I've been waiting to see this video with baited breath, and I can safely say that I am not disappointed. Definitely articulates some of the reasons as to why I connect with these tales, and even how certain story tropes I would otherwise dislike can still work for me in a story. Consider the like well-earned.
Good versus evil is the starting point. Without evil there is no conflict, there are only several characters sitting around a table and agreeing they should all go home because there's nothing to do. Nice T-shirts.
One thing to keep in mind ( as i am rewatching GoT) is you can have a morally gray world and still have righteous good guys in it, like the starks. I have to say that Martin masterfully pulled this off though, as I am struggling with these things in my own fantasy story.
Excellent video! It really helped me to feel confident enough to simplify my narrative in favor of focusing on characters internal struggles over more complex political narratives. Not such an easy decision where I feel so many of the stories nowadays focus on moral ambiguity on a large scale across governments. I enjoy those stories as well, but characters are what interest me the most and this video helped me understand what draws me to binary narratives - the freedom to really focus on internal morality and the responsibility/power of the individual. Thank you! 😁
You are very welcome! Not every story needs "shades of gray villain" or moral ambiguity and I will die on the hill that you should chose the framing device that best suits the story YOU want to tell :D
Love the binary plot nuanced characters. Makes sense in reality too. Years ago, I had a debate with myself as to whether in fact, the creator was good or evil, and is good greater than evil? Because of beauty in nature, which is massively powerful., love between and among people, human ability to experience connection with other humans and joy, and finally the existence of Hope I do believe that good is more powerful, ultimately, and finally than evil. As for the nature of the creator, my thought at this point is if you are all powerful and can make and do anything, what is the one thing you do not have? For now, my answer is freely given love.
Loved the video! There is something about good versus evil stories that gives this comfort we cannot find in other narratives, and this is why I believe we still want them to exist. However, I feel they do base themselves on the inevitability of the good winning over evil, and I think it brings a false sense of comfort. Maybe ideological comfort? I don't know if that, in the long run, contributes to us humans getting used to avoiding uncertainty and the complexity present in those universal values we think should be universal, and makes us lazy in accepting other interpretations of said values. I also think uniting against a common enemy could be problematic, as it's hard to say what that enemy looks like most of the time. What is good, and what is evil? Can good and evil be set in stone with no option for nuance? Either way, I still understand why these narratives exist and I do understand that we also need some relief when we're confronted with a tough reality as is ours :) This is just food for thought!
There are binary narratives in stories based on the moral complexities of lived experience, but they are softer than good vs evil. A common device is male vs. female or synonymous opposite stereotypes. But any such device poorly used can easily come off as just masked good vs evil.
And even worse, it can paint a picture where one side of the stereotype is painted as "universally evil" which is a trap easy to fall into. (All women as manipulative or all men as abusive leaps to mind). And that is the danger with binary narratives, IMO. The moment you stray into those real world identities and stereotypes, the loss of nuance is not realistic.
@@JustInTimeWorlds But it is well used, if cynical, if both sides of the stereotype are painted as "universally evil" (all manipulative women vs. all abusive men as in your example).
@@JustInTimeWorlds I have a number of queer characters in my stories, including two of the main characters (I'm a member of the rainbow community myself🏳🌈), which is another type of character that's often stereotyped. I'm going to be very careful not to use any of those gay stereotypes. One of my gay mains is a brilliant swordsman, so no worries there. The other is a bit of a weakling at first, but he toughens up and becomes quite good with the sword, himself. He also becomes a powerful sorceror. The one gay stereotype I'm giving him is that he has a lot of respect for girls/women.
So, this can make for a good narrative, but you need to sow seeds of nuance early, otherwise it can come across as shoe-horned into the plot :D But it can make a GREAT story. Especially if you do deep 3d person limited because then narrator's understanding can change as they experience more of the world and that takes the reader along for the ride and the character growth.
@@JustInTimeWorlds that is something I'm going to have to keep in mind. My mc starts out with very black and white thinking. Throughout the story, she is forced into situations where she cannot keep her morals and achieve her goals. Eventually she gets to a more nuanced stance. There is a "evil" god early on who throws doubt on her moral system. They are supposed to be a fairly frequent character. Basically the MC makes a deal with this god so she can go back to earth after dying. She has to listen to the god while pursuing her own goals.
@@thecriticalone1783 My stories might be a little similar because my four main are children in the first book (about 11 at the start), and like children tend to do they view the world in black and white. Even my main main, Elkar, who's incredibly intelligent (basically, he's the Hermione of the group). Despite his vast knowledge he still has that childish naivety. I'm going for more of a trinary narrative for later on, though.
