Automoderated users, Autopatrolled users, Bureaucrats, Comment administrators, Confirmed users, Moderators, Rollbackers, Administrators
213,577
edits
(→[[Western Animation]]: clean up) |
mNo edit summary |
||
(33 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{trope}}
'''Designated Evil''' is when a writer paints the solution to a problem, committed by a protagonist, as indisputably wrong or evil, but either doesn't make an alternative action clear, or shows the audience that the alternative would have been ineffective. Any protests that the action was necessary will be met with [[What the Hell, Hero?|stunned silence or stares]], and the question of [[Take a Third Option|what should have been done instead]] is either never asked, never answered, or answered with a solution that clearly would not have worked. Most often, the solution involves violence.
This usually makes a point of [[Bad Guys Do the Dirty Work|sparing the more sympathetic characters the responsibility of dealing with it themselves]], while still leaving them to stand as a morally-superior gallery to condemn the solution. Expect the rest of the heroes to be at the very least reluctant to forgive the character who commits the act, regardless of any reasoning or extenuating circumstances. They may not be able to argue the point, and they may recognize that they get to enjoy the benefits of that solution after the fact, but they will still denounce it as wrong, and the character wrong for doing it. The best a
Often, this comes off especially hypocritical if the series has shown it to be perfectly acceptable to kill human villains [[One-Winged Angel|if they shed their human side]], or turn out to be [[Not Even Human]] in the first place.
This trope is what happens when you mix [[Moral Dissonance]], a bit of [[Fridge Logic]], and maybe some [[Values Dissonance]] for good measure. After all, just what is a right and wrong response to morally complex scenarios can vary just person to person.
As noted above, this is largely a subjective trope. For some, the writers are right, killing a helpless human is always wrong, no matter what. For others, the idea that you should just take away the bad guy's toys and [[Karma Houdini|send him on his way despite his multiple murders and likelihood to do it again]] is infuriating. However, the emotional impact of taking a human life is strong enough that perhaps not being completely sure that the hero is justified in doing so may be reason enough to consider the act immoral. It varies.
Compare [[Informed Wrongness]], the more extreme version where the character's actions aren't wrong in any context. Also compare [[What Do You Mean It's Not Heinous?]] for when characters in the work take this attitude, but the work itself does not actually side with their opinions. See also [[Straw Man Has a Point]], which is when the designated evil character actually makes a completely legitimate argument for their actions.
{{examples}}▼
▲{{examples}}
== [[Anime]] and [[Manga]] ==
* Largely averted in ''[[Trigun]]''; it's made entirely clear that the only person thoroughly convinced killing is always wrong is Vash.
* In ''[[Naruto]]'', {{spoiler|Danzo is evil because he ordered the Uchiha massacre. But there were no alternatives: negotiation was tried, appeasement is asking for trouble and makes the Hokage look weak, executing only the leaders would leave very irate survivors or sympathizers, announcing the deed would make everyone paranoid.}}
** The argument does not necessarily follow: if making it plain that the coup plans have been detected and the leaders are being executed for treason leaves the surviving sympathizers intimidated from their plans then the goal has been achieved with minimum loss of life. If not, then the sympathizers can be killed for their own crimes if and when they actually commit them in the future. Killing them all up front is not the only possible solution, just the ''most expedient'' possible solution ,and that is what Danzo is being condemned for.
== [[Comic Books]] ==
* [[Wonder Woman]] killing Maxwell Lord. Lord was busily trying to bring about small-scale Armageddon, had control of one of the most powerful beings on Earth, was using that control to have Superman beat Batman to death, and himself said, while under the Lasso of Truth,<ref>However, the Lasso can only confirm that the villain sincerely believes that what he is saying is true -- it cannot provide a guarantee that the villain isn't mistaken.</ref> that killing him was the only way to stop him. Despite this, everyone in-universe acts like Wonder Woman killed him in cold blood for jaywalking, and since DC has a fairly strong tradition of Killing Is Always Wrong, it's heavily implied we're supposed to think this of her too. Unlike other examples of this trope, Wonder Woman is absolutely candid about what she did, including the fact that she considered herself completely justified due to the extraordinary circumstances. And she is also willing - even eager - to stand trial for it. (She is acquitted).
** This is arguably an example where the argument is so poorly constructed that you cannot figure out which side is supposed to be the Designated Evil—Diana, for killing a man she could have rendered unconscious (unconscious telepaths are no more able to mind-control Superman than dead ones are, and buying time to conduct a detailed examination of the truth of his claims before deciding that he needed to die might have been more prudent and would definitely have been more heroic), or the heroes, for straw-manning her sincere desire to protect Superman as some demented lust for killing instead of making their objections of the framework 'Look, we appreciate what you wanted to do, we just think you could have done it in a manner that didn't require actually killing the guy.'
