The title is pretty self-explanatory. I was challenged to write a Harry Potter fanfiction, and as I was writing it the question arose: what exactly is a Dark Lord?

In the canon it seems to involve being homicidal and having a world fear you. Going from what I've read here, both recently and before I left fanfiction, it seems to involve being a raving maniac, hating Dumbledore, and torturing Ginny for a few hours every night before bed, which actually doesn't seem to contradict canon.

To me it seems like a Dark Lord is a customary, if slightly propagandistic, title you apply to someone subversive to the morals and ethics of what society deems to be right and wrong. Obviously there has to be some other requirements to be met, but overall it seems to be purely propaganda. Take for example Lucius Malfoy, he is feared, has subversive views, and his orders are followed, but he isn't referred to as a Dark Lord. Does this mean a Dark Lord has to publicly declare his intent to enter war? Voldemort was certainly a public figure, and we can presume Grindelwald was as well. If this were the case having the title of Dark Lord would come down to:

1) having views in direct or indirect conflict with the majority-held beliefs.
2) acting upon said views publicly, often through war
3) a base of like-minded followers has to have congregated around you.

In this way it seems as if being a Dark Lord were less about actually being Dark and more of being an extremist, or simply a reformist. However, if this were the case you could have people like, say, Dumbledore become Dark Lords. They might not use anything worse than a stupefy, but if they declared war on, and tried to change, the current society, they could be titled Dark Lord. This doesn't sit well with me, because Dumbledore is definitely not dark, but it fits with the propaganda tactic. I seem to recall Potter being referred to as a Dark Lord in the canon when they thought he had used dark magic though, which doesn't completely fit with propaganda, as he wasn't trying to tear down the dominant society.

So it is possible that to be a Dark Lord you have to utilize something associated with the dark, along with have a negative reputation in the eyes of society at large. This would explain why Dumbledore isn't considered a Dark Lord. Although he has at several times had a generally negative reputation, he was never accused of using dark magic, and thus wasn't a Dark Lord.

So, what do you believe it takes to actually gain the coveted Dark Lord title? Is it power? Reputation? Pure propaganda? Do you just have to be a raving homicidal maniac?

 

Generally being a meanie.

 

Being the meanest meanie of a group of meanie.

 

And you have to wear black.

 

Don't forget your ultra-cool, ultra-fear-inspiring mark.

 

Calling yourself a Dark Lord and being willing to torture the fuck out of anyone who tries to say that isn't even a real title seems to be the only qualification.

 

Delusions of grandeur.

 

That and the minions- no Lording without some toadies to humiliate. Also, you have to beat up on policemen and other officials, and not own any cute pets.

"It's the Dark Lady Ginevra and... her... pygmy puff. Never mind, folks."

 

You must have a secret base or hide out. No Dark Lord is complete without a nice hidey hole. Preferably if it's dark or dank or both

 

Also, you should drive big fast cars and feast on endangered species.

 

Plucky, modest but heroic child nemesis who happens to hold the key to your ultimate destuction

= Dark Lord.

 

There are few things more fear inspiring than someone who can simultaneously flay you and cuddle his (or her) pygmy puff.

I suppose that means people have to fear you? Can't say I ever pictured the relationship between Voldemort and Harry in that fashion, but it is certainly a funny prospect.

...Cars?

Interestingly enough, most of the other aspects can be attributed to Batman, don't know if anyone else noticed. He has a dark, dank cave. A mark that inspires fear. He's not adverse to torturing anyone... Voldemort should have called his followers Dark Knights.

 

They were originally called the Knights of Walpurgis per JKR interview

Edit:
I'm not sure if Death Eater is better or worse. Deez, Death Munchers et all are dumb, but if she stuck with the original, they'd be Kow's which is worse

 

Bit unimaginative with his previous group, the Knights of Walpurgis(sp?), don't you think?

That said, being a Dark Lord would probably require a mastery of dark magic, or, if canon is to be followed, the ability to spam more unforgivables then anyone else.

Edit: Ninja'd by BadVoodoo

 

If you can get people to take the Dark Lord Waldemort seriously then you deserve the title. Its as easy as that.

 

Never knew about the Knights of Walpurgis thing. I think I would have preferred it over Death Eaters though. The first time I heard the name I had to brush my teeth. So unsanitary.

The mastery actually makes a lot of sense, but what defines mastery? Being able to use a few dark spells better than anyone else, or having mastered a wide range of dark spells? This could work, though. It is possible that Grindelwald left a vacuum in his wake and you had all these dark wizards trying to claim the title of Dark Lord, resulting in a melee. Voldemort, if canon is to be believed, could have risen to the top, as incompetent as everyone seems to be. I like what these requirements seem to imply. To rise there you would certainly have to be ruthless and powerful, and you would have to use the dark arts to do so, because it is doubtful that you leave your enemies alive.

Eventually you could gain a growing group of followers as people come to fear and respect you. All of those fighting wizards group around one person and support him as he grows, but he would have to be wary of his followers too. There's a whole story in that idea alone.

Actually, this sort of title makes me think of Sith Lords.

Unforgivables could work too, kind of unimaginative though.

 

Ok, "Dark Lord" is just something that Voldemort was called iirc. There is no empty post that a dark wizard fills up every year and people start crying "A new Dark Lord has risen!"

 

Diving into arcane magic, the majority of it being either dark or 'questionable', as well as having the desire to impose you own will/beliefs upon the greater world at large, believing that it's for 'the best'. Dumbledore couldn't technically be classed as a 'Dark Lord' because of his morality, goals, methods and actions. Grey, maybe, but not Dark.

Although both were Dark Lords, Grindlewald and Voldemort were two entirely seperate monsters in nature.

Grindlewald wanted wizards to rule over muggles - although he was a powerful wizard with possible vast knowledge of the Dark Arts, he was more of a traditional 'general'/leader, leading the masses.

Voldemort, however, was very different: he primarily wanted power, and for muggles/muggleborns to be wiped out. He primarily worked in the shadows, with a fairly small, elite group (KoW/DE's) working for him/acting as his 'hands', whilst he himself delved deep into the blackest of magic.

Simply put (and Star Wars fans will understand this) - Voldemort = Darth Sidious on crack. Grindlewald = Darth Malak.

 

I am aware of that. In a lot of dark!Harry stories, he takes up the title of Dark Lord. I was merely asking what, if anything, truly defines a Dark Lord. It appears that there is no general consensus on what it is, outside of being homicidal. My first post was theories on what a Dark Lord could possibly be. I recall that somewhere in canon it was stated Voldemort gave himself the title. My question has been answered quite a few times now, there were just some interesting points brought up I wished to elaborate upon. Looking back I do see how one could easily misconstrue what I said to me asking why every bad guy in history is a Dark Lord. My apologies, I should have made that clearer in my post(s).

I enjoyed that analogy, well put. It appears you're saying that to be a Dark Lord you have to have skewered morals and use dark magic, which is what I was trying to get at in my first post.

 

Perhaps Riddle only started calling himself "Lord" because it was the only way he could get his anagram to work...

But yeah, no one else is called a "Dark Lord" in canon.