history of Imperialism to see why.  Oppression, exploitation, slavery, genocide–all of these have been done in the name of Empire, and many more evils besides.  Even benevolent hegemonic powers (such as, I would argue, the United States of America) often end up doing great harm, either through action or inaction.

Of course, all of this makes for some really great stories.  When Asimov wrote his Foundation series, he quite literally based it on The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire by Edward Gibbon.  When Frank Herbert wrote Dune, he drew extensively from his background as an orientalist and based the overworld story on the Muslim conquests of the 7th and 8th centuries.  Star Wars is based loosely on the collapse of the Roman Republic, and Firefly echoes many of the old Western tales of former Confederate soldiers heading west after the US Civil War.

It’s worth pointing out that the Galactic Empire is by no means the only form of political organization in space opera.  There are actually several, including:

  • The Federation — A loose organization of stars and planets that usually exists to foster cooperation and mutual peace between galactic civilizations.  Rarely evil, but can be crippled by red tape.
  • The Republic — A more centralized version of the Federation, typically.  Exercises more control over its citizens, but not in an oppressive way.  Usually features some form of representative government.
  • The Alliance — A team of political underdogs united to overthrow the Empire and establish a more just form of government in its place.  If they win, they usually become the Republic or the Federation.
  • The Kingdom — A smaller government within the larger political system, often struggling for survival against more powerful forces. Not always democratic, but is often good, at least to its own citizens.
  • The Hegemonic Empire — Like the Empire, but rules primarily through soft power, ie co-opting their enemies rather than crushing them.  May overlap with the Republic or the Federation.
  • The People’s Republic of Tyranny — The Empire pretending to be the Federation.
  • The Vestigial Empire — What the Empire becomes when it’s been defeated but not yet destroyed.  Still oppressive and evil, but rules a smaller territory and struggles for relevance and survival.
  • The Remnant — An element from the Alliance that’s gone rogue.  The war may be over, but these guys are still fighting it, even if they’ve lost sight of what they’re fighting for.
  • The Horde — A highly aggressive and expansionist warlord state.  By far the most violent and brutal of any political organization, it seeks to conquer and subjugate the entire galaxy.

As a political science major, all these forms of government really fascinate me.  I’ve played with quite a few of them, especially the Horde (Bringing Stella Home), the Empire (Desert Stars), the Hegemonic Empire (Star Wanderers), the Kingdom (Stars of Blood and Glory), and the Remnant (also Stars of Blood and Glory).  You can definitely expect to see me play with them again in the future.

Continue reading E is for Empire

Out of the Silent Planet by C.S. Lewis

out_of_the_silent_planetWhen Doctor Elwin Ransom went on a spontaneous walking tour of rural England, he wasn’t expecting to be kidnapped by a mad scientist and taken to Mars.  He soon escapes, only to find himself lost without any way to return home.

Fortunately, the native Martians soon take him in, teaching the otherworldly stranger of their peaceful, utopian ways.  They are just as astonished to have a visitor from Earth as Ransom is astonished to be their guest.  To them, Earth is a silent planet–the only world with no spiritual connection to the rest of the universe.

The more Ransom learns about the gentle people of Mars, the more he realizes that something evil lurks in the heart of our world–and that contact between the worlds can only hasten the showdown between the forces of good and evil.

I decided to read this book after chatting with Norman Cates at Worldcon 2011, following the “When Faith and Science Meet” panel.  Some fascinating questions had popped up toward the end, especially regarding science fictional universes that are not incompatible with millenialist religions.  Norman asked if I’d read C.S. Lewis’s Space Trilogy, and when I said that most people had told me it isn’t as good as Lewis’s other work, he kind of rolled his eyes and said that it was worth checking it out and deciding for myself.

Well, I didn’t get around to reading it until this summer, but I’m glad I did.  It’s a short read, no more than 180 pages or so, and I finished it in a couple of days.  The world it describes is quite fascinating–a fantastical version of Mars that I’d actually like to visit, perhaps even more than Bradbury’s and Burrough’s.  The kidnapping in the beginning was compelling enough to hook me, but it was the immersive feel of the world that really made the book for me.