* [[The Punisher]] seems to run into this occasionally, depending on how he's being handled and whether he's in his own book or not. Usually in his own book, he's taking out major drug and arms traffickers, mobsters, and other people that could quite possibly rate the death sentence anyway. Outside of his own book, just to make sure that his war on crime is [[Designated Evil]], some writers actually have him killing ''white-collar embezzlers''.▼
** To summarize: the writer's intent might have been to create a fascinating moral dilemma, but the execution was so clumsy that it just comes off as eye-rolling.
▲* [[The Punisher]] seems to run into this occasionally, depending on how he's being handled and whether he's in his own book or not. Usually in his own book, he's taking out major drug and arms traffickers, mobsters, and other people that could quite possibly rate the death sentence anyway. Outside of his own book, just to make sure that his war on crime is
== [[Film]] ==
* ''[[Daybreakers]]'' gives us the
* Anakin's killing of Count Dooku in ''[[Star Wars|Revenge of the Sith]]'' comes across this way-Palpatine is quite right that the Republic can't hold him, or fairly try him.
** Backed up in universe however, as even completely justified actions committed due to strong emotion is the path to the Dark Side. Basically, the Force can use Designated Evil actions to turn the perpetrator into actually evil.
** Also, Palpatine is factually wrong. Unlike Palpatine himself, Count Dooku is a lapsed member of the Jedi Order (a former member of the Jedi Council itself, even) -- while there might be problematic legal arguments re: the Jedi Council's alleged jurisdiction over ''Palpatine's'' actions, they unquestionably have authority to discipline Dooku as they see fit. (While Dooku had officially resigned honorably from the Jedi, the revelation that he had secretly gone Sith before doing so would presumably void the legitimacy of his resignation.)
*** For that matter, Palpatine is incorrect about their inability to hold Dooku prisoner. By the time Anakin kills him in cold blood, Dooku has already had both his hands sliced off. Unless fitted with combat cybernetics, even a Sith Lord stops being much of a physical threat after multiple amputations.
* ''[[A Few Good Men]]'' has Jessep's infamous [[Motive Rant]], wherein he casts ''himself'' in the position of
** Subverted in that Jessep's rant is based on the logic that extra-legal means of intimidation and harassment are somehow necessary for him to maintain discipline among his troops. By actual military practice of the modern era, any commander who publicly admits that he cannot maintain control of his men's actions without having them threaten each other and beat each other up is openly confessing his own incompetence at leadership for all the world to hear and should be relieved on that basis ''alone'', even if it wasn't illegal. This point is Lampshaded in the movie by Tom Cruise's character who quite effectively points out that if Jessep's men were actually as well-disciplined as he claims, this whole thing would never have happened.
== [[Literature]] ==
* [[Alternate Character Interpretation]] seems to deliberately leave the invocation of this vague in the case of ''[[Dexter]]''. The people he kills are most definitely murderers that have cheated justice, and Dexter often steps up his timetable to take them out if he thinks they're likely to kill again. Opinions in-universe on whether the Bay Harbor Butcher is a hero or a villain differ across a spectrum, and the series itself is murky on the point.
* When [[Discworld
* In ''[[The Dresden Files
** Though Harry himself later points out that he wouldn't necessarily have had a problem with mercy-killing Slate or killing him in a fight. The problem is that he ''knows'' that he really only killed Slate for the sake of gaining his power, which is why he's worried. It's still arguably an example of this, since there's no other way to pass the mantle on and Harry is clearly a much better person to wield it than Slate, but then that's Harry... he's designating ''himself'' as potentially evil, a recurrent fear of his.
* The [[Star Wars Expanded Universe]]'s ''[[New Jedi Order]]'' series features the Yuuzhan Vong, aliens from another galaxy who overrun the ''Star Wars'' galaxy in a series of [[Curb Stomp Battle
== [[Live Action TV]] ==
* Gunn killing the professor that sent Fred to Pylia in ''[[
** Angel and crew's
** To some extent, Angel letting {{spoiler|Drusilla and Darla snack on the Wolfram & Hart lawyers in season 2.}} It was a good indication that Angel was going down a darker path as it's generally something he wouldn't even think of doing, and he can be blamed for not sticking around to stop the two afterwards, but we're apparently supposed to fault him on principle for not saving a bunch of people who willingly and knowingly work for the personifications of evil who are responsible for much of mankind's suffering. Furthermore, Lorne directly states that it was going to happen no matter what Angel did, and the Powers just didn't want him around for it.
