I get the majority of Equestrian nobility, aristocracy, and more-or-less the bulk of the Upper Class (thank you for pointing that out, BlueBastard) are not supposed to be the most likable characters. Most of them are just caricatures of the stereotypical snobby, dim-witted aristocrats you see everywhere in popular culture. They're not villains or really antagonists in the truest sense in the show, they're relatively harmless, if just annoying.

But a noticeable trend I've seen in popular fanfics is the vilification of many nobles, who serve as if not the main villain, a one-shot antagonistic figure, a secondary villain at most. I usually see it when you have a character is being 'oppressed', be it the Changeling-OC-of-the-week (so to throw any moral ambiguity or shades of grey out the window), the lower classes, non-Unicorns/non-ponies, etc. Or alternatively, when we want to throw a spanner in the works of Celestia or more commonly Luna smoothly running their governments. Basically, it's usually done as a tool to take a cheap shot at the 'hypocrisy' and 'corruption' of Equestria and all the jazz.

I'm aware that this is nothing new in popular culture, but there's no doubt it's cliche as heck, right? The 'evil corrupt Aristocrat' is commonplace, and there's often little to no chance of them having anything slightly resembling depth or multi-dimensions; it's almost always the cliched one-note overweight, stuffed shirt who can only shout and splutter all his/her cliche lines, not a character but a simple cardboard cutout I have to roll my eyes at. I want to emphasize I'm not against noble/aristocrat/plutocrat or whatever who is villainous in itself, but if we are going to do it, could we just try to make them a little more interesting than this? Maybe make them funny, goofy, some redeeming qualities or at least a 'Jerkass/Strawman has a point'?

Not only that, but when you think about it, in the Celestia/Luna stories especially, the evil nobles don't even make for that good villains, in the sense of credibility, because when you think about it, what do either Celestia or Luna really have to fear from them, when they could easily just vaporize with a thought? They really aren't that much a threat to these all-powerful, beloved Alicorns, are they? And it really looks even more jarring when you have the nobles/aristocrats acting so ridiculously one-note and over-the-top that they're openly belligerent towards these all-powerful Princesses as if the latter answer to him and he is superior to them (it's usually a stallion), which I've seriously seen more than once. It's one thing if they are ridiculously pompous and EEEVVVIIILLL! but it's another when they're actually even getting up in the Princess' faces like even they're dung on his hooves.

Do you think the nobility are overly vilified in stories? Do you think it is justified, or just a tired dead-horse cliche? Could you name some where it's done well or at least does something new with it?

2912991
I believe they can be justified if they have some depth to them, and their motives are understandable and not just 'lets oppress the poor people for money and power'. Sadly such a thing rarely happens

2912991
I think they get worse than they deserve. I'm sure a lot of them are pretentious pricks but Fancy Pants and Fleur didn't seem that bad. At least my by head canon they aren't.

2912991
It's just a common theme, the rich oppress or lord over those less fortunate with their wealth. To have someone who has money but acts courteous is uncommon but there could be a story you can make out of it.

2912991 It's because it's easy to make a story like that

2912991

The one time I've used them, I characterized most of them as stuck-in-their-ways incompetents, Blueblood especially. I don't know about the rest of the world, but given the way the American political system seems to be 'working' of late . . . well, noble ponies are an easy target.

For what it's worth, I've had a lot more fun with Canterlot University professors.

I don't think 'nobility' is the word you're looking to use in so far as 'upper class', since the former implies having ties to a royal family of sorts.

And generally, the upper class does get vilified more or less because they are in official fiction. With the exception of a few good ponies like Fancypants, they are generally all are snooty elitists who only change their tune purely for public image should somebody even more important than they, such as Fancypants, show approval for something they normally would deem below their station in life.

Hell, Applejack's own socialite aunt and uncle showed contempt for her country accent, and Trixie did it all the time despite not even being close to having a reputation as a rich and socially influential pony.

2912991

Personally, I hate seeing it in stories, if for no other reason but the fact that it comes up so frequently and it is always done the same way. You rarely ever get to see the flipside, where it's a rabble attacking nobles that were attempting to act civilized and tried to maintain order for example. Ray Bradbury (sort of) did a story like that, and there are countless examples throughout history where worked up masses would murder innocent people while labeling them as "oppressors."