This being C.S. Lewis, the more spiritual and allegorical elements of the story lie fairly close to the surface, but it didn’t detract much from the reading experience for me.  It became fairly obvious towards the end that the whole story is basically an attempt to incorporate the Christian millenialist mythos into a mainstream science fictional setting, which is probably where most of the criticism comes from.  If you know that up front, however, and are willing to go along with it, it shouldn’t take much away from the story.  In fact, that might just be what draws you to it.

It’s interesting, because Orson Scott Card tried to do something very similar with the story of Lehi in his Earthbound series, and I think he actually failed where Lewis succeeded.  When I read A Memory of Earth, I felt that Card actually lost the best parts of both the Book of Mormon mythos and his own science fictional world by trying to force them together.  In contrast, Out of the Silent Planet feels much more coherent and compelling, and not artificial at all.

I do feel like things sped up a bit too much at the end, though.  The experience became a little less immersive for me when Lewis went from describing the alien world to bringing the millenialist themes to the forefront.  It’s almost as if the focus of the book itself shifted, and that was a little bit jarring.  I’m a big fan of metaphor, but allegory is a more difficult pill for me to swallow.

That said, I enjoyed the book, and am definitely interested in finishing the rest of the trilogy.  It’s got a lot of merit to it, and is definitely worth checking out no matter what the critics may say.

Trope Tuesday: Hoist By His Own Petard

One of the most satisfying ways to defeat the villain is to have his own nefarious scheme bring about his downfall.  In Hamlet, Shakespeare described this as “hoist by his own petard,” or blown up by his own bomb.  Basically, it’s a self-deposing villain whose evil plans have gone horribly right.

Not only is this a delicious form of death by irony, it’s also a satisfying way to show cosmic justice in action while allowing the heroes to keep their hands clean.  When done best, the villain keeps the tension notched up to eleven and only commits his fatal mistake after the heroes have made their last stand.  Bonus points if the petard takes the form of a minion who decides to switch sides.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, you’ll often find this trope in stories geared towards a younger audience, which generally try to avoid messy endings and shades of gray.  In some ways, it almost resembles a Disney Villain Death, in that the heroes often come out with clean hands and an unambiguously clear conscience.

However, this isn’t always the case–sometimes, it’s precisely because of the shades of gray that the villain’s plans become self-defeating.  Case in point, Pride and Kimblee from Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood.  You’d think that both characters are totally evil–and perhaps they are–but that doesn’t stop the one from undermining the other at just the right moment.

When done right, this is an incredibly satisfying way to defeat a bad guy.  When done poorly, however, it undermines the villain altogether, or turns the story into just another Aesop.  As always, your mileage may vary, so when writing one of these stories it’s important to keep your audience in mind.

In my own books, it’s probably more common for this to happen to the heroes, which probably makes it a form of Two Rights Make A Wrong or Nice Job Breaking It, Hero.  I do enjoy hoisting the villains as well, though, and will almost certainly use this trope in the future.

Trope Tuesday: True Neutral

The True Neutral is something of an enigma.  They generally take no side, either because they have moved beyond good and evil, or because they simply don’t see good and evil the way we do.  Or because this isn’t their war and they just want to be left alone.  Or…well, let’s get to it.

From the easydamus character alignment page:

A neutral character does what seems to be a good idea. She doesn’t feel strongly one way or the other when it comes to good vs. evil or law vs. chaos. Most neutral characters exhibit a lack of conviction or bias rather than a commitment to neutrality.

Some neutral characters, on the other hand, commit themselves philosophically to neutrality. They see good, evil, law, and chaos as prejudices and dangerous extremes. They advocate the middle way of neutrality as the best, most balanced road in the long run.

As you might expect, this alignment doesn’t describe just one type of character.  In fact, there are many different archetypes that fall under True Neutral.  They include:

That’s quite a spread, isn’t it?  The main thing to keep in mind is that these are the characters who refuse to take sides–not just in whatever overworld conflict is driving the story, but in the ethical questions that the story raises (unless neutrality itself is their answer).