@@Aewon84 sounds cool, and I'd be happy to hear more about your world, and talk more about mine. Lol Yeah my mc starts as a 15 year old with a very limited view point about the world around her. The world is very harsh and information is hard to find compared to our world. So it makes it really easy to fall into a specific mindset , however her travels and dealings with others start to expand her understanding. I'm guessing your characters can relate to the last sentence ?
I'm considering using a trinary narrative for my stories. Light and Dark are two sides of the same coin. The true heroes are the ones caught in the middle. This is the lesson I've taken from the culture war. No, I'm not a centrist. Centrists tend to be right-wing apologists. My view of Balance is similar to Star Wars. Balance isn't Light and Dark in equal measures. A character can't truly be good if they have antagonistic characteristics. A perfect example of that is Daemon Targaryen.
This only works within particular genre conventions. As Nietzsche says; all philosophy is ultimately autobiographical, revealing the life experiences of a philosophical movement that makes them arrive at particular conclusions. Good versus evil stories resonate with us, because we're drenched in a culture where the concept of spiritual warfare is, well, spiritually powerful to us. Our fiction echoes this underlying, borderline apocalyptic hope for stories about good against evil. I think that argument #2 is particularly weak here, because these are not universal concepts or themes. Not all stories are about hope. Not all stories are about the triumph of the human spirit. The example of Star Wars is particularly weak exactly because, as the trilogy progresses, the refusal of the call defies the dualism at the heart of the story. Narnia is an explicitly Christian story and exceptional in this regard. Just to be clear, I think the argumentation is weak. Personal preferences are, well, a matter of taste, but I think that presenting these ideas as "universal", the scope of fiction is dramatically narrowed to a retreading of the monomyth.
Technically you could do both. You could make two political views that are both understandable. But the consequences when implementet are night and day. So one is a well meaning opinion that works in theory along the lines of "the road to hell is paves with good intentions" while the other one is a bit of a cruel seeming opinion that leads to the overall good. The problem of this could be, that there are two contradictory narratives running. One is about the greyness of ideas and the other one the black and white of the consequences. If I had to solve that contradiction I would basically tell the same story out of two perspective. You follow a person who has to navigate the upper class and shape the world of ideas while another person lives in the lower class and is faced with all the consequences. I would probably deliberately make it so that the two never meet and I would also give both the equal number of space. That way I would show the duality of moral ambiguity. In some way it is very clear and obvious and the very same topic can be very nuanced. Another problem is that I'm a person with limited views. So the best I can do is guess what political views seem caring but are horrible in practice and which ones are not. And any choice I take will have plenty of disagreements by the readers. At best I can satisfy one political group when I decide on something but offend another one.
To me, that's not a binary narrative though, it's more of a nuanced, gray position where you're left asking the questions like: could the one position have been implemented and avoided the path to hell? or Could the other have been implemented without the cruelty? The story you suggested can be a fascinating and fantastic story, but one side isn't wholly evil and the other side wholly good. There's nuanced shades of gray in the middle and that's not the binary plot device. Conversely: In Tolkien's world there is never a shred of doubt that Ar-Pharazôn is evil. He usurps the throne of Númenor. Then he marches on Mordor, which sounds like a good act, but he's so prideful, he captures Sauron and takes him back to Númenor. And there of coure, Sauron manipulates the crap out of Ar-Pharazôn and basically leads to the fall. There's never any doubt that Ar-Pharazôn is doing the wrong thing and that's because Tolkien's world is very black and white. There's the good side and there's the bad side. And usurping the throne is bad and will come to a bad end. It's very black and white.
@@JustInTimeWorlds I don't think those questions necessarily arise. Lets's take the example of Narnia and the silver chair. There through bewitchment the green lady almost convinced the protagonists to belief her. And social bubbles sometimes creat an almost equally strong level of bewitchment. If you have to navigate a social class that is fully convinced of something that is actually not true, then their actions can be objectively wrong in every way you look at it. Unless of course you take up a very stringent set of assumptions. And let's assume that you are an opposing person in that social bubble. Since everybody constantly repeats those sets of assumptions, you have to be on guard to not slowly accept them too. The lower class figure who has to live out those desicions could be used as a reference point to show the objectivity aspects of it. In my opinion, there have been plenty of examples in history where what I described played out.
@@JustInTimeWorlds if by political its Totalitarianism vs Economic Freedom could be a focus. While the Empire of Alshiron isnt perfect. the cause of facing down the cyclic returns of the chairman is. The empire is often forced to put its squabbles with other powers to the side and reason with neutral powers in order to resist Derigar. Derigar portrays the Empire as an exploitative force obsessed with greed. The story focuses on cybernetic super soldiers facing down the demonic forces of the "party of derigar".. The empire sees their ultimate goal to end the chairman.