Just because one is a member of the aristocracy doesn't mean they instantly get an "I'M A POMPOUS ASSHOLE"-gland transplanted into their brain or whatever. If anything, they tend to get very strict tutelage during their childhood that is aimed at making sure they don't turn into a bunch of gluttonous bastards when they grow up.

The "friction between the nobility and the commoners" is most likely just like any other form of prejudice: both sides are suspicious of the other because they were given a few bad examples (i.e nobles acting as dickheads and a rabble causing trouble)

2913040

Fancy Pants and Fleur aren't generally depicted as nobles either, though... they're usually just wealthy, with Fancy Pants having earned his way to the top.

291340
Sorry, was thinking of aristocrats for a second. If that's so, the only nobity we know are the princesses, cadance included, and blueblood. Which really are all over the place

2912991
Yes, they are over-villified. I know some good rich people in real life, but TV stereotypes make them all *&*^%&. Pretty annoying.

2912991
Yes'm. I've even done it myself, in my first fic. And I rather regret it now, in truth, and try to be a bit more balanced in newer work.

If we're going by canon side of things, then the entire fandom is filled completely with a load of horse fecal matter.

There is no evidence besides Blueblood that points toward them being evil.

So, I suppose if one wishes to stand right by canon, roughly a quarter of a fics featuring them would have to be terminated and erased from the site servers.

I admit, after the behavior of some of the Canterlot elite in Sweet and Elite, I tend to write them so a lot are reasonably nice but a noticeable amount are jerks and a great many have rather conservative attitudes (which changes the dynamics of slashfics involving a member of the elite).

2912991

I generally like a more balance approach, and have tried to aim for that in my stories. The nobility and upper class may have a good number of them who are snobby or otherwise troublesome (Between issues such as privilege and the slightly self-selecting nature of individuals who could ascend to the upper class), but not all. I try to have a mix; some are snobbish jerks, others might do the right thing, even if it's somewhat self-centered, and still others might be genuinely good ponies, like Fancy Pants. I think having a spectrum of personalities makes the whole thing seem much more believable.

Playing it as either extreme doesn't feel very convincing, and makes them look like either cardboard villains, or makes the story look more akin to apologist propaganda.

The worst, to me, is when a story combines villain-aristocracy with them having serious influence constraining Celestia and Luna's actions, to the point that the Princesses are effectively subordinate to their decisions. However you look at it, they could only have that influence because Celestia allowed it. Given how long she's had to subtly influence things, I have almost as hard of a time believing she would allow such a thing to take place as I do believing that she and Luna would accept the injustices such settings were specifically crafted to create. The excuses given are usually weak hand-waves that generally feel like the author saying, "don't think on it too hard." It makes her look spineless, which seems pretty contrary for someone who's been able to hold a nation together, sovereign, and under the same government for a thousand years (Note: an accomplishment that no currently-existing nation can claim).

2912991

I think they are often over-vilified. Quite a few stories will make sweeping statements about how much the nobles are disliked by the characters and the rest of Equestria. Such universal callousness on the part of the nobles strikes me as highly unlikely. Celestia and Luna are nobles and apparently the paragon ideals of Equestria. If an author tells me that not one, single noble in the entire country tries to emulate the Princesses then I seriously question their literary choices. You can't have the Princesses be idolized and then have nobody actually follow them (well, you can, but it makes no sense!).

Should some of the nobles be corrupt/callous? Yes! That tells me that the individual nobles have their own goals and personalities even if I never see them. It's just that some should also be virtuous and kind. Just like the Princesses.

2913040 I have to agree that out of all the nobles in Canterlot, only Fancy Pants and Fleur are tolerable at best. Everypony else including "Prince" Blueballs deserve to be loathed beyond time and space.

2912991 Well, you can thank Equestria Noir for that.

2914212
Well, we simply don't know about other royalty. The point Iw as trying to make is that the sample size is simply to small to draw any real conclusions from.

Short version; It's an easy moral target. Sir Moneybags hates everything because some things don't give him money. He's a dick and we all know it.Boring antagonist, more useful as a target than a narrative device.

2913236

You rarely ever get to see the flipside, where it's a rabble attacking nobles that were attempting to act civilized and tried to maintain order for example. Ray Bradbury (sort of) did a story like that, and there are countless examples throughout history where worked up masses would murder innocent people while labeling them as "oppressors."

