Darkness and Evil -- Examing the Metaphor

[Kristopher]

Don't let the academic-sounding title scare you away. Please?

 

As mentioned in another thread on HGDB, light and dark are often used as metaphors or stand-ins for good and evil. I keep wondering why this is. I have some of my own ideas, I know some of the other explanations that have been offered for this.

 

However, I want others' thoughts on this matter, specifically on two questions:

 

A) Why are these associations made? Why are those particular metaphors used?

 

In what ways, in fiction and gaming, can these be contradicted? How can the expectations be turned on their heads?

[Lord Liaden]

Re: Darkness and Evil -- Examing the Metaphor

 

One of the most obvious explanations for this metaphor is that we are a predominantly vision-based species. The light reveals the reality of our environment, but in the dark terrible things may be hidden, not only real dangers but the even more horrible ones of our imagination.

 

It's worth noting, though, that not all manifestations of light and dark in popular culture necessarily follow those conventions. For example, in civilizations surrounded by desert such as Egypt, the sun and the gods associated with it were sometimes depicted as fierce and destructive, bringers of drought and fire. OTOH for some fictional nocturnal cultures, including Tolkien's elves, the night is a cool and quiet time of rest and comfort.

[Mike W]

Re: Darkness and Evil -- Examing the Metaphor

 

I suspect most of it goes back to ancient mythologies where the world was spun out of darkness. So darkness equals chaos and non-existance. Light brings life. It worked this way for the Greeks and the Norse among others. And it shows up in Genesis in the Bible as well. All was dark until God brought light to the universe. This is probably further re-inforced by the often used "light of reason" metaphor which goes back at least to Plato (think about the myth of the cave).

 

As for turning the metaphor on its head - as mentioned before, the Egyptians had a very different view. Or you could create a species that lived in darkness due to some physiological reason, so the bright light hurts their eyes. You could also consider having a god who specializes in "secrets that need to be kept" knowledge that should not see the "light of day" so to speak. In short, since most mythological meanings used light as a positive aspect, you need to find ways for the light to be harmful so that people would naturally prefer the darkness.

[Robyn]

Re: Darkness and Evil -- Examing the Metaphor

 

In what ways' date=' in fiction and gaming, can these be contradicted? How can the expectations be turned on their heads?[/quote']

 

Demonization. Some say that the victors write history books, others that the survivors do; while this may have some overlap with that thread in the Roleplaying forum about winning and losing versus a tie, the thing to remember is that anyone who writes history books can (potentially) deceive future generations about who won and who lost. Also, unless the political needs of the moment call for rewriting a particular section of history, changes will probably be gradual and only to accomodate new changes to national philosophy.

 

Because of this, history may seem rather fluid, so it's vital to have some sort of reliable long-term records, possibly of the long-lived people who were actually around way back when. What people were won't matter much to anyone when all that's still left is who people are. Even when memory still recalls the past, it won't influence the present for people who don't base their personal identities on a romanticized ideal of their ancestors or some other idols (or the factual status of such a belief).

 

Modern players may or may not recognize and avoid racism (in particular, the aspect that stereotypes individuals or groups based on their origin) in gaming, it depends on what the setting (explicitly) calls for and, if racism would be appropriate, how well the players can roleplay. The other side of what you could be asking about is self-admittedly "dark" (or evil) people; the first can arise culturally through a tendency of villains to associate themselves with certain SFX, the latter can be seen as ethical centrism (when, really, the particular combination of values that are upheld as virtuous may be arbitrary, and not inherently perfect).

 

None of this directly answers your question, but I've given this sort of thing a great deal of thought in the past (few years), so I find myself unable to write a few trees' worth of paper because I can't see them for the forests in my mind. This should give you an idea of the factors I found it productive to take into account, though, and hopefully one or two of them will give you an angle to look at this in that you hadn't noticed before.

[Cantriped]

Re: Darkness and Evil -- Examing the Metaphor

 

Hmm, I Agree that dark tends to be villified because it is in a snese 'harmful' to us, it deprives us of a critical sense and allow's "Evil" to be perpetuated where our eyes will not discover it.

The last few years however I've seen many examples (and a growing tendency) for what used to be considered the bad guys to act as the protagonists in stories. This is producing a "Shades of Grey" morality by infering that the darkness isn't innatly evil, but rather what it is used for. Personally I like this view much better.