Your last point where you say, that former enemies working together can come across cynical, unless you prepared the characters for it, reminded me of something. *spoiler warning* I once read the webnovel "Desolate Era" there the main character grows stronger over time and discoveres more and more of the world. He was one of the most competitive characters in the story. And at the end of the book he defeated everything and discovered everything. There he suddenly lost all the drive he had during the story and was contempt in staying as he was. That felt very offputting. I think that was the biggest mistake of this story.
The thing the author of that webnovel clearly failed to grasp is that people who hunger for knowledge are never truly satiated. Even if they learn all the knowledge of the universe.
@@Aewon84 I agree. This genre is truly interesting all the way till the end. But I've never read a novel of that genre with a satisfying ending. If you build a story where the hunger for knowledge and competitiveness is the core, you can't really make a nice ending.
It has to be stressed that these are strengths of binary narratives ONLY when telling a story of epic scale, where you want to paint a whole group of characters as evil, to dehumanize them so that the audience wouldn't empathize with them and wouldn't feel sorrow or regret for their suffering. Be super careful not to even subconsciously add any identifiers of real-world races, nationalities or religions. Propaganda is the most destructive activity that an author can engage in. In a story of personal rather than epic scale, simplifying conflicts to a single dimension only weakens our belief about a character's feelings and values being real and weakens both the emotional impact and the universal themes that the writer is trying to evoke in us. Also, I argue that stories of individuals are the only stories that can garner a reader's empathy and emotional impact. That's why even the most epic stories are still told mainly through the actions of individuals.
I have a story called ETERNAL CHAIRMAN Democratic Peoples Republic of Derigar Holy Alshiron Empire Derigar is portrayed as this totalitarian regime ran by immortal necroamancers called serics. The regime smothers its population in propaganda, the entire economy is defined by the regime. The leader the Eternal Chairman takes both the role of a dark lord and of a totalitarian dictator in charge of a Dystopian regime. A regime that determines people will fight for the revolutionary "democracy" both in life and in death, The rise and fall of Derigar represents how totalitarian ideologies wont stay dead and seem to have a life of their own Alshai is a semi-constitutional monarchy who paints itself as an absolute one. Almost all power in Alshai is vested in the hands of councils of enterprises. They symbolize economic freedom, technological innovation, property rights. The Mercenary armies of the empire especially the cybernetic violet claw face on against the Totalitarian regime of Derigar.
really? I had "a Susan" in my family in about the same generation as Susan was. I found Susan's character very realistisc, as when one's alliancess to anything are without a real internal conviction, merely superficial - because this is what currenly makes one be repected. Then when something else makes one being respected, the allegiances change. It is a story about opportunism, that some people are outwardly motivated, and even if they make good allies at one moment, their alliance cannot be relied upon permanently. It is a fit warning imho to be prepared, that some who aligned with one in one part of their life do not have to do that all the way through and then the best thing is just to let them go and mourn what was, instead of trying to force them back to what they once were or seemed to be.
I never noticed that aspect of Susan. Perhaps my Christian bias and me being a teenager when reading Narnia was the reason for it. If I put myself into the shoes of an Atheist, then I can understand the perpsective of Marie (the creator of the video). Especially if we assume that Hell is endless torture. That way, a lack of interest in a certain topic is punished by eternal torture. I have a slightly more nuanced and less developped opinion of hell, so I don't think this framing is the chariteable option, but I understand that this is a possible option that some Christians uphold and that some Atheists are annoyed by. But your point is also pretty good. There are certainly people who are just on your side because they find your company agreeable for that span of time. And if the situation changes then you notice that they never cared for you and possibly even oppose you qute strongly.
@@benrex7775 well, as I see Hell more as a state of self-chose alienation, I assume I never saw much trouble with Susan, she stays where she wanted to stay, while others move on where they are called to and want to go, why would that be in any way problematic?
@@Chociewitka I have never really looked into all the ways hell could be according to the Bible or Christian authorities. I think we have too little information to actually know. But if God is how the Bible describes him to be, then he is just and loving. So I doubt he does pointless torture. That is why I also see hell in a pretty similar way as you do. But I have heard enough Atheists to know that some of them reject Christianity for the sole reason that they find the concept of hell immoral. At least the concept of hell they are raised with.
I've heard Atheists say, that they do not belief in any supernatural power of force. But in other conversations the same person says they belief that everything will turn for the good. WIth that I mean they think it was inevitable that life began to exist and it was inevitable that evolution creates life that is intelligent. When we look at humans then they belief that over a long time technology automatically improve and so does the ethicality of humans as a whole. Your second point made me think of these conversations. Do you think that can also be considered as a binary view of good and bad where progress is good and regress/traditionallity is bad?
