No magical consequences?

"Who hasn't wished to have some sort of superpower at least once in their life? But we don't like heroes whose superpowers come with no cost. Superman is perpetually an alien, Batman is incapable of carrying on a reasonable relationship with anyone other than the Joker or Catwoman, even the Kwisatz Haderach has to pay over and over again for his gifts. Frodo ended up saving the Shire, but couldn't go back to his old life within it. There must always be a cost/consequence, because Real Life is full of consequences." Lilith Saintcrow from a Witchychicks blog post.

 

Lilith Saintcrow guest blogged last week on the witchychicks blog on writing paranormals. Ms. Saintcrow mentions the need to have consequences and costs for magical or super powers--something I've mentioned a time or two myself, as have others such as Lawrence Watt-Evans.

 

I've said before (but am too lazy to look up the post and link it)the only logical consequence of magic users with no metaphysical brakes is despotism. Absolute power corrupting absolutely is practically a given when magical ability is as easy and inconsequential to the wielder as breathing*; and to give your magicians such massive power without any means of it being checked is to ensure they logically would become the evil overlords that your protagonist has to overcome. And while evil god/evil overlord stories have their place, if you want a magic wielding protagonist, you should consider how his magical abilities are limited and the rules by which they are 1) used, 2) distinguished (so your take on magic isn't the same as every other author's), and (most importantly) 3) the cost and consequences to the wielder.

 

Idea.

However, supposing you have a character who's observed to have all these super magical powers and yet there appears to be no consequence. This might be an interesting set up for a story. (It actually is an idea that I've had percolating for a while which I thought might make an interesting screenplay a la the Thirteenth Floor.) So say you have this character, and your protagonist gets to wondering how they can defy the laws of physics, etc. and how they can have godlike powers that cost them nothing. He wonders if these people have a secret source, or if they are a danger to society as in they want to take over the world with their super powers. It would be sort of inhuman for them to be all Justice League dutiful and not be at least strongly tempted.

 

Which brings me to the what if part. What If...the super powers are something more sinister, something being taken from another world, or from the people of the story's world?

 

And my conflict goes off from there as the secret is accidentally discovered and the protagonist has to save himself--either by revealing the secret or using the same dire means of gaining the powers himself. Talk about a moral dilemma! (I love moral dilemmas.)

 
And, as a final note, let me refer you to Lawrence Watt-Evan's Laws of Fantasy:

1. Watt-Evans' First Law of Fantasy: Stories are about people.

2. Watt-Evans' Second Law of Fantasy: People are never wholly good or wholly evil, and therefore characters should never be wholly good or wholly evil.

3. Watt-Evans' Third Law of Fantasy: The basic human motivations are universal.

4. Watt-Evans' Fourth Law of Fantasy: Everything other than the basic human motivations will vary, depending on the cultural setting.

5. Watt-Evans' Fifth Law of Fantasy: Magic, like everything else, has rules.

6. Watt-Evans' Sixth Law of Fantasy: If a story can be written without a fantasy element, then don't bother with the fantasy element.

And, just for kicks, read up on the Turkey City Lexicon's speculative fiction gripes and groaners (provided by a vast array of sff writers over the years.)  Some of these are used in other genres; many are spec fic specific, like the "squid on the mantlepiece" or the "smeerp."

*Thus Harry Potter is solidly in the kid lit camp for that reason alone, although they are excellent reads. 

Comments

[Charles Gramlich]

I disagree with Watt-Evans #2, and in fact I think some of other rules contradict that one. He says that characters should never be wholly good or evil because real life people aren't like that. He's correct that real life people aren't, but we're already not talking about real life. In a world where magic works, we're already outside of real life. One of the great power's of fantasy, of fiction in general, and one of it's greatest gifts, is to allow us to contemplate that which isn't real. There are times when a purely good or purely evil character is "exactly" what you want.

As for #2, I'd go so far as to say that, logically, if you were to accept all the premises of that law, then you couldn't have fantasy at all because magic isn't real.

[Helen Ginger]

This was very interesting. I don't write fantasy or speculative fiction, so I'd never thought about the need for balance. If a character has a super power, he must have a consequence.

Helen
Straight From Hel

[writtenwyrdd]

You have a point, Charles. I figure that, like any writing rule, it's only a rule when you want it to be and mileage varies according to our intentions and needs as writers.

[writtenwyrdd]

Glad you found this useful!

[Angie]

I agree about the consequences. [nod] Not only does it make sense (thermodynamics, anyone?) but it makes for a better story. If your characters have no limitations, then the villain has to make a truly stupid blunder to be caught and stopped, and the hero can never find a worthy opponent. Superman actually had that problem for a while; he'd grown so powerful over many years and many writers that the stories had to get pretty twisted to explain why it took more than three frames for him to solve whatever problem came up. One of the Crisis-type series DC did depowered him quite a lot, and although the fans howled, it was better for the stories.

Angie

[laughingwolf]

i get really pissed off with clowns trying to depict animation as 'real life'! grrrrr

get over it, bozos... anything goes in animation, all rules are suspended for the duration

you want 'real life', use 'real' actors doing 'real' things....

[pacatrue]

I always cringe at rule 6, which I've heard several times. For me, the idea of a normal love story taking placing in a new world or alternate history is just fine. I understand the purpose of the rule, but I don't know if I really buy it. Checkov said that if you have a gun above the mantelpiece, someone needs to fire it by act 3. I think rule 6 is basically the same thing.

[writtenwyrdd]

I've considered that same thing, paca, and I've decided that, for myself, what #6 means is that, essentially, if the story runs along as if it were in this reality, that if the background of a foreign reality makes no real difference, then it is a contrivance. So, what that means in a nuts and bolts manner seems to be that if some element of the foreign reality, the book reality, affects the plot, then you don't have to worry about it.

But, all in all, you can tell a love story in a space ship and it might just as well be an ocean liner. It does end up being splitting of hairs more often than not!

[writtenwyrdd]

I am rather fond of limitations on my cartoon characters within their reality. If I don't know the rules and there are no limits, how am I going to be afraid for my favorite super hero? This is why Superman has his kryptonite.