My favorite example of this trope is the Childlike Empress from The Neverending Story.  As the very embodiment of Fantasia, she transcends good and evil so completely that her power, the Auryn, cannot be used to forbid a monster from acting on its own evil nature.  Truth from Fullmetal Alchemist is another good example of a transcendent True Neutral.

With everyday, down-to-earth characters, though, this alignment tends to tick me off.  The Ents, for example, very much fall under this trope (as does Tom Bombadil…unless you subscribe to this theory).  Most others examples either come across as weak, selfish, or cowardly to me, so I don’t really care much for this alignment–unless it’s the starting point of a well-constructed character arc.

For that reason, in my own work, most True Neutrals are either straight-up antagonists or gradually shift in alignment as the story progresses.  In Genesis Earth, Michael Anderson starts out as one of the weaker True Neutral types, but changes as events in the story make him grow.  In Desert Stars, Sathi probably falls into this type, though I’m not so sure; either way, he’s very easily manipulated by his Neutral Evil wife.  In Bringing Stella Home, Ilya falls under this alignment due to his moral cowardice, and Anya might as well, though more as a Selfish Good than anything else.  Roman probably does too, but more because he’s old and wants to give up the fight; that’s something I’m currently working on in Stars of Blood and Glory.

I haven’t done a transcendent True Neutral yet, but if I ever write a heroic fantasy tale with gods and demons, I probably will.  After all, if Michael Ende did it in my favorite novel of all time, how can I resist?

Trope Tuesday: Lawful Neutral

Hey, SOMEONE had to bring order to Europa.

Unlike the Lawful Good, the Lawful Neutral has no qualms about committing heinous acts to maintain order.  Whether for country, for position or for the preservation of the English language, these characters believe in law above all else, giving stern chase or sacrificing their own personal feelings to achieve it.

From the easydamus character alignment page:

A lawful neutral character acts as law, tradition, or a personal code directs her. Order and organization are paramount to her. She may believe in personal order and live by a code or standard, or she may believe in order for all and favor a strong, organized government.

Interestingly, while Lawful Neutrals believe in upholding some form of law, it doesn’t always have to be the law.  Characters who follow a strict personal code of honor often fall under this alignment, even if that code of honor runs contrary to the law of the land.  The most extreme example of this is the Übermensch, who transcends the laws of society and becomes a law unto himself (though in a lot of cases, the Übermensch ends up being Lawful Evil).

While it may seem like most Lawful Neutrals would be antagonists, that’s not always the case.  In Fullmetal Alchemist, General Olivier Armstrong may be stern and austere, but she spends most of the story on the side of the good guys.  And in Girl Genius, Klaus might seem like a bad guy at first, but really, he just wants to restore order and defeat the Other.  Both Death and Lord Vetinari in the Discworld series are also Lawful Neutrals, but they’re never on the bad guys’ side or the good guys’ side…they’re neutral.

In my own work, the best example of this would probably be the Patrician from Heart of the Nebula. I haven’t published this one yet, but I hope to have it out later this year.  Abaqa from Stars of Blood and Glory is another good example, the son of Qasar and Sholpan.  But in the works I’ve already published, Ben from Bringing Stella Home is probably the most prominent Lawful Neutral.

Trope Tuesday: Neutral Evil

Have you ever encountered a villain who you just hated? One who only cares about himself (or herself), who has no real loyalties and will sell out his friends, or even his master?  One who treats people as means to an end, and will use whatever means necessary to achieve those ends?  Chances are, that villain is a Neutral Evil.

From magnificent bastards to dirty cowards, from card carrying villains to seductresses and bounty hunters, this character alignment can take many different shapes and forms.  The one thing they have in common, however, is that they’ll do just about anything to further their own evil ends–including pitting the other villains against themselves.  Like the Chaotic Neutral, the Neutral Evil always looks out for #1–though entirely out of pure selfishness, as opposed to a love for free will and individuality.

