What is a "grey" character - and are there any?

[Jo498]

It is often claimed that some books (e.g. ASoIaF) are better/deeper/whatever, because they have "complex and grey" characters (compared to e.g. LotR and many clones).

A grey character is neither clearly "good" (white) nor bad ("black"). Of course, differentiation is good, but I wonder if, depending on how one does this differentiation most characters are still quite clearly written (and read) as "black" or "white".

Roughly, in my impression the so-called grey characters of dark and gritty fantasy are often not grey at all, but they are at best cynical machiavellians and and worst psychopaths both of which would be firmly on the side of "bad". And of course there are "good guys" in b/w narratives whose main job is to slaughter unnamed orcs, henchmen etc. by the dozen without thinking twice.

E.g. Long John Silver is not a grey character; despite being often friendly he is clearly shown as a cold-blooded killler. He is very clearly a bad guy, just fleshed out in an interesting way.

Or Catelyn. She does not treat Jon very nicely and makes at least one rash decision (seizing Tyrion, where, btw she has no qualms at all, it is not a tough moral decision). But is she written or read as grey? IMO in no way. She is very clearly basically good.

Very similar with Jon. He has to do tough things, like killing Halfhand and betray his lover, but it's "following orders" by the "good side", basically his job as an infiltrator.

Even Dany who dupes the slavers and exacts brutal "justice" is supposed to be basically in the right, because she is only sly, unfair and brutal when treating the obvious villains.

[Queen of Whores]

I think the whole "omg a song of ice and fire is so deep, the characters are so realz" mindset some people have is complete bullshit. It doesn't take a genius to make a fictional creation do something good, then write them doing something not so good. Just about every book ever written has done this. Some just compare ASoIaF's "grey, morally ambiguous" characters to The Lord of the Rings' somewhat more simplistic (with exceptions of course) characters to get a sense of elitism and superiority, like an immature way of yelling out "hey we're better than you cause we're all deep and complex 'n stuff..."

Just my two cents ;)

[Free Northman Reborn]

I agree with the above criticism of the concept of grey characters.

To take it one step further, you get an author like Abercrombie. (A very good author, by the way, and one whose skill I'm not trying to detract from with my assessment of grey characters).

In any case, many people rave about the grey characters in his books, but if you look at them, they are just all plain evil bastards, who you are just forced to try and identify with because they happen to be point of view characters.

That's not a grey character. That's just an evil character whose experiences you are asked to share, and who you kind of have to root for to an extent, else the story ends.

[Jo498]

I agree with Abercrombie's characters being mostly evil bastards. (One exception may be West, and of course there are some characters which are not plain evil, but basically idiots like the foppy Prince or dan Luthar.)

Of course it takes skill to make an evil bastard interesting and somewhat sympathetic to the reader. This is not in dispute.

I actually suspect that the skill of writers making (mostly) cold-blooded bastards sympathetic is one source of presumed greyness. Take Tyrion: He became more or less a complete asshole at the end of Storm, but because he has been framed and also mistreated and hated by his father all of his live, we may have some sympathy for his reactions. But he is quite an egotistic and whiney bastard before being framed, which we forgive him mostly because he is written as a witty and smart guy, and of course, he does some good things such as demoting Slynt, not raping Sansa and preventing some of the worst of Joffrey's cruelties. Maybe he could count as grey. But basically he is only a somewhat less ruthless Machiavellian than Tywin or Littlefinger.

But truly "grey" characters are, IMO, a comparably rare thing, even in "great literature". Macbeth is not grey, he is "bad", despite his regrets. Othello maybe is a grey one (no pun intended!)

[polishgenius]

I think you're just using a much more narrow definition of 'grey' than most people. It's used to distinguish from the squeaky-clean boyscout type characters and their pitch-black evil opponents, it's not meant to suggest that a character would come up true neutral on an alignment chart.

Also, Black Dow: despite the name, there's a truly grey character even by your definition.

[Arakan]

I think the whole "omg a song of ice and fire is so deep, the characters are so realz" mindset some people have is complete bullshit. It doesn't take a genius to make a fictional creation do something good, then write them doing something not so good. Just about every book ever written has done this. Some just compare ASoIaF's "grey, morally ambiguous" characters to The Lord of the Rings' somewhat more simplistic (with exceptions of course) characters to get a sense of elitism and superiority, like an immature way of yelling out "hey we're better than you cause we're all deep and complex 'n stuff..."

Just my two cents ;)

This.

I read and watch a lot of Genre Fiction and when I break it down (considering only main characters) I met only 2 disturbing grey characters: Toni Soprano, Walter White

[Queen of Whores]

This.

