Google Image Search
Here we are at the final type of story and it’s one that can give an author a massive headache. Not in the moment, but after the story is written, published, and absorbed by readers. I’m talking about ‘Right vs Wrong’, which creates stories about temptation, good/evil, and morality.
We always think that this is an easy story to write because who can argue with right and wrong. Killing somebody is wrong. Saving someone is right. Fairly simple and universal concepts, which every reader can connect to. Definitely no gray area like if you kill someone who has been murdering others. Nobody would dare to think that’s a good thing since killing is ALWAYS wrong. That’s enough sarcasm since I’m sure everyone gets my point.
Morality isn’t universal. Culture, experience, religion, mental state, and many other factors will mold a person’s sense of right and wrong. Even the big crimes we know are wrong aren’t always treated that way. People have defended murderers and rapists if they feel there was a bizarre moral high ground. That’s because something influences their sense of right and wrong to the point where justification is created. Other people won’t agree or even be disgusted by the mentality, but this is the human race. We aren’t a hive mind. More of a pack mentality where people will fall in line behind someone else to adopt their morality. No wonder cults are so common throughout our history.
Getting back to writing for those who haven’t rushed off to the comments to talk about the real world, the grayness of morality is a challenge. ‘Right vs wrong’ stories tend to involve someone being tempted to make a wrong decision. An author would like to believe that all readers would know which is the ‘correct’ choice, but that’s not the case. You may always have a group of readers who think the wrong decision is the right one. Nothing you can do about it beyond accepting the fact.
Something you should never do is argue your moral code with your readers. Being a stranger to them, you aren’t going to convince them to change their ways. It’s more than likely that they are surrounded by people who share their views, so they will always have more support for their stance. This doesn’t mean you have to agree with them or change your own ways. Just that there really isn’t any point in confrontation, especially over a fictional conflict. You know where you stand and remaining by your morality is more important than changing strangers on the Internet.
I’ve used ‘right vs wrong’ in my stories a lot. Heroes have to make big decisions and their morality is traditionally supposed to stay strong. I like having them waver a bit as they grow, but I still skew towards traditional ‘good/evil’ things. This is where I run into issues with some readers. For example, one of my stories had a hero meeting an arrogant lover of his girlfriend. It was a cultural open relationship thing, which the hero agreed to since he would be traveling. (Horrible sum up of what was always designed to be a tragic relationship.) Anyway, I had several readers asking why the hero didn’t just kill the asshole lover who was goading him into a fight. When I pointed out that such an act would be murder even in a fantasy world, they claimed the hero was weak and the asshole deserved to die. This was such a shocking mentality for me to face since I would think the more heroic act is to not take the bait, kill a weaker opponent, and go to jail instead of finishing your quest. Yet, the morality of these readers allowed them to believe certain people were okay to kill for their general, non-violent behavior.
What do other people think of the ‘right vs wrong’ theme?
Legends of Windemere 
I like a right versus wrong story. They seem clear cut. I’ve seen a lot of story remakes that pushed the right versus wrong approach into a morally gray territory. I don’t mind some of those if they make a good case for the changes. (Also, some of the original authors sometimes caused their characters to make some very gray decisions instead of their usual black and white choices. I am thinking in particular of Agatha Christie’s last Hercule Poirot book.) But I take issue with some story remakes if the original author had a specific moral code that the people remaking it don’t share. Now I am thinking of a Netflix remake of a Jane Austen novel where the main character’s personality was completely overhauled because a decision was made to make a rom-com instead of a drama (which is what the book is). Actions Austen’s main character would never have taken this main character did with aplomb.
LikeLike
Fully agree with those changes to right vs wrong. Seems to happen a lot when a person wants to do a rewrite and make an established villain a hero or anti-hero. The success of Wicked and Maleficent really pushed that idea to over-saturation and lazy writing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Good point about those stories and how people think writing this kind of reversal is easily done. With the Netflix movie, the main character’s personality was changed, but the other characters were pretty much the same. That was problematic, because they reacted to her the way the characters in the book did. Since in the book she was too polite and broken emotionally to stand up for herself at first, her family bullied her. But in the Netflix movie, since the developers decided to make her snarky and confident, that should have completely changed the relationship dynamic altogether. But nope! They followed the same story beats, which didn’t fit the main character’s revamped personality at all.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s definitely lazy. It would confuse me a lot too. A character’s personality helps determine their actions. Change it and they won’t respond to story events the same way. That’s writing 101, so it’s weird that people ignore it, especially those getting paid by a company like Netflix.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have a problem with changing an author’s intent to this extent. It’s disrespectful to the author, and, in fact, changes the story.
LikeLike
I had a real problem with the series Breaking Bad. Here was a guy who convinced himself that making meth was an okay thing. Given the amount of pain in the world over meth I just couldn’t go along with the premise. I think when the creator of a story alters conventual morality for the sake of the plot it weakens the story significantly.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I never saw it, but it always sounded like it was about how Walter White turned into a bad guy. It would make sense for a guy who can’t think of any way to get money for chemo besides making meth would rationalize it. Then there’s the slippery slope.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I still found it too much for me.
LikeLike
I like these kind of stories. Your example from your own books is a good one as to how different people view things. But if it hadn’t gone the way you wrote it, there would have need no story! But people can’t see that.
LikeLike
Thanks. It is unfortunate that it’s become more common for readers to be so critical that they don’t want the story to have happened.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I always struggle with this stuff. Lizzie always has struggles with what she is doing, and sometimes can’t see the positive outcomes. She has killed a couple of humans along the way, too. Some might see it as her being manipulated by the hat. Others will understand her struggles to take drastic action. I try to include the mental struggles, but also need to take the stories where they need to go.
LikeLike
That’s part of the fun for me. Right and wrong aren’t always universal. So, you can get readers to evaluate their own stances.
LikeLiked by 1 person
What do you do about the gray areas? I think that’s more realistic and human. I was trying to think of a clear example of right vs wrong – I think the Harry Potter series is a good one.
LikeLike
The current issue with the gray area is that people seem to think we all see the same color scheme. This is where this theme runs into problems because people assume it’s black/white all the time. It’s more about conflicting versions of morality and can change depending on stories.
LikeLike
And then there are so many shades of gray.
LikeLike
Your example of the hero resisting temptation to just kill somebody annoying is right on. This person is on a mission, they want public support for it. Murdering people would weaken or completely erase the perception that they are a hero at all.
Where this has intersected for me is at the end, when readers insist the bad guys should die. Life isn’t that simple, and I prefer to reflect this in my endings.
I have enjoyed reading more cozy fantasies, where the antagonists are persuaded to go away, rather than breaking into violence.
LikeLike
I will admit that I do enjoy seeing a villain get taken out, but it has to work for the story. Makes sense for action-oriented ones where the villain killed a lot. Not for less violent stories.
LikeLiked by 1 person