Phantoms, by Dean Koontz

I don't believe in evil. And I especially don't believe in evil in stories.
I think it's a cop-out to use the concept of "evil" as a reason for the events in a story to happen. It's perfectly fine for characters to believe in evil or to say something is evil (although too much of that as a running theme makes me roll my eyes) but for an author to say something is evil? I don't like that. It's just my opinion, but I think it's cheap. It's an excuse.
Maybe it's the fact that I'm an atheist. I don't believe in an ultimate good. I don't believe in an ultimate bad. That just isn't how it works, in my head.
I don't think people come out of the womb bad, or evil, or destined to be such. I think mental issues and certain experiences and life events, and a whole host of other possibilities, can and do contribute to someone's actions and behavior. An inclination to the negative, if you will. However, to me, that is not evil. People are not evil. And weather phenomenon and natural events, like tornadoes and earthquakes, are certainly not evil.
I feel like this is my soapbox. Whenever this comes up, I have to talk about it. And it's all because of Dean Koontz.
The concept of evil is a running theme in the books of his that I have read and I think it's just a waste of time for an author to claim something is evil, to use the narrative to claim that. That's not a reason. It's not an explanation. It's nothing but a tactic, a cheap one.
Now, that isn't to say I think only my opinion is right, or that evil should never be discussed or written about. It's a bit like jump scares in horror movies. They are cheap. Overrated. They often don't work as they are intended to, because they are used without thought, or skill, or just not in the right manner.
And then there will be a jump scare that just WORKS.
If it fits the story, if the presence of evil has a POINT in the story, if it is a driving force, if there is a reason for evil to be a reason, then it will work. But if it's just a theme and it's being thrown into the story all the time, it makes me roll my eyes and yawn and be frustrated.
Despite all this, despite the fact that I'm standing on my soapbox jabbering to the internet right now, devoting a whole blog post to this idea, I really did like Phantoms by Dean Koontz. It's an older book of his, published in 1983. I liked it a lot. It dealt with subjects and concepts I am interested in. The story was well-paced. The characters were likable, or at least believable. The ending was even pretty good for once.
I just wish writers would hold true to this: Everything in a story must have a reason to be in the story. There needs to be an explanation, a reason, a connection. Coincidences and one-in-a-million chances in real life do happen, but fiction is much, much less forgiving.
Therefore, a story about an ancient creature who causes mass disappearances -as in Phantoms- probably shouldn't be described as evil. What does that add to the story? Unless that is what the characters believe personally, which is different from what the narrative states as fact, it adds nothing. Literally nothing.
I think that's the end of my rant! Be sure to check me out at www.facebook.com/authoremilyblue, or follow me on Twitter, where my handle is @Miss_Emily_Blue.
Until next time!

~Blue