Really? I mean, granted, history is littered with examples of weak or lower class people who are of a particular minority being sent to the wall for consipiracist reason, but the members of the ruling class are usually immune and often the instigators. When the rabble come out to murderize somebody, it's usually with the complicity of those in positions of authority.
The only real example that comes to mind of a noble being attacked for trying to keep order and act civilized was Abdelkader actions to protect the Christian minority from his coreligionists.

2916108

The example that I was hesitant to mention (maybe not for the "keeping order" bit) was the murder of the Romanovs at the hands of the bolsheviks. Granted, some might rightfully say that the way the tsars were running the country, it was no wonder that some people might be pissed off enough to want to kill them. However, it was no reason to just round up and murder their entire family, then dispose of the bodies the way they did.

Another two might be the English Civil War or the French Revolution. Again, in both cases one may argue that the victims have pretty much betrayed their own people, but the degree of how "evil" they actually were was greatly exaggerated by most, and the way these executions were carried out, not to mention the fact that killing them did not exactly bring a swift end to everyone's troubles (both would then go on to produce more bloodshed), might suggest that them doing everything they could to keep order and maintain their rule might not have been such a bad thing, at least when compared to the aftermath.

That said, yes, such examples are negligible in number compared to how many times the lower classes have been "trodden on," though in recent years I've begun to question whether the stereotype really was as common as most think it was, or even if it was, was it really as bad as they portray it all the time...

2913697 I agree with this method. It's perhaps the closest the writer's can get to the reality of the upper class/nobility/aristocrats. Demonizing the vast majority of them, even with only a few good ones, has been done to death and is simply unrealistic.

I absolutely agree with the second part. These two are the closest things to Godesses in this show; they should have absolutely nothing to fear from these villainous OC Aristocrats. I just can't imagine that situation working without it looking jarring to at least some degree; it could only really work if there wore ordinary ponies, likely Unicorns.

It especially becomes dumbfounding when the Evil Aristocrats, who is SO ridiculously one-note and over-the-top shouting and raving to the point it's 'Harry Potter' Dursley' levels, even openly contemptuously talks to the Princesses like he (it's usually a stallion) is superior to them and they answer directly to him. It's one thing if they are ridiculously pompous and EEEVVVIIILLL! but it's another when they're actually even getting up in the Princess' faces like even they're dung on his hooves.

2912991

Hmm I don't think so. Depending on how you do it. The upper class, while in the show, have been shown to be...well NOT evil, but very...what is the word for it. So image concerned. I think they are trying to show off their success. I think they are so driven to clime to society latter, they put a lot of thinks on the way side. It is like some self perpetuating cycle. When your on top, you are more important. When you are more important, then you get to control what is right or wrong.

This may in it self may be a fault of Blueblood, who can be considered the "highest" of the upper class due to his blood line of Celestia and Luna. If the upper class is so concern in copying what is above them, then that can be Blueblood. Blueblood may just be a spoiled jerk, rather than evil, but it can make the rest act like him. In short, it is pretty much like middle/high school.

But I don't think they are evil, maybe a tad too concerned about how they look. There are plus sides to them. Fancy Pants is one of them. Sapphire Shores seems nice. There was a pony that was holding a charity auction in the fancy pant episode

If that makes any sense

2932541 Oh no, I absolutely agree with what you're saying here in terms of the show. I'm just saying in the fanfiction, I think they tend to get overly vilified into caricatures. You know, the stereotypical overweight, stuffed-shirt, purple face and ridiculously over-the-top twit who can only shouting and bluster every single line he says.

2932644

Maybe. But I just like saving that for Blueblood XD.

2912991 Well in my story Princess Twilight Sparkle has a aristocratic background and she fights crime as Mare Do Well, Prince Blueblood just has some psychological issues but not evil, Carrot Cake is the owner of a very successful catering company who got to be elected mayor of Ponyville and he is good guy, but there is Filthy Rich who is a villainous manipulator, and the worst ones are Fluttershy's aristocratic parents who are completely heartless because when poor Fluttershy was born with bat like deformities because a vampire bat bit her mother in the stomach when she was pregnant with her they threw her into the sewers when she was just a filly and BTW Fluttershy is the main character of my story and it is a dark tragedy

2913853 An excellent point. If many of the nobility are as concerned about looking good as they are indicated in the show, then wouldn't acting like Celestia be the one thing they're all trying to be?