What are the attributes of Grimdark?

The Big Peat

Darth Buddha
Joined
Apr 9, 2016
Messages
3,764
If we were to define genres by how well it included 3-5 big attributes/definitions, what would be your 3-5 attributes of Grimdark?

(Or more or less I guess, but I think that's a good number to be thinking of)
 
A world like the one in Karl Edward Wagner's novel Bloodstone
 
Mostly covered above, but:
A lack of unabashed good guys, other than as victims.
Violence.
Pessimism.
Cynicism
Gore.
Lack of respect, for human life.
And, in the spirit of Bick's #3, a lot of scratching of various bodily parts.
 
You've got blood, swearing, bad smells, moral ambiguity etc but I think for full grimdark points, the world has to be artificially rigged to preclude a happy ending. An example might be that the Emperor in Warhammer has to eat the souls of psychics. That's a deliberate authorial decision for the sake of it. An honourable or even vaguely altruistic decision has to end badly, and the author will damn well make sure that it does.
 
Everyone is depressed.
The weather is atrocious/there is a magic cloud/volcano cloud hanging between farmers and the sun ensuring that all the crops fail.
 
I disagree with all this hopelessness & depression attributed to grimdark.
Grimdark echoes the reality of our world. There's no Black and White. Just because the MC does everything right, doesn't mean it works out right.

Compared to the 'hop, skip and jump' glee and manners of epic fantasy, it's bleak yes. Compared to some YA? Grimdark's all rainbows and glitter. It doesn't shy away from grit. Second breakfast? Seriously - in GD those poor hobbits wouldn't have eaten for a week.
Most of the characters in grimdark, while morally grey, hope to achieve something - eg defeat the oppressive regime.
 
Well, you can have awful things happening in a story, without it being grim dark and bleak. It is all in the tone, and the attitude of the characters. Yes, grim dark characters can want to achieve things, but there is never an upbeat moment, or humour - I don't mean everyone cracking a joke - though that should happen because it does in real life - look at the Blitz for example and all the up yours Hitler humour that went on in London while it was being bombed to heck - but more the kind of commentary on life kind of humour -usually quite wince making.
A rather dark but not grim dark story is for example T Kingfisher's Clocktaur War duology. She is just too sharp a commentator and there is underlying very dark humour, so I don't find it grim dark. (She also writes horror by the way.) For the record I am not a fan of sparkly rainbows and unrealistically successful endings either.
I think the moral greys of the world can be written about without unrelenting gloom and because I react to tragedy with black humour, and push back and look for the positive, reading a book where none of the characters do that feels not just depressing, but to me that feels unrealistic. However I do know that my dark humour annoys some people who think humour in tragedy is out of place. For example I spent my mother's funeral being aware of how funny she would have found the midnight blue plush lining of the stretch limo, the incredibly tall, bony, elderly, sombre undertaker in a frock coat and that he arrived at our house with a glossy catalogues of coffins. All through I felt she was sitting in the corner giggling. I kept this to myself as the rest of the family did not share that sort of sense of humour that mother and I had.
 
  1. Meaningless violence and death
  2. Hopelessness punctuated by extreme bathos
  3. Uneven distribution of luxuries; when daily essentials are considered luxuries.
  4. Total devaluation of life: when human trafficking is considered a good thing.
  5. Science is a sport; meant to entertain and amuse.
 
Well, you can have awful things happening in a story, without it being grim dark and bleak.

That seems like noir to me. I wish I could remember who said it (possibly Richard Morgan) but noir acknowledges the flaws of the world but tries to change them: grimdark accepts the futility of trying to improve anything.
 
@Toby Frost - OK, that's interesting. I'd got noir down as something akin to a black and white movie of a ill lit grubby back street - not my thing either.

As a person who campaigns and knows the improvements made by historical campaigns, anything that says it is futile to try and improve anything is going to get an irritated response from me.
 
Well, part of the reason behind this exercise to see if there's a consensus-ish group of definitions that allow for many different kinds of grimdark that has a recognisable commonality but don't have a cookie cutter feel; grimdark that isn't depressing and grimdark that is seems to fit into that.

That said, I think a lot of grimdark is indeed miserable as all hell, and if futility/despair/nihilism doesn't come out as one of the major attributes in this I'll be shocked.

And I also feel quite strongly that the idea it's more realistic across the board than Epic Fantasy is so much hokum and PR. Reality contains so many things after all, and most of them stranger than fiction.
 
So those grimdark questions I was asking people. I've toted up the responses I've got from various communities and it seems the tentative set of attributes I'd put out there are

Primary Attributes

Graphic Content - Mainly violence, sometimes sexuality, sometimes taboo
Tone - Very cynical and/or nihilistic and/or grim
Amoral or Immoral Protagonists

Secondary Attribute

Unhappy Violent World - This is almost a primary attribute, as a lot of responses hinted at this without saying it outright

Tertiary Attributes

Unhappy Endings (both for books and for character arcs)
Dark Humour - Although I did one person say grimdark is humourless
Motivated Protagonists/Protagonists with lots of agency
Worlds that deliberately bleak/gritty - i.e. little bathing, colourless, sexual diseases etc.etc.
An absence and/or snuffing out of hope - (maybe should be higher - I think I had three people put this and nihilistic grim tone as sole attribute)

Do these sound right? I'd argue that if this is roughly the list, something Grimdark should contain either all three primary attributes, or two primary attributes and lots of secondary/tertiary attributes - which can create a fair amount of wriggle room on what can be considered part of the genre.
 
I am a fan of Grimdark, and what I like most about it is the unlikeliness of the 'heroes'. I mean, who roots for the torturer? The protaganists are flawed, but somehow their moral compass is something the reader can use to navigate the dimness of the usually brutal settings of these types of books. I also think that dark humour is essential to a good grimdark tale. Otherwise it is too depressing and 'off-balance' for the reader. You have to have something that lifts the emotion, and if it can't be happy, it's got to be funny. I appreciate sarcasm, irony, and witty comments doled out to offset the pessimism and hopelessness that can weigh down the genre.
 
Last edited:
I think another angle that's missing is class differences. Mainstream fantasy has upper class characters - we follow the nobility and demi-gods of the world, the financial elites. In "grimdark" works such as by Joe Abercrombie, we're just as if not more likely to follow low class characters who scrape by from day to day, and otherwise have little if any financial security. The Heroes is a great example of this.

This is probably reflected in attitudes - princes feel entitled to crowns and kingdoms as their birthright, even if initially hidden, and we're expected to root for them because their only eligibility to rule is their blood line, not personal qualities. The Lord of the Rings really underlines this. Lowest class characters do not share that sense of entitlement, and might feel reasonably cynical about the nobility,
 

Similar threads


Back
Top