Sure. You can develop a binary perspective around "conservatism good" and "progress bad" or vice versa. (Conservatism in this case defined as conservation of traditions). I think though that you're going to run into a reader problem. Clearly there are times when there should be progress (e.g. I don't think anyone wants to conserve the tradition of slavery or feudalism, but both of those are in our past so someone changed them). And there are times when progress should be avoided, or at least retarded (e.g. it's worth having a very long discussion about damage done to family structures by the industrial revolution and the rise of the nuclear family and the destruction of the extended family. Does that mean we should go back to those structures? Probably not, we're no longer an agrarian civilization, but it's still worth discussing to see what we can learn from those traditions). Sorry for the TLDR, I suppose the short answer is yes, you can, but be aware that by doing so, you might create fake binary narratives which will probably annoy more readers than it pleases.
@@JustInTimeWorlds I didn't mention that as a book idea. I just found that idea interesting and pondered on how to understand the views of my conversation partners I had in mind. And your feedback helped me see that it can be either of the two, depending on the individual. Although like you mentioned in the case of Boromir. Sometimes an idea can still be binary, even though the character or situation can be nuanced.
@@JustInTimeWorlds The focus of my story is Economic Freedom resisting Totalitarianism. speaking of feudalism. While the empire uses feudal titles for private enterprises partially because they see the term "chairman" as absolutely demonic. The empire views all sentient beings whether biological or robotic as deserving of rights which in the eyes of the empire come from "the spark of alshiron" essentially an allegory for Christianity as well as free economies where invention and creative pursuits are seen as holy. Its a blend of appreciation of the finer parts of tradition as well as a hopeful look into a future where technological innovation is allowed to continue. A really large emphasis is put on the fact that Derigar even if its uses more progressive language is an extremely old force of tyranny. Its a sort of mix of the "God Kings" of the ancient world, North Korea/USSR, Sauron's mordor ... the regimes propaganda is often treated as a running joke
Even though I usually enjoy you channel, and despite thematic narratives being absolutely being my jam. I find I have to disagree with basically everything said. Sorry, I could only watch 15 minutes, so if anything gets better later in the video then that happened too late for me, since I was so thoroughly annoyed by then that I simply could not go on. What are my issues? Well, I think dualism (binary story) is mostly boring, but the feature prized here is what I think makes them actually bad. I talk about morality, the moment when you have one side framed as good and the other as bad, then you no longer have anything of value to say, it is then just othering, propaganda, the conquest mentality that is too prevalent in western storytelling that I wish we could abandon or the colonialist BS that it is! Courage and other virtues actually become stronger when it is not clear that they are actually a supposedly good side. That is why samurai drama, that has not this nonsense of good and evil backed in, is so much stronger at exploring these virtues. By having a moral answer and the removal of any ambiguity, there is nothing left to explore,it becomes just preaching, and sadly only of the pastoral patriarchal kind that we really don't need more of. If you want to truly explore a binary, then make sure not to assign moral values to only one side, but treat both sides as equal, otherwise there will be no dilemma, and thus no depth for the characters.
@@Drudenfusz I think she addressed this pretty well when she talked about the difference between moral ambiguity from the reader's perspective vs the character's. It can be obvious from the reader's perspective who the "good guys" are, and the journey we're taken on can be the characters figuring that out. It can be obvious to both the reader and the characters what the Right Thing To Do is, and the story can be about either the character's internal struggle to hold true to that despite temptations to the contrary, or their struggle against external forces that consciously or unconsciously stand in the way. Look at 1984. It's very obvious that the Party is bad, but that doesn't take away from Winston's struggles to live under their rule. Look at LOTR. The central conflict is about trying to defeat Sauron, whose goal is to subjugate or wipe out the protagonists' entire civilization - regardless of his motives, it's pretty clear the ends don't justify the means. But a core component of the story is that ultimately the influence of the Ring is too great for any mortal mind to withstand, and that faced with such temptation even the humblest will succumb to the lust for power. Another theme is "when faced with seemingly overwhelming odds, do you crumble or hold firm?" The nature of the overwhelming odds doesn't matter really - they're a catalyst for the growth of the protagonist through their struggle. And if what they're facing doesn't matter, then why not make it something evil? That's not preaching - it's just storytelling. Obviously it CAN be preachy (looking at you, Narnia). But it doesn't HAVE to be. There are plenty of things universally considered bad that can be called upon when creating evil characters, and we don't always need to explore their inner psyche and backstory for the narrative to be compelling.
My abilities in writing seem to pivot to good vs evil. Glad to see that’s a good thing
Nothing wrong with it at all :) It's not my favorite tool, but it's still a great storytelling device with fantastic themes.
I say lean into your strengths.
@@omegagilgamesh thanks
Binary narratives are fine, honestly. A grand adventure is a very different story to the court culture of a grand empire.
💯 different horses for different courses.
I've been waiting to see this video with baited breath, and I can safely say that I am not disappointed. Definitely articulates some of the reasons as to why I connect with these tales, and even how certain story tropes I would otherwise dislike can still work for me in a story. Consider the like well-earned.