*** Which makes sense; it's not that letting Wolfram & Hart lawyers die is bad in and of itself, it's that the act of killing human beings is not psychologically healthy for Angel. For about the same reason that doing body shots is not psychologically healthy for a recovering alcoholic.
* ''[[Buffy the Vampire Slayer]]'' has a similar problem in deciding when and if killing a human is [[Moral Event Horizon|Crossing The Line]].
** It seems like ''Buffy'' had some problem with slaying vamps ''en masse'', as Faith and Buffy slaying a nest during daylight hours was posed as part of Faith's slippery slope. Partially because Buffy was *gasp!* skipping school, but maybe the writers think that kind of slaying is bad sportsmanship or something.
** Giles kills a helpless {{spoiler|Glory-in-Ben-form}}. He says he has to, because he knows Buffy won't (and it's strongly implied that he doesn't tell anyone and lets them believe they just died of prior injuries). On the other hand, there's the whole hell dimension thing
* The finale of season 4 of ''[[Doctor Who (TV)|Doctor Who]]'', {{spoiler|the Doctor's half-human clone kills the Daleks in order to save everything else that ever lived, will lived, or had lived in the multiverse. The Doctor not only exiles him to another dimension which he'll never be able to leave for this action, but makes sure to take a potshot blaming this supposedly inexcusable act of violence on the clone [[Humans Are Bastards|being part human]]. One supposes that literally uncountable numbers should have died just so the Doctor wouldn't have a squidgy feeling about how they were saved}}.▼
*** Another reason this trope is in effect here is that there's no indication that the helpless party wouldn't have died had the ultimate enemy been killed anyway. Killing the evil version would almost certainly have killed the helpless innocent version, too... doing it the other way around just made it ''possible''.
*** Complicating the matter even further is the fact that by the final episode Ben was no longer an innocent bystander, but an accessory before the fact to Glory's crimes. However, Giles likely did not ''know'' this at the time he made his decision to kill him.
▲*
** Not to mention that the Doctor has (tried to) commit genocide of the Daleks at least ''three times'' previously.
* ''[[Wizards of Waverly Place]]'' had the episode "The Good The Bad And The Alex" in which one character tries to end the whole [[There Can Only Be One|one wizard per family rule]] this is treated as wholly and unequivocally evil without any
== [[Tabletop Games]] ==
* Third edition (and earlier) ''[[Dungeons
** Another ridiculous 3E restriction was that Rangers could choose their own race as a "favored enemy" only if they were evil. Since intelligent humanoids can be of any alignment, there's nothing inherently evil about training to be a better hunter of your own species (this is, after all, what policemen and soldiers spend their time doing in the real world). This was removed in 3.5 as the designers realized how stupid it was.
== [[Video Games]] ==
* The [[
** It is entirely possible to complete that level without killing a single human, simply by holding back and waiting until after they all become zombies. The game still casts you as history's greatest monster for doing so.
* Faldio in ''[[Valkyria Chronicles]]''. He effectively saves all of Gallia from being crushed by the tank-destroying, laser-firing, invincible enemy commander {{spoiler|by inducing those same powers in [[Action Girl|Alicia]]. He achieves this by shooting her, since he knows her powers can only be awakened via near death experience.}} He gets severely punished for it, but no one ever mentions the fact that, well, nobody else had any ''better'' ideas, and since
{{quote|
'''Faldio:''' "The people... Gallia needed her. Now let me ask you a question: how else do you think we could have won that battle? If not for Alicia's power, Gallia would have most certainly lost."
'''Welkin:''' "I still can't..." }}
* In the first ''[[Ar
== [[Western Animation]] ==
* On ''[[Total Drama Action]],'' Courtney is immediately set up as the villain because she [[The Complainer Is Always Wrong|keeps complaining about her team]], and then later she manages to get [[Big Eater|Owen]] eliminated. This is apparently supposed to make us dislike her, given how
** Just an addition to the ''TDA'' part: Owen does get eliminated because Courtney voted for it, but what about the other teammates? Oh, right, they voted for Courtney, even though they were told by Chris that voting her off was off-limits this time around. Their votes were negated, while Courtney's remained valid. So, the characters are all upset that Owen got voted off and blame Courtney, even though it was ''their'' fault per the stated rules.
* Less dire example in "[[Arthur (
{{reflist}}
[[Category:Morality Tropes]]
▲[[Category:Home Page/YMMV]]
[[Category:YMMV Trope]]
[[Category:The War On Straw]]
|