[Kristopher]

Re: Darkness and Evil -- Examing the Metaphor

 

Demonization. Some say that the victors write history books, others that the survivors do; while this may have some overlap with that thread in the Roleplaying forum about winning and losing versus a tie, the thing to remember is that anyone who writes history books can (potentially) deceive future generations about who won and who lost. Also, unless the political needs of the moment call for rewriting a particular section of history, changes will probably be gradual and only to accomodate new changes to national philosophy.

 

Because of this, history may seem rather fluid, so it's vital to have some sort of reliable long-term records, possibly of the long-lived people who were actually around way back when. What people were won't matter much to anyone when all that's still left is who people are. Even when memory still recalls the past, it won't influence the present for people who don't base their personal identities on a romanticized ideal of their ancestors or some other idols (or the factual status of such a belief).

 

Modern players may or may not recognize and avoid racism (in particular, the aspect that stereotypes individuals or groups based on their origin) in gaming, it depends on what the setting (explicitly) calls for and, if racism would be appropriate, how well the players can roleplay. The other side of what you could be asking about is self-admittedly "dark" (or evil) people; the first can arise culturally through a tendency of villains to associate themselves with certain SFX, the latter can be seen as ethical centrism (when, really, the particular combination of values that are upheld as virtuous may be arbitrary, and not inherently perfect).

 

None of this directly answers your question, but I've given this sort of thing a great deal of thought in the past (few years), so I find myself unable to write a few trees' worth of paper because I can't see them for the forests in my mind. This should give you an idea of the factors I found it productive to take into account, though, and hopefully one or two of them will give you an angle to look at this in that you hadn't noticed before.

 

You've kinda hit on what I've been thinking about. The general concept I've been considering is that the "gods of light" are the intruders, and that Darkness was there first, but lost the critical battle. The upstart gods and their children wrote history to make Darkness out to be evil, destructive, and terrible.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Darkness and Evil -- Examing the Metaphor

 

A) Why are these associations made? Why are those particular metaphors used?

 

In what ways, in fiction and gaming, can these be contradicted? How can the expectations be turned on their heads?

 

Dude, this is a thesis level question. You're asking if someone (in this case, me, the author) can challenge the most basic essence of how we view good and evil and what lens and definition we place on it. Good heavens.

 

Okay, question one. Why are these associations made? Why are those particular metaphors use, are actually two totally separate questions. The first, why are these associations made, goes back quite some time. In Christian Mythology you have the "light of heaven" and the "darkness of hell" - the Divine Comedy uses this as we climb up the Devil's Leg OUT of Hell and into "the light." It's also used as an allegory for Wisdom or Knowledge - for example, the Allegory of the Cave.

 

If we're going to go REALLY far back, we can start with the Descent of Inanna. Since 3000 BC, we've associated "death" with interment, and thusly going "down" - Inanna leaves the light (order) and decends into the darkness of the underworld to face her sister (chaos). Hence, if Hell is down (and across the River Styx, etc. & so forth) then Heaven must be up. What else is up? Right, the sun (and the moon, but that's part of element two).

 

I'll break out the Campbell and simplify this - Light (Goodness) is synonymous with Order, Knowledge, Understanding. The "light goes on," the "light of knowledge" and having the path laid out before you. All of these things require you to see what's in front of you. Darkness, by contrast, hides and shrouds things. It makes it difficult to discerne what's happening - it's Fog of War, Confusion, the Monster Under the Bed (or in the closet, or in the darkening wood, take your pick).

 

So. We make those associations because they're embedded in the collective subconcious (Jung) of all the stories that we tell; they're used because we're all familiar with them. Changing these tends to make people uncomfortable, it confuses them and takes them out of the associations that they make easily.

 

Now, part B, how do we turn it on it's head? It's already been done. Dark Champions is a prime example, since many of those characters are Anti Heroes - those who start off as "heroic" styled characters but through one way or another wind up as Vigilitantes (on the wrong side of the law, and so on). Many times we over think these things - the question, in my mind, is far less "How do we do this?" and much more, as I've said many times on these boards, what kind of story do you want to tell?