Thank you :)
Good versus evil is the starting point. Without evil there is no conflict, there are only several characters sitting around a table and agreeing they should all go home because there's nothing to do.
Nice T-shirts.
One thing to keep in mind ( as i am rewatching GoT) is you can have a morally gray world and still have righteous good guys in it, like the starks.
I have to say that Martin masterfully pulled this off though, as I am struggling with these things in my own fantasy story.
Great lecture! Right now i'm imagining creators of Rings of power tied to chairs a listening neverending loop of this wisdom.
Excellent video! It really helped me to feel confident enough to simplify my narrative in favor of focusing on characters internal struggles over more complex political narratives. Not such an easy decision where I feel so many of the stories nowadays focus on moral ambiguity on a large scale across governments. I enjoy those stories as well, but characters are what interest me the most and this video helped me understand what draws me to binary narratives - the freedom to really focus on internal morality and the responsibility/power of the individual. Thank you! 😁
You are very welcome! Not every story needs "shades of gray villain" or moral ambiguity and I will die on the hill that you should chose the framing device that best suits the story YOU want to tell :D
Love the binary plot nuanced characters. Makes sense in reality too. Years ago, I had a debate with myself as to whether in fact, the creator was good or evil, and is good greater than evil? Because of beauty in nature, which is massively powerful., love between and among people, human ability to experience connection with other humans and joy, and finally the existence of Hope I do believe that good is more powerful, ultimately, and finally than evil. As for the nature of the creator, my thought at this point is if you are all powerful and can make and do anything, what is the one thing you do not have? For now, my answer is freely given love.
Loved the video!
There is something about good versus evil stories that gives this comfort we cannot find in other narratives, and this is why I believe we still want them to exist. However, I feel they do base themselves on the inevitability of the good winning over evil, and I think it brings a false sense of comfort. Maybe ideological comfort?
I don't know if that, in the long run, contributes to us humans getting used to avoiding uncertainty and the complexity present in those universal values we think should be universal, and makes us lazy in accepting other interpretations of said values.
I also think uniting against a common enemy could be problematic, as it's hard to say what that enemy looks like most of the time. What is good, and what is evil? Can good and evil be set in stone with no option for nuance?
Either way, I still understand why these narratives exist and I do understand that we also need some relief when we're confronted with a tough reality as is ours :)
This is just food for thought!
There are binary narratives in stories based on the moral complexities of lived experience, but they are softer than good vs evil. A common device is male vs. female or synonymous opposite stereotypes. But any such device poorly used can easily come off as just masked good vs evil.
And even worse, it can paint a picture where one side of the stereotype is painted as "universally evil" which is a trap easy to fall into. (All women as manipulative or all men as abusive leaps to mind). And that is the danger with binary narratives, IMO. The moment you stray into those real world identities and stereotypes, the loss of nuance is not realistic.
@@JustInTimeWorlds But it is well used, if cynical, if both sides of the stereotype are painted as "universally evil" (all manipulative women vs. all abusive men as in your example).
@@JustInTimeWorlds I have a number of queer characters in my stories, including two of the main characters (I'm a member of the rainbow community myself🏳🌈), which is another type of character that's often stereotyped. I'm going to be very careful not to use any of those gay stereotypes.
One of my gay mains is a brilliant swordsman, so no worries there. The other is a bit of a weakling at first, but he toughens up and becomes quite good with the sword, himself. He also becomes a powerful sorceror. The one gay stereotype I'm giving him is that he has a lot of respect for girls/women.
CS Lewis had plans to write Susan’s redemption but he died before he could do that.
I wlnder how many stories take the traditional good v evil path just to show the shades of grey later into the story.
So, this can make for a good narrative, but you need to sow seeds of nuance early, otherwise it can come across as shoe-horned into the plot :D But it can make a GREAT story. Especially if you do deep 3d person limited because then narrator's understanding can change as they experience more of the world and that takes the reader along for the ride and the character growth.
@@JustInTimeWorlds that is something I'm going to have to keep in mind. My mc starts out with very black and white thinking. Throughout the story, she is forced into situations where she cannot keep her morals and achieve her goals. Eventually she gets to a more nuanced stance. There is a "evil" god early on who throws doubt on her moral system. They are supposed to be a fairly frequent character. Basically the MC makes a deal with this god so she can go back to earth after dying. She has to listen to the god while pursuing her own goals.
@@thecriticalone1783 My stories might be a little similar because my four main are children in the first book (about 11 at the start), and like children tend to do they view the world in black and white. Even my main main, Elkar, who's incredibly intelligent (basically, he's the Hermione of the group). Despite his vast knowledge he still has that childish naivety.
I'm going for more of a trinary narrative for later on, though.