From the easydamus character alignment page:

A neutral evil villain does whatever she can get away with. She is out for herself, pure and simple. She sheds no tears for those she kills, whether for profit, sport, or convenience. She has no love of order and holds no illusion that following laws, traditions, or codes would make her any better or more noble. On the other hand, she doesn’t have the restless nature or love of conflict that a chaotic evil villain has.

Of all the alignments, Neutral Evil can be the most dangerous because characters with this alignment have no qualms about doing whatever needs to be done to achieve their evil goals.  However, characters with this alignment also tend not to become evil overlords, because they backstab each other too much and don’t have what it takes to run a large organization.  Within their limited spheres of influence, however, they can be deadly.

There are a lot of Neutral Evils who I love to hate, but Lucy van Pelt from Peanuts is definitely near the top of the list.  Saruman is another one, though he’s less of a magnificent bastard than Sephiroth (Why did you have to kill Aeris?  WHY???).  And of all the Neutral Evils, Voldemort is probably the most ambitious.

In my own works, my favorite Neutral Evil would have to be Shira from Desert Stars.  Man, I hated her so much…once I got her character down, it was a real joy to write. 🙂 From Bringing Stella Home / Sholpan, Borta is definitely a Neutral Evil.  Qasar leans more to the lawful side, while Gazan leans to the chaotic, but Borta is squarely neutral–and she’s vicious.  Genesis Earth and Star Wanderers, however, are generally feel-good stories, so they don’t really have anyone with this character alignment.

Trope Tuesday: Neutral Good

Arguably the best of the good-aligned characters, the Neutral Good can always be counted on to do the right thing, whether that means working within the system or rebelling against it.  Whether young or old, soft or shrewd, nice or not so nice, these are the guys (and girls) most likely to save the world and defeat the enemy with love.

From the easydamus character alignment page:

A neutral good character does the best that a good person can do. He is devoted to helping others. He works with kings and magistrates but does not feel beholden to them.

The Neutral Good is not devoid of weaknesses, of course.  Although they are devoted to good, their lack of commitment to law means that they are not always willing to enforce it.  Also, for those who just want to get things done, this alignment can be somewhat limiting, in the way that a commitment to any higher ideal usually is.

Interestingly, this is a very common alignment for heroes in space opera stories.  Case in point, Luke Skywalker: even though he’s young and reckless, he’s not above learning the ways of the force and joining the Jedi order.  Miles Vorkosigan from Lois McMaster Bujold’s Vorkosigan series also falls squarely into the Neutral Good camp.  Moving on to manga and webcomics, Alphonse and Winry from Fullmetal Alchemist both fall under this alignment, giving balance to Edward’s more chaotic outbursts.  Agatha from Girl Genius is also a Neutral Good…at least, when there aren’t any wrenches nearby.

There are quite a few characters with this alignment in my own work.  Even though she’s a mercenary captain, Danica from Bringing Stella Home falls squarely into this alignment; she’s got a tough outer shell, but she’ll do anything for her men, even…well, I don’t want to ruin Stars of Blood and Glory. 😉 Also from Bringing Stella Home / Sholpan, Stella is solidly Neutral Good, which is part of why the ending is so deliciously twisted.  In Star Wanderers, Jeremiah falls into this alignment mostly through default, which is good for Noemi because the circumstances of the novel put her totally at his mercy.  And in Desert Stars, this is probably Mira’s alignment, though she’s easily manipulated by her Neutral Evil mother.

What can I say?  I’ve got a soft spot for Neutral Goods.  Considering how well this kind of a hero fits in to a classic space adventure, it shouldn’t come as any surprise.

Trope Tuesday: Lawful Evil

If the term “villain” applies to anyone, it applies to the Lawful Evil.  Whether the evil overlord, his trusted right-hand man, or one of his devoted minions, these characters are dedicated wholeheartedly to their cause, whether they believe it will lead to a better world or not.  Taking over the world is often a major obsession, because hey, someone’s got to do it.  A staple of the evil empire, these guys often turn their country into an industrialized wasteland, though they often have propaganda machines to take care of any bad press.  Bonus points if they can transform into a freakish monster in battle.