 

This is the first question that lends any sort of definition to what you'll be doing. Do you want to invert those symbols? That's really very simple. Create your Evil Empire using all Good/Heaven imagery. Your heroes, suddenly, are facing down the perceived heroes and part of their quest is proving where the evil lies. For that game to work, you MUST spend at least three or four sessions (and issue a "you know this from living here your whole life" primer) so it's clear to the PCs how the world is going to react to them and their actions.

 

WE know the evil is there, the PLAYER knows the evil is there, but the world view is that the so-called Rebellion is just a bunch of upstarts who have no business ruining their convenient way of life. Not to be confused with Star Wars, where we know from the get-go the Empire IS evil; there's no ambiguity. And with that LACK of ambiguity comes certainty as to where the line is drawn. The more ambiguous this becomes, the less clear the good/evil barrier is.

 

So, step two in gaming, don't run four color. Allow me to explain; I don't mean "super heroes" I mean any scenario in which the lines are completely defined. The essence of the good/evil conflict and it's symbolism is that it's skin deep. When we rely on them, we're relying them actively because it makes everything much simpler.

 

Those are some thoughts. Does that answer (or begin to answer, to be fair) the question? This is a massive topic that I couldn't cover in 20,000 words and 20+ sources.

[Kristopher]

Re: Darkness and Evil -- Examing the Metaphor

 

Dude, this is a thesis level question. You're asking if someone (in this case, me, the author) can challenge the most basic essence of how we view good and evil and what lens and definition we place on it. Good heavens.

 

Okay, question one. Why are these associations made? Why are those particular metaphors use, are actually two totally separate questions. The first, why are these associations made, goes back quite some time. In Christian Mythology you have the "light of heaven" and the "darkness of hell" - the Divine Comedy uses this as we climb up the Devil's Leg OUT of Hell and into "the light." It's also used as an allegory for Wisdom or Knowledge - for example, the Allegory of the Cave.

 

If we're going to go REALLY far back, we can start with the Descent of Inanna. Since 3000 BC, we've associated "death" with interment, and thusly going "down" - Inanna leaves the light (order) and decends into the darkness of the underworld to face her sister (chaos). Hence, if Hell is down (and across the River Styx, etc. & so forth) then Heaven must be up. What else is up? Right, the sun (and the moon, but that's part of element two).

 

I'll break out the Campbell and simplify this - Light (Goodness) is synonymous with Order, Knowledge, Understanding. The "light goes on," the "light of knowledge" and having the path laid out before you. All of these things require you to see what's in front of you. Darkness, by contrast, hides and shrouds things. It makes it difficult to discerne what's happening - it's Fog of War, Confusion, the Monster Under the Bed (or in the closet, or in the darkening wood, take your pick).

 

So. We make those associations because they're embedded in the collective subconcious (Jung) of all the stories that we tell; they're used because we're all familiar with them. Changing these tends to make people uncomfortable, it confuses them and takes them out of the associations that they make easily.

 

Now, part B, how do we turn it on it's head? It's already been done. Dark Champions is a prime example, since many of those characters are Anti Heroes - those who start off as "heroic" styled characters but through one way or another wind up as Vigilitantes (on the wrong side of the law, and so on). Many times we over think these things - the question, in my mind, is far less "How do we do this?" and much more, as I've said many times on these boards, what kind of story do you want to tell?

 

This is the first question that lends any sort of definition to what you'll be doing. Do you want to invert those symbols? That's really very simple. Create your Evil Empire using all Good/Heaven imagery. Your heroes, suddenly, are facing down the perceived heroes and part of their quest is proving where the evil lies. For that game to work, you MUST spend at least three or four sessions (and issue a "you know this from living here your whole life" primer) so it's clear to the PCs how the world is going to react to them and their actions.

 

WE know the evil is there, the PLAYER knows the evil is there, but the world view is that the so-called Rebellion is just a bunch of upstarts who have no business ruining their convenient way of life. Not to be confused with Star Wars, where we know from the get-go the Empire IS evil; there's no ambiguity. And with that LACK of ambiguity comes certainty as to where the line is drawn. The more ambiguous this becomes, the less clear the good/evil barrier is.

 

So, step two in gaming, don't run four color. Allow me to explain; I don't mean "super heroes" I mean any scenario in which the lines are completely defined. The essence of the good/evil conflict and it's symbolism is that it's skin deep. When we rely on them, we're relying them actively because it makes everything much simpler.