@@Aewon84 sounds cool, and I'd be happy to hear more about your world, and talk more about mine. Lol
Yeah my mc starts as a 15 year old with a very limited view point about the world around her. The world is very harsh and information is hard to find compared to our world. So it makes it really easy to fall into a specific mindset , however her travels and dealings with others start to expand her understanding. I'm guessing your characters can relate to the last sentence ?
I'm considering using a trinary narrative for my stories. Light and Dark are two sides of the same coin. The true heroes are the ones caught in the middle. This is the lesson I've taken from the culture war. No, I'm not a centrist. Centrists tend to be right-wing apologists. My view of Balance is similar to Star Wars. Balance isn't Light and Dark in equal measures. A character can't truly be good if they have antagonistic characteristics. A perfect example of that is Daemon Targaryen.
This only works within particular genre conventions. As Nietzsche says; all philosophy is ultimately autobiographical, revealing the life experiences of a philosophical movement that makes them arrive at particular conclusions. Good versus evil stories resonate with us, because we're drenched in a culture where the concept of spiritual warfare is, well, spiritually powerful to us. Our fiction echoes this underlying, borderline apocalyptic hope for stories about good against evil.
I think that argument #2 is particularly weak here, because these are not universal concepts or themes. Not all stories are about hope. Not all stories are about the triumph of the human spirit. The example of Star Wars is particularly weak exactly because, as the trilogy progresses, the refusal of the call defies the dualism at the heart of the story. Narnia is an explicitly Christian story and exceptional in this regard.
Just to be clear, I think the argumentation is weak. Personal preferences are, well, a matter of taste, but I think that presenting these ideas as "universal", the scope of fiction is dramatically narrowed to a retreading of the monomyth.
You'll probably prefer my politics video where I argue for the non-binary narrative.
Technically you could do both. You could make two political views that are both understandable. But the consequences when implementet are night and day. So one is a well meaning opinion that works in theory along the lines of "the road to hell is paves with good intentions" while the other one is a bit of a cruel seeming opinion that leads to the overall good.
The problem of this could be, that there are two contradictory narratives running. One is about the greyness of ideas and the other one the black and white of the consequences.
If I had to solve that contradiction I would basically tell the same story out of two perspective. You follow a person who has to navigate the upper class and shape the world of ideas while another person lives in the lower class and is faced with all the consequences.
I would probably deliberately make it so that the two never meet and I would also give both the equal number of space. That way I would show the duality of moral ambiguity. In some way it is very clear and obvious and the very same topic can be very nuanced.
Another problem is that I'm a person with limited views. So the best I can do is guess what political views seem caring but are horrible in practice and which ones are not. And any choice I take will have plenty of disagreements by the readers. At best I can satisfy one political group when I decide on something but offend another one.
To me, that's not a binary narrative though, it's more of a nuanced, gray position where you're left asking the questions like: could the one position have been implemented and avoided the path to hell? or Could the other have been implemented without the cruelty?
The story you suggested can be a fascinating and fantastic story, but one side isn't wholly evil and the other side wholly good. There's nuanced shades of gray in the middle and that's not the binary plot device.
Conversely: In Tolkien's world there is never a shred of doubt that Ar-Pharazôn is evil. He usurps the throne of Númenor. Then he marches on Mordor, which sounds like a good act, but he's so prideful, he captures Sauron and takes him back to Númenor. And there of coure, Sauron manipulates the crap out of Ar-Pharazôn and basically leads to the fall.
There's never any doubt that Ar-Pharazôn is doing the wrong thing and that's because Tolkien's world is very black and white. There's the good side and there's the bad side. And usurping the throne is bad and will come to a bad end.
It's very black and white.
@@JustInTimeWorlds I don't think those questions necessarily arise. Lets's take the example of Narnia and the silver chair. There through bewitchment the green lady almost convinced the protagonists to belief her. And social bubbles sometimes creat an almost equally strong level of bewitchment. If you have to navigate a social class that is fully convinced of something that is actually not true, then their actions can be objectively wrong in every way you look at it. Unless of course you take up a very stringent set of assumptions. And let's assume that you are an opposing person in that social bubble. Since everybody constantly repeats those sets of assumptions, you have to be on guard to not slowly accept them too.
The lower class figure who has to live out those desicions could be used as a reference point to show the objectivity aspects of it.
In my opinion, there have been plenty of examples in history where what I described played out.
@@JustInTimeWorlds if by political its Totalitarianism vs Economic Freedom could be a focus. While the Empire of Alshiron isnt perfect. the cause of facing down the cyclic returns of the chairman is. The empire is often forced to put its squabbles with other powers to the side and reason with neutral powers in order to resist Derigar. Derigar portrays the Empire as an exploitative force obsessed with greed. The story focuses on cybernetic super soldiers facing down the demonic forces of the "party of derigar".. The empire sees their ultimate goal to end the chairman.