From the easydamus character alignment page:

A lawful evil villain methodically takes what he wants within the limits of his code of conduct without regard for whom it hurts. He cares about tradition, loyalty, and order but not about freedom, dignity, or life. He plays by the rules but without mercy or compassion. He is comfortable in a hierarchy and would like to rule, but is willing to serve. He condemns others not according to their actions but according to race, religion, homeland, or social rank. He is loath to break laws or promises.

While Lawful Evils believe in following rules and keeping their word, they’re not above emotional manipulation, negotiating unfavorable contracts, or following the law in letter only.  Even so, they tend to suffer from genre blindness and bureaucratic stupidity (as well as megalomania–but hey, that’s part of the job description).

According to tvtropes, Lawful Evils come in four types:

  1. The supreme ruler, dedicated to establishing and maintaining a civic order that is itself evil.  A good example of this would be Sauron from The Lord of the Rings.
  2. A zealot or übermensch whose moral code falls outside of established social norms.  Khan from The Wrath of Khan is a pretty good example of this, as is Tyler Durden from Fight Club (though your mileage may vary).
  3. The Dragon or other minion who may have their own goals, but answers to the big bad.  Darth Vader is probably the most well-known example.
  4. A complete monster who is dedicated to the destruction of free will and liberty.  The Mormon conception of Satan fits this perfectly.

The scary thing about this trope is that it actually exists in real life.  In fact, outside of our sheltered middle-class, liberal democratic existence (a relatively recent and unusual development in the eyes of history), this type of overlord tends to be the rule and not the exception.  You don’t have to look any further than North Korea, Burma, or Syria for examples of this–which is to say nothing of the Soviet Union, the Third Reich, or the British Empire.

My favorite example of this trope is probably Darth Vader, not just because of how badass he is, but because of his heel face turn at the end of Return of the Jedi.  Ignoring how bad episodes I, II, and III were, his character arc really is the thing that makes that story.  And while we’re on the subject of history, let’s not forget this epic showdown between Stalin and Hitler.  Seriously, click that link.

In my own work, the best example of a Lawful Evil would probably be Qasar from Bringing Stella Home / Sholpan.  He’s more of the affable type than a true evil overlord, though; that would be Tagatai, who doesn’t really come to power until Stars of Blood and Glory. A much more sinister example would be Emile from Heart of the Nebula, or the villain I have planned for Edenfall–I’d better finish those!  And of course, there’s Sheikh Sathi from Desert Stars, though he’s mostly a type 3 Lawful Evil under the thumb of his Neutral Evil wife.

Perhaps one of the reasons I haven’t done a truly despicable Lawful Evil yet is because I’ve been kind of sheltered here in the states.  It will be interesting to see how my writing changes after spending some time in Eastern Europe; Georgia, after all, is the homeland of Stalin.

Darth Vader helmet taken from this site.

Trope Tuesday: Chaotic Evil

If a character in a story scares the hell out of you, chances are he’s a Chaotic Evil.  From ax-crazy psychopaths to nightmarish clowns, from cold-hearted monsters to eldritch abominations, these guys are known for their complete lack of empathy, their nihilistic outlook on life, and their sick sense of humor.

From the easydamus character alignment page:

A chaotic evil character does whatever his greed, hatred, and lust for destruction drive him to do. He is hot-tempered, vicious, arbitrarily violent, and unpredictable. If he is simply out for whatever he can get, he is ruthless and brutal. If he is committed to the spread of evil and chaos, he is even worse…it represents the destruction not only of beauty and life but also of the order on which beauty and life depend.