 

Those are some thoughts. Does that answer (or begin to answer, to be fair) the question? This is a massive topic that I couldn't cover in 20,000 words and 20+ sources.

 

Thank you for what you did post. Everything helps.

 

(Although it seems that the answers I'm getting to the first question are things I already suspected -- those seem to be the accepted theories, don't they.)

 

Anything you might recommend reading?

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Darkness and Evil -- Examing the Metaphor

 

Yah, Jung wrote a book about it (the collective subconcious) but I haven't read it. If you want to learn the heart & soul of mythology, and what drives it, then pick up Hero of a Thousand Faces (Campbell). If you're looking for examples of great DRAMA, and a sort of "real world" interaction, then Edmund Spencer's Faerie Queene is a phenomenal book which I utterly loathed (Octopentameter, or whatever it was called, bored me to TEARS). However! The first story, the Red Cross Knight, is very good and a great example of the lines of good & evil you're looking for.

 

The Divine Comedy is a must read, which if you haven't gone through it, you should. Also, in the exact same vein, Milton's Paradise Lost, which paints the Devil as a sympathetic figure, purely for the purpose of showing that he is NOT to be pitied. Paradise Lost is the source of much of the modern Christian Mythos (NB: My use of the phrase Christian Mythos, to those reading, is not meant in ANY WAY as a religious challenge; it's a literal reference to dealing with the 'mythology' - the core stories of Christianity - in writing).

 

Now, like I said originally, I can be much more useful if I knew what kind of story you wanted to tell. Where are you going with the answers to the questions? I can direct you to some other material based on that as well.

[Robyn]

Re: Darkness and Evil -- Examing the Metaphor

 

You've kinda hit on what I've been thinking about. The general concept I've been considering is that the "gods of light" are the intruders' date=' and that Darkness was there first, but lost the critical battle. The upstart gods and their children wrote history to make Darkness out to be evil, destructive, and terrible.[/quote']

 

This may not be entirely accurate. Think the "Vorlons vs. Shadows" philosophy in Babylon 5. Also see the Duncan Deegan: Oracle For Hire webcomics, come to think of it

 

Law, or Chaos, while each possessing attractive qualities, may destroy the universe (or reality itself) at their most extreme, pure expressions.

 

So. We make those associations because they're embedded in the collective subconcious (Jung) of all the stories that we tell; they're used because we're all familiar with them. Changing these tends to make people uncomfortable' date=' it confuses them and takes them out of the associations that they make easily.[/quote']

 

This is an excellent example, Kristopher, of how Thia and I think alike

[Lucius]

Re: Darkness and Evil -- Examing the Metaphor

 

I suspect most of it goes back to ancient mythologies where the world was spun out of darkness. So darkness equals chaos and non-existance. Light brings life. It worked this way for the Greeks and the Norse among others

 

Actually, the Norse cosmology has the world brought forth from the interaction of Fire and Ice. There are Jotuns (Titans, or Giants) of both Fire and Ice, and neither group was more or less evil than the other – although Loki, come to think of it, was born to a woman of the Fire Giants wasn’t He?

 

Dude, this is a thesis level question. You're asking if someone (in this case, me, the author) can challenge the most basic essence of how we view good and evil and what lens and definition we place on it. Good heavens.

 

 

Is he?

 

I think the fact that you view these metaphors as “the most basic essence of how we view good and evil” is very telling in itself.

 

If you're looking for examples of great DRAMA, and a sort of "real world" interaction, then Edmund Spencer's Faerie Queene is a phenomenal book which I utterly loathed (Octopentameter, or whatever it was called, bored me to TEARS). However! The first story, the Red Cross Knight, is very good and a great example of the lines of good & evil you're looking for.

 

Drove me nuts. I think Spenser was a hack. Nothing anybody does in the story makes any sense.