I read and watch a lot of Genre Fiction and when I break it down (considering only main characters) I met only 2 disturbing grey characters: Toni Soprano, Walter White

Ah yes, two absolutely fantastic characters easily as good as any I've seen in any literature (praise goes to David Chase and Vince Gilligan respectively). I honestly found Tony to be even more grey than Walt. He disgusted me more than any other TV protagonist, yet at other times got my sympathy more than any other, so it was really hard for me to make a proper judgement on him.

[The Marquis de Leech]

Grey characters arguably presuppose the existence of black and white, at least in terms of theoretical absolutes. If there were genuinely no good or evil within a setting, then there would be no grey either, but rather complete amorality or else a completely alien framework of morals.

[Jo498]

I have to admit I forgot, what Black Dow did in First law...

Of course, if one looks far and wide enough, there are certainly some grey characters, sometimes involved in really hard moral dilemmas.

But especially in Genre fiction very often the morals are not so much alien, but shifted. Hamlet, one of the most famous dilemma-faced characters in literature, would probably count as a wimpy good guy in our fantasy worlds...

In any case, I think it makes sense to distinguish between a grey character like Walter White, a crazy villain like Tuco and a smart and rather interesting villain like Gustavo Frings, doesn't it?

Nothing grey about Tuco, although he truly cares for his Tio. Littlefinger may be more like Gus and Ramsay Bolton like Tuco, but Littlefinger is not grey; he is a completely ruthless schemer and killer.

The framework of the Homeric epics is rather strange to us, although these are supposed to be one of the foundation of western culture. It is perfectly o.k. for Odysseus to massacre the suitors, although all they did was pestering Penelope, sleeping with the maidservants and eating from his stores. It is not that they actually stole his kingdom and abducted his wife. One should think that such a crime could easily be dealt with the paying of some compensation and an apology. But within this framework it seems presupposed that Odysseus is the good guy and the massacre is a fitting retribution. It is also not a problem at all the Odysseus cohabitated with Circe and Calypso for years, whereas it would be unthinkable for Penelope to sleep with one of the suitors and then send him away when her husband returns and all be fine...

The Dothraki have some similar features to those archaic heroes, unfortunately like most trope barbarians they are very crudely done. Would we describe Drogo as "grey"? I fear he simply is not interesting or developed enough (and we have no PV) to tell e.g., why he is rather gentle at first, but consequently rapes Dany night after night.

[Theda Baratheon]

This.

I read and watch a lot of Genre Fiction and when I break it down (considering only main characters) I met only 2 disturbing grey characters: Toni Soprano, Walter White

Walter White is a terrible person though. He's an entitled narcissist who tried to poison a fucking child. Seriously, I don't really view him as grey because even though he's the main character; I never liked him at all.

[polishgenius]

I haven't watched Breaking Bad (!) but isn't there a reason it's called 'Breaking Bad' and not 'Breaking Kind Of Morally Middling'?

[Arakan]

Grey characters arguably presuppose the existence of black and white, at least in terms of theoretical absolutes. If there were genuinely no good or evil within a setting, then there would be no grey either, but rather complete amorality or else a completely alien framework of morals.

Absolutely.

Furthermore a "grey character" knows when he is doing sth wrong (the same goes for an evil character). And I would also like to add that "grey" for me means a signifcant amount of "bad deeds".

Everything else is good (Robb, Jon, Ned) or bad (Vargo Hoat, Ramsay).

classic grey in the Series: Hound, Arya, Tywin, Theon

I would also like to introduce the "alien" character, who is not aware of right or wrong (with regards to our perception). He might do good things, he might do bad things from our ethic and moral pov. But for this character it's all the same, the classic "force of nature".

Many evil or grey characters in the series are just "alien" (e.g. the Dothraki and Ghiscari characters, arguably the Mountain, the Faceless Men)

[Arakan]

Walter White is a terrible person though. He's an entitled narcissist who tried to poison a fucking child. Seriously, I don't really view him as grey because even though he's the main character; I never liked him at all.

You are right in your characterization (except I disagree about the conclusion ;) ) but what is Tony then in your book??

[Toblakai]

There are plenty of grey characters in ASOIAF: Theon, Jaime, Tyrion, Sangor and many others are quite grey. Just because some are light or dark grey doesn't change that. If you are only saying a character is grey if they are perfectly grey (red 95, green 95, blue 95) then that is too restrictive.

And Abercrombie has lots of grey; they are not all evil bastards. In addition to West who you mentioned, Jezal, Dogman and even Logen are not evil bastards (only Logen's berserker side is). They are all deeply flawed people who also have redeeming traits.

[Arakan]

I just wanted to add to make my view clearer: a "grey" character needs some kind of balance between his "good" deeds and character attributes and his "bad" deeds and character attributes.

This balance is the subjective part...some may consider Tywin a grey character, some see in him an evil one. But what I often do miss is a clear stringency in judging different characters, and this is often due to fandom and selective perception which itself is based on cognitive dissonance.