According to tvtropes, characters who fall under this alignment can be categorized by five types, in decreasing order of redeemability:

  • A Chaotic Good who took things a little too far and inadvertently fell into evil.  Can usually be brought back with a heel realization if they haven’t already crossed the moral event horizon.  Scar from Fullmetal Alchemist is a good example of this type (incidentally, he’s also my favorite character from that series).
  • A character with a very feral nature who believes that everyone is out to get him and thus ends up killing everyone in order to protect himself.  Often manipulated by the Big Bad to do his dirty work.  He doesn’t really kill out of malice, though, so there may still be a possibility of redemption.
  • Committed to chaos before evil.  Can be convinced to team up with the heroes, if only because they happen to share the same enemy.  For these characters, their freedom is the most important thing–though don’t trust them too much, or else you’re liable to end up with a knife in your back.
  • Committed to evil before chaos.  These guys will never team up with the heroes, but they may team up with the Big Bad, even becoming one of his mooks if it gives them more opportunities to unleash fiery mayhem of death on the world.
  • True Chaotic Evil.  These are the most dangerous, because they have absolutely no loyalties and absolutely no compunction.  The best you can hope for is to kill them before they wipe out your entire civilization.

Fortunately, the Chaotic Evil’s weakness is his inability to put together a competent organization. If he has any plans, they’ll usually fizzle out because they’re too haphazard.  When the Chaotic Evil overlaps with the Chessmaster, however, things can get really, really dangerous.

My favorite Chaotic Evil is definitely the Joker from the Dark Knight.  He is, without a doubt, the most dangerous incarnation of this trope that I’ve ever seen.  Running a close second is Kefka from Final Fantasy VI.  Best final fantasy villain of all time, hands down–he totally owns Sephiroth.

I have to admit, I haven’t used this trope much in my own work yet.  Gazan from Bringing Stella Home probably falls under this character alignment, but he’s more of the third type than a true Chaotic Evil.  As a race, the Hameji initially fall under this trope, but they have reasons for everything they do, so once they overthrow the established order, they shift more to Chaotic Neutral.

One day, though, I’m going to write a character with this alignment.  One day…

Trope Tuesday: Chaotic Good

A pox on the phony king of England!

Wherever you find the evil empire, dirty cops, or a misguided crusade, chances are there’s a Chaotic Good somewhere in the shadows fighting against it.  From barbarian heroes to freedom fighters, rebellious princesses to ethical sluts, these free-spirited, noble-minded rebels are constantly at war with the man, robbing the rich to give to the poor.

From the easydamus character alignment page:

A chaotic good character acts as his conscience directs him with little regard for what others expect of him. He makes his own way, but he’s kind and benevolent. He believes in goodness and right but has little use for laws and regulations. He hates it when people try to intimidate others and tell them what to do. He follows his own moral compass, which, although good, may not agree with that of society.

Interestingly, once the evil bad guys are gone, the balance between Good and Chaotic is even more difficult to keep than the line between Good and Lawful.  For that reason, Chaotic Goods often make extremely poor rulers after the war is over.  When they win, they usually do one of the following:

Of all the character alignments, this one is my favorite.  It fits my own sensibilities almost perfectly.  Whenever a character of this type has to give up their old life to accept their new responsibilities, I can’t help but feel a little wistful and sad (maybe that’s why I haven’t settled down and married yet…hmm…).

This trope is extremely prevalent in manga and anime, with Edward Elric from Fullmetal Alchemist my personal favorite.  Agatha and Gil from Girl Genius are also really awesome–it’s going to be interesting to see how Gil shifts now that his father is out of the picture.  In science fiction, Captain Kirk is probably the most beloved character of this type, though almost all of Heinlein’s protagonists also fit the bill.

In my own work, Tiera Al-Najmi from Desert Stars is probably the best example of this trope.  She stands alone against the restrictive norms and hypocrisy of her society, urging Mira to do what’s right instead of what’s expected.  In Bringing Stella Home, James McCoy fits this trope too, though you could also make an argument that he’s more of a Neutral Good.  In Heart of the Nebula, however, he’s definitely Chaotic Good, which puts him squarely at odds with Lars, a Lawful Good who appears in all of the Gaia Nova novels thus far.