 

I just can’t get past the part where the Princess and the Lion spend the night with this mother and daughter. The Lion, as usual, sits up and watches all night. It watches all night and travels all day. Okay, I can swallow that, it’s some kind of mighty magical lion. The daughter’s boyfriend comes to visit while everyone but the Lion sleeps. He knocks on the door, and nobody hears him except the Lion. He shouts and swears and pounds, and nobody hears him except the Lion. He knocks the door down and bursts in, and nobody hears him except the Lion. The Lion pounces, kills, and eats him, and nobody hears it except the Lion. Must be heavy sleepers. Then everyone wakes up in the morning, has breakfast, and the Princess and Lion set out on their journey – and only after they’re out of sight do the two women notice things like the door broken down and the bloody corpse on the floor….not just heavy sleepers, they must both be nearly blind too…

 

Thank you for what you did post. Everything helps.

 

(Although it seems that the answers I'm getting to the first question are things I already suspected -- those seem to be the accepted theories, don't they.)

 

Anything you might recommend reading?

 

Tao Te Ching. Or Dow Du Jing, or however they’re spelling it nowadays. Maybe the Chuang Tze (or Dwong Zuh) too, but essentially, anything authentic about Taoism (or Dowism.)

 

Because the Chinese concepts of Yang and Yin correlate to Light and Darkness, there is a great deal of confusion and misunderstanding in the West, where people too readily assume Dark is always Evil and Light is always Good and never the twain shall meet. A good antidote to this confusion is be made aware of the most basic, literal, original meanings of the words Yin and Yang.

 

They refer to the shady side or the sunny side of a hill.

 

It may help if you keep in mind that what part of the hill is shady or sunny depends on what time of day and what time of year it is. Then go look at the symbol often called the “Yin Yang Sign” which is called in Chinese something that translates as “Diagram of the Great Ultimate.” You’ll notice the symbol, besides being round, is drawn almost as if it is in motion, the black and white chasing each other around the circle. And you’ll notice that in the heart of each, is the seed of the other.

 

In fact, the Eastern cosmology of the universe arising from, and proceeding according to, the interaction of these two opposing (not necessarily in the sense of conflict) forces, strikes me as pretty similar to the Norse cosmology of Fire and Ice – Yin and Yang are just more sophisticated and elaborated ideas, whereas Fire and Ice are very concrete phenomena. But both are examples of cultures where the universe is seen in terms of the interaction Light/Heat/Active Principle and Dark/Cold/Passive Principle without attributing an absolute moral meaning to these metaphysical opposites.

 

 

Lucius Alexander

 

What do you expect from a man with a palindromedary?

[lynnlefey]

Re: Darkness and Evil -- Examing the Metaphor

 

Okay... I have to chime in here. The light and dark thing isn't cultural, jungian, whatever. It's born into us at a biological level. Little children, once they've gotten beyond being squeeling poop-boxes, aren't afraid of the light, they're afraid of the dark. Why? As has been mentioned before, it's due to having our primary sense deprived. Some Christians cast most or all nocturnal animals in the mold of evil, even the owl, which is otherwise often seen as a symbol of wisdom.

 

People wanting to accomplish covert acts do well to use the cover of darkness. Consider the standard view of the ninja, clad all in black, blending into their nocturnal environment.

 

When humans are in the woods at night, and hear a sound, they wonder what's making it. Without their eyes to assure them it's not a bear, it might BE a bear, when in fact it's most likely squirrels. The idea of things hidden and obscured from darkness is universal.

 

When we understand something, we say 'I see'. When we are confused, we say 'fumbling in the dark'.

 

There is certainly cultural additions to these thoughts, but it is for all practical matters due solely to the fact that sight is our primary sense.

[Curufea]

Re: Darkness and Evil -- Examing the Metaphor

 

Evolution.

 

We are diurnal not nocturnal. The dark is not safe, but full of danger.

 

Education of the next generation - dark=bad.

Hence stories are created where the moral is dark=bad

[Robyn]

Re: Darkness and Evil -- Examing the Metaphor

 

Fire and Ice are very concrete phenomena. But both are examples of cultures where the universe is seen in terms of the interaction Light/Heat/Active Principle and Dark/Cold/Passive Principle without attributing an absolute moral meaning to these metaphysical opposites.

 

Another thought is that, while (in today's world) we think of darkness as the mere absence of light, it was once (and for a long time) considered a force unto itself.

 

Wait . . . been reading too many comics recently. Excessive emphasis.

[Kevin Schultz]

Re: Darkness and Evil -- Examing the Metaphor

 

Some Christians cast most or all nocturnal animals in the mold of evil, even the owl, which is otherwise often seen as a symbol of wisdom.