Your last point where you say, that former enemies working together can come across cynical, unless you prepared the characters for it, reminded me of something.
*spoiler warning*
I once read the webnovel "Desolate Era" there the main character grows stronger over time and discoveres more and more of the world. He was one of the most competitive characters in the story. And at the end of the book he defeated everything and discovered everything. There he suddenly lost all the drive he had during the story and was contempt in staying as he was. That felt very offputting. I think that was the biggest mistake of this story.
The thing the author of that webnovel clearly failed to grasp is that people who hunger for knowledge are never truly satiated. Even if they learn all the knowledge of the universe.
@@Aewon84 I agree. This genre is truly interesting all the way till the end. But I've never read a novel of that genre with a satisfying ending. If you build a story where the hunger for knowledge and competitiveness is the core, you can't really make a nice ending.
It has to be stressed that these are strengths of binary narratives ONLY when telling a story of epic scale, where you want to paint a whole group of characters as evil, to dehumanize them so that the audience wouldn't empathize with them and wouldn't feel sorrow or regret for their suffering. Be super careful not to even subconsciously add any identifiers of real-world races, nationalities or religions. Propaganda is the most destructive activity that an author can engage in.
In a story of personal rather than epic scale, simplifying conflicts to a single dimension only weakens our belief about a character's feelings and values being real and weakens both the emotional impact and the universal themes that the writer is trying to evoke in us. Also, I argue that stories of individuals are the only stories that can garner a reader's empathy and emotional impact. That's why even the most epic stories are still told mainly through the actions of individuals.
I have a story called ETERNAL CHAIRMAN
Democratic Peoples Republic of Derigar
Holy Alshiron Empire
Derigar is portrayed as this totalitarian regime ran by immortal necroamancers called serics. The regime smothers its population in propaganda, the entire economy is defined by the regime. The leader the Eternal Chairman takes both the role of a dark lord and of a totalitarian dictator in charge of a Dystopian regime. A regime that determines people will fight for the revolutionary "democracy" both in life and in death, The rise and fall of Derigar represents how totalitarian ideologies wont stay dead and seem to have a life of their own
Alshai is a semi-constitutional monarchy who paints itself as an absolute one. Almost all power in Alshai is vested in the hands of councils of enterprises. They symbolize economic freedom, technological innovation, property rights. The Mercenary armies of the empire especially the cybernetic violet claw face on against the Totalitarian regime of Derigar.
really? I had "a Susan" in my family in about the same generation as Susan was. I found Susan's character very realistisc, as when one's alliancess to anything are without a real internal conviction, merely superficial - because this is what currenly makes one be repected. Then when something else makes one being respected, the allegiances change. It is a story about opportunism, that some people are outwardly motivated, and even if they make good allies at one moment, their alliance cannot be relied upon permanently. It is a fit warning imho to be prepared, that some who aligned with one in one part of their life do not have to do that all the way through and then the best thing is just to let them go and mourn what was, instead of trying to force them back to what they once were or seemed to be.
I never noticed that aspect of Susan. Perhaps my Christian bias and me being a teenager when reading Narnia was the reason for it.
If I put myself into the shoes of an Atheist, then I can understand the perpsective of Marie (the creator of the video). Especially if we assume that Hell is endless torture. That way, a lack of interest in a certain topic is punished by eternal torture. I have a slightly more nuanced and less developped opinion of hell, so I don't think this framing is the chariteable option, but I understand that this is a possible option that some Christians uphold and that some Atheists are annoyed by.
But your point is also pretty good. There are certainly people who are just on your side because they find your company agreeable for that span of time. And if the situation changes then you notice that they never cared for you and possibly even oppose you qute strongly.
@@benrex7775 well, as I see Hell more as a state of self-chose alienation, I assume I never saw much trouble with Susan, she stays where she wanted to stay, while others move on where they are called to and want to go, why would that be in any way problematic?
@@Chociewitka I have never really looked into all the ways hell could be according to the Bible or Christian authorities. I think we have too little information to actually know. But if God is how the Bible describes him to be, then he is just and loving. So I doubt he does pointless torture.
That is why I also see hell in a pretty similar way as you do.
But I have heard enough Atheists to know that some of them reject Christianity for the sole reason that they find the concept of hell immoral. At least the concept of hell they are raised with.
write good VS better evil
hahahaha. I guess that's one way to read it.
Im just plain bored with post modernist moral ambiguity , it was cool at first but got tiresome, I've stated to read older books
Justice For Susan
I've heard Atheists say, that they do not belief in any supernatural power of force. But in other conversations the same person says they belief that everything will turn for the good. WIth that I mean they think it was inevitable that life began to exist and it was inevitable that evolution creates life that is intelligent. When we look at humans then they belief that over a long time technology automatically improve and so does the ethicality of humans as a whole.