Dany is a particular interesting case as her character is so regularly the reason for passionate discussions and sometimes outright flame wars.

There is a clear pattern...you have the extremists on both side of the black and white spectrum (haters and fans, albeit the former is rather a small minority) and then you have people like me who see her as "grey". And those who see her as "grey" very often get attacked by her fans due to cognitive dissonance. After all no one wants to be fan of a character who at the end of the day is not labeled as "good" (some character flaws dont make a person grey).

Basically a serious and interesting discussion is often only possible between the "greys" (different shades of grey you know ;) ) as you cannot "cure" someone from cognitive dissonance on an internet forum...

[Toblakai]

Great post Arakan. I am sure that is part of it. I have no problem liking someone who does "bad" things. Dany has her share of traits that are at times what is viewed as traditionally evil. And Arya is a sociopath. Tywin, while not really a good person, probably would have made a great ruler.

[Eponine]

I think it's more about motivations and understandable reactions than just a tally of whether the character's actions were good or bad. Black characters are bad because badness and white characters are white because goodness. Often there's some kind of justification offered at the beginning for why these characters are good or bad, but it pretty much boils down to "the plot needed a bad guy".

With Tyrion, for example, a lot of what he does is a reaction to situations brought up within the story - his father and sister's disdain for him, his self-hatred for giving into his father's command to rape Tysha, bitterness toward different people who devalued him while he was Hand, the betrayal by Shae... OTOH, he is egotistical and whiny earlier, largely because despite his troubles as a dwarf, he's recognized as a Lannister with all the gold that goes along with it. He barely has to work and he has an endless flow of wine and prostitutes.

There's a complexity to the sociological worldbuilding that allows one to understand that a character could act a certain way if he has a certain background and is put into a certain situation. This is what I distinguish as being different from an off-screen single paragraph about how bad guy is bad because something bad happened to him once.

ETA: Another factor is that in the example I gave, this isn't all just an elaborate backstory constructed simply to round out Tyrion's character. Most of these things that help explain him also affect other characters and are entwined with the plot as a whole.

[Jo498]

Sure, the motivations have to be plausible, but a psychopathic killer does not become grey IMO, because we know he was mistreated as a child and is now on his righteous revenge, only going slightly overboard.

(Sandor Clegane comes pretty close to someone like that, but he is not a psychopath, only slightly more brutal than Westeros norm and he does some good things, very dark grey, though.)

I do not except Tywin as grey. He is a ruthless Machiavellian who only cares about the power of his House. Even then he could have overruled Joffrey to avoid his worst excesses, but apparently he prefers not, because it might lead to destabilization of the Lannister rule. He employs sadistic killers like the Mountain etc.

Cersei is similar, only stupid.

Theon is about as "grey" as Macbeth (i.e. not). He betrays his allies to gain power (and show is asshole father how tough he is). Only he fails rather quickly and is shown to be not ruthless enough. Then he falls into the hands of a cardboard sadist and we feel pity, because noone deserves to be treated like that.

It's been too long that I read the Jaime chapters of the later books. To be honest, I never found his "development" all that plausible. It seems like bits and pieces. But I agree that he is not simply bad, although pushing Bran to his likely death apparently does not weigh on his conscience.

I agree that Tyrion should be seen as grey and Dany, too, although they are most of the time shown as "good guys" with a few deplorable decisions.

[messem]

Absolutely.

Furthermore a "grey character" knows when he is doing sth wrong (the same goes for an evil character). And I would also like to add that "grey" for me means a signifcant amount of "bad deeds".

I disagree wholeheartedly. Evil characters do NOT know that they doing something evil. I.e. they are psychopaths. Pure evil always thinks it is doing the right thing. Everybody else is doing something bad now and then. Feeling bad about it makes these people grey. Pure good people are rare and literaturewise boring as fuck.

[wolverine]

I think the whole "omg a song of ice and fire is so deep, the characters are so realz" mindset some people have is complete bullshit. It doesn't take a genius to make a fictional creation do something good, then write them doing something not so good. Just about every book ever written has done this. Some just compare ASoIaF's "grey, morally ambiguous" characters to The Lord of the Rings' somewhat more simplistic (with exceptions of course) characters to get a sense of elitism and superiority, like an immature way of yelling out "hey we're better than you cause we're all deep and complex 'n stuff..."

Just my two cents ;)

I think it is a little more complex than that. I truly feel George did an outstanding job of changing reader's perceptions of certain characters, whether they are really grey or not. The prime examples being Jaime and Sandor. One is introduced to us shoving an innocent favored son out a castle window and the other remorselessly chopping down an innocent peasant boy. I can't really think of the good things Sandor has done other than saving Sansa from the mob, which is pretty much his duty at the time. He still speaks cruelly and frighteningly to her and everyone pretty much all the time. Yet, many people don't despise The Hound and wish him dead as they probably did for quite a while in the series.