 

The idea of "Darkness=Evil" in Christian imagry at least (as well as the focus on angels and whatnot), comes in through Judiasm, who in turn picked it up from Zoroastrianism.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Darkness and Evil -- Examing the Metaphor

 

Where in Judaism are Darkness & Evil associated? I don't recall anything -specific- that says so; I'm not arguing, I'm just curious if you could cite it so I can go reference it. Regardless.

 

Is he?

 

I think the fact that you view these metaphors as “the most basic essence of how we view good and evil” is very telling in itself.

 

He is. And they are, as I learned after too many years of sitting in dingy classrooms arguing with professors about the nature of the universe as expressed through story, which is why Campbell & Jung are relevant to the argument. It isn't that it has anything "to do" with them - it's that they pointed out how these things interact with a whole bunch of OTHER things, and one of those key things is how we tell, react to, and learn from stories. Which is why the topic is so massive.

 

Agreeing with the Palindromedary, Taoism has nothing to do with Good or Evil, but balance, which is part of the massive string of comments and thousands of words I was referring too earlier.

[oberon]

Re: Darkness and Evil -- Examing the Metaphor

 

Law, or Chaos, while each possessing attractive qualities, may destroy the universe (or reality itself) at their most extreme, pure expressions.

 

Although I haven't read it in ages, The Time Master trilogy by Louise Cooper explored this idea.

 

oberon

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Darkness and Evil -- Examing the Metaphor

 

So did the Dragonlance Cycle - and, to be fair, so does basic social studies.

 

Thesis -> Antithesis -> Synthesis -> New Thesis

 

Lather, Rinse, Repeat.

 

Eventually, any thing will fall to an extreme, good, evil, doesn't matter. What Lucius mentions, and what I actively avoided because it's so darn complicated and I didn't want to try and get into it on a message board, is the need for, and nature of, balance. That's where a lot of the philosophy of Zen & Tao come from. Harmony negates the need for either a clear Good or Evil - that's the whole Buddhism Trascendence thing. The way to Nirvana is an Eight Fold Path which decries, in many places, a lot of the crazy hedonism we Westerners engage in. Specifically because that way of thinking leads to strife.

 

See also: Equilibrium.

[Kevin Schultz]

Re: Darkness and Evil -- Examing the Metaphor

 

Where in Judaism are Darkness & Evil associated? I don't recall anything -specific- that says so; I'm not arguing, I'm just curious if you could cite it so I can go reference it. Regardless.

 

Basic search on the word "darkenss" in the NIV. Most of the phrases after Genesis (Job, Psalms, and Proverbs especially) use darkness as a place of wailing and gnashing of teeth, where the wicked lay waiting to ambush virtuous men who may wander there. In contrast, the light is a place of goodness and mercy.

[McCoy]

Re: Darkness and Evil -- Examing the Metaphor

 

Where in Judaism are Darkness & Evil associated? I don't recall anything -specific- that says so; I'm not arguing' date=' I'm just curious if you could cite it so I can go reference it. [/quote']

Job 30:26 When I looked for good, then evil came unto me: and when I waited for light, there came darkness. [KJV]

 

Job 38:15 And from the evil-doers their light is kept back, and the arm of pride is broken. [KJV]

 

Psalms 23:4 Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me. [KJV] Technically shadow, not darkness, but still --

 

Isaiah 5:Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

 

Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. [KJV]

 

This continues into the Greek Testiment, John 3:20 All those who do evil hate the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed. [NIV]

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Darkness and Evil -- Examing the Metaphor

 

Another good starting point for turning the metaphor on its head is making the Darkness=Cave=Womb=Saftey connection. I could easily see building a fantasy culture with a Mother Darkness as the nurturer and a chief evil god based on a greater natural threat than nocturnal animals and darkness ... Ice or Storms could both be obvious possibilites.

[Zed-F]

Re: Darkness and Evil -- Examing the Metaphor

 

In what ways' date=' in fiction and gaming, can these be contradicted? How can the expectations be turned on their heads?[/quote']

 

There's a series of books by L. E. Modesitt, Jr. called the Recluse Saga wherein the world is split between order and chaos. Not quite good an evil, but in the first several books the order folks are the good guys and the chaos folks are the bad guys. Thing is the order folks are all about black and darkness, and the chaos folks are all about white light. You can check those books out to get some good ideas.