Your second point made me think of these conversations. Do you think that can also be considered as a binary view of good and bad where progress is good and regress/traditionallity is bad?
Philip Pullman's His Dark Materials is a binary fantasy trilogy about just that. The author is an outspoken atheist.
Sure. You can develop a binary perspective around "conservatism good" and "progress bad" or vice versa. (Conservatism in this case defined as conservation of traditions).
I think though that you're going to run into a reader problem. Clearly there are times when there should be progress (e.g. I don't think anyone wants to conserve the tradition of slavery or feudalism, but both of those are in our past so someone changed them). And there are times when progress should be avoided, or at least retarded (e.g. it's worth having a very long discussion about damage done to family structures by the industrial revolution and the rise of the nuclear family and the destruction of the extended family. Does that mean we should go back to those structures? Probably not, we're no longer an agrarian civilization, but it's still worth discussing to see what we can learn from those traditions).
Sorry for the TLDR, I suppose the short answer is yes, you can, but be aware that by doing so, you might create fake binary narratives which will probably annoy more readers than it pleases.
@@JustInTimeWorlds I didn't mention that as a book idea. I just found that idea interesting and pondered on how to understand the views of my conversation partners I had in mind. And your feedback helped me see that it can be either of the two, depending on the individual. Although like you mentioned in the case of Boromir. Sometimes an idea can still be binary, even though the character or situation can be nuanced.
@@francescocarlini7613 I think I've heard of this book, but I've never read it. Thanks for the mention.
@@JustInTimeWorlds The focus of my story is Economic Freedom resisting Totalitarianism. speaking of feudalism. While the empire uses feudal titles for private enterprises partially because they see the term "chairman" as absolutely demonic. The empire views all sentient beings whether biological or robotic as deserving of rights which in the eyes of the empire come from "the spark of alshiron" essentially an allegory for Christianity as well as free economies where invention and creative pursuits are seen as holy. Its a blend of appreciation of the finer parts of tradition as well as a hopeful look into a future where technological innovation is allowed to continue. A really large emphasis is put on the fact that Derigar even if its uses more progressive language is an extremely old force of tyranny. Its a sort of mix of the "God Kings" of the ancient world, North Korea/USSR, Sauron's mordor ... the regimes propaganda is often treated as a running joke
Even though I usually enjoy you channel, and despite thematic narratives being absolutely being my jam. I find I have to disagree with basically everything said. Sorry, I could only watch 15 minutes, so if anything gets better later in the video then that happened too late for me, since I was so thoroughly annoyed by then that I simply could not go on. What are my issues? Well, I think dualism (binary story) is mostly boring, but the feature prized here is what I think makes them actually bad. I talk about morality, the moment when you have one side framed as good and the other as bad, then you no longer have anything of value to say, it is then just othering, propaganda, the conquest mentality that is too prevalent in western storytelling that I wish we could abandon or the colonialist BS that it is! Courage and other virtues actually become stronger when it is not clear that they are actually a supposedly good side. That is why samurai drama, that has not this nonsense of good and evil backed in, is so much stronger at exploring these virtues. By having a moral answer and the removal of any ambiguity, there is nothing left to explore,it becomes just preaching, and sadly only of the pastoral patriarchal kind that we really don't need more of. If you want to truly explore a binary, then make sure not to assign moral values to only one side, but treat both sides as equal, otherwise there will be no dilemma, and thus no depth for the characters.
@@Drudenfusz I think she addressed this pretty well when she talked about the difference between moral ambiguity from the reader's perspective vs the character's.
It can be obvious from the reader's perspective who the "good guys" are, and the journey we're taken on can be the characters figuring that out.
It can be obvious to both the reader and the characters what the Right Thing To Do is, and the story can be about either the character's internal struggle to hold true to that despite temptations to the contrary, or their struggle against external forces that consciously or unconsciously stand in the way.
Look at 1984. It's very obvious that the Party is bad, but that doesn't take away from Winston's struggles to live under their rule.
Look at LOTR. The central conflict is about trying to defeat Sauron, whose goal is to subjugate or wipe out the protagonists' entire civilization - regardless of his motives, it's pretty clear the ends don't justify the means. But a core component of the story is that ultimately the influence of the Ring is too great for any mortal mind to withstand, and that faced with such temptation even the humblest will succumb to the lust for power. Another theme is "when faced with seemingly overwhelming odds, do you crumble or hold firm?"
The nature of the overwhelming odds doesn't matter really - they're a catalyst for the growth of the protagonist through their struggle. And if what they're facing doesn't matter, then why not make it something evil? That's not preaching - it's just storytelling.
Obviously it CAN be preachy (looking at you, Narnia). But it doesn't HAVE to be. There are plenty of things universally considered bad that can be called upon when creating evil characters, and we don't always need to explore their inner psyche and backstory for the narrative to be compelling.