[Robyn]

Re: Darkness and Evil -- Examing the Metaphor

 

Another good starting point for turning the metaphor on its head is making the Darkness=Cave=Womb=Saftey connection.

 

To set that aside for a moment (having nothing to do with what you said, but I want to show the sequence in which things occurred to me here), other concepts associated with good and evil are creation and destruction. The good can only giveth, and the evil can only taketh away. (Toss in something about each speaking for oneself but never for others, and you practically have my epistemology. But I was digressing.)

 

There's a metaphysical aspect to all this, too. Note the (popular) philosophical doctrines of each era; when people believe that mankind is helpless in the face of nature, their defining trait is fear. Those who tell the stories cannot dictate the responses of those who listen, however; that is determined by the philosophy of each audience member, individually.

 

Sometimes, a storyteller will not only aim for a particular lesson, but count on everyone hearing it, which is extremely foolish (and possibly very dangerous). The authorities design a film warning about the consequences of rape, and the potential rapists feed their fantasies with the depiction while filtering out the negative parts ("We wouldn't be so stupid.")

 

It seems incompatible, fundamentally, with the heroic mindset, to view oneself as powerless to alter reality. That mindset may have been appropriate (and common) back in the Middle Ages (also, interestingly, called the Dark Ages at times), but mankind has attained a somewhat more effective understanding of reality nowadays. This effects some changes in our defining traits:

 

There are dangerous things that walk the streets at night.

 

I'm one of them.

 

Instead of placing themselves on the "I am powerless, weak, afraid, the victim." side of such equations, people are now placing themselves in a "We emphasize/identify with the powerful, dangerous." area. This happened before (and, if the PC's exist in such an era, they may be such individuals), but rarely. Both predators and protectors will find themselves comfortable with such a shift, since strength can support both preying upon others and defending them from such assaults; they each discover their natural niche in such an environment.

[Markdoc]

Re: Darkness and Evil -- Examing the Metaphor

 

Another good starting point for turning the metaphor on its head is making the Darkness=Cave=Womb=Saftey connection. I could easily see building a fantasy culture with a Mother Darkness as the nurturer and a chief evil god based on a greater natural threat than nocturnal animals and darkness ... Ice or Storms could both be obvious possibilites.

 

Or, as in Troll mythology from Runequest, fire and death. If you are looking for reading to help on this topic, I'd start here:

http://www.wam.umd.edu/~gerakkag/rq.html

 

Forget Jung, the poor old philospher manqué. He has a lot to say, much of it fun to read, but in the end, almost none of it informative for someone interested in story. Trust me - I read a lot of Jung back in my "Salterton" days. Campbell covered everything he said in more detail and with less digression.

 

That's not to say "Don't read Jung" - he writes well and raises interesting issues. Just don't expect enlightment on this particular topic.

 

cheers, Mark

[Eosin]

Re: Darkness and Evil -- Examing the Metaphor

 

Like others, I find some merit with the belief that "darkness = danger/ignorance" but I don't know how well this is supported. In the old world, without ready access to light producing portable technology, the dark was something to be feared and avoided if possible. Not counting man made dangers, the real world offers enough by way of natural hazards to make gallavanting in the dark a dangerous proposition (long falls, twisted ankles, bumped heads).

 

A supporting contention could be the Zoroastrian belief that Angra Mainyu was the poisoner of fire... He who gave it color and noxious smoke to pollute that which was pure. The "good guys" used fire as Christians use the cross to evoke a connection with their diety. He was the pure light. To my knowledge this is the oldest recorded division "dark=bad" and "light=good" occuring as early as 800 B.C..

 

Some other fun concepts that ocur with visual story telling relate to early TV and later the Arian ideal. Fun stuff.

 

As to turning it on its head - the dark, claustrophobic comfort of the womb thing has some precedent in mythology. As to the cave aspect, it could be used well in a world with flying hunters like dragons. They would offer shelter from the "soaring death." Heat could do the same, in a world where the noon sun raised temps to unbearable levels, finding a cool deep cave could mean the difference between life and death.

 

A prepondance of sight based hunters who sucked wind at night (night blind) could also twist a society to the point where it caried on most activities during the safer hours of darkness. Night = Safety.....