I am so enamored with it, in fact, that I'm eighteen chapters into writing my own novel that deals with both it and society's views of how we apply those definitions.
Just what is it that makes us go one way or the other? If you say it's the result of social constructs like family and school, or the everyday exposure to media (both real and fictitious), then the influence can be seen as external. If, on the other hand, it's the result of our own physical and psychological development and our choices and actions based on that and our processing of that external stimulus, then the influence can be seen internal.
We've been trying to figure it out since the beginning of recorded time, and with respect to Jung, Freud and the other great analyzers of the human mind, I think we've only scratched the surface of what truly makes us tick.
I'd like to tell you that my fascination with our psychological makeup is purely because I read too many Sherlock Holmes books as a kid or tried to figure out the plot to every episode of Law & Order ever made.
*Editorial Note - I am guilty of both counts, actually, but everybody's got to have a hobby, I suppose.
It's because I've been trying to figure out my own psychology and which side of the line I actually fall upon.
In my life, I've been called both an angel and Satan, and I've never understood the logic behind either. I am far from a righteous, incorruptible man and my conscience is such that it's truly not in my nature to behave like a psychopath or even a sociopath. And yet, my experience has shown me that as a culture, we're content to slap someone with such labels all the time.
The one constant I've heard through the years in both mass media and my own bubble is the notion that once a person commits a crime, that's all they are capable of doing and that is all they'll ever be. Rehabilitation and reform are myths and pipe dreams, and therefore the only logical conclusion is indefinite, passive-aggressive punishment.
Now don't mistake me. There are some people who are indeed psychopathic, sociopathic, sadistic, or predatory and are fully aware of what their actions will result in. I've never subscribed to the concept that a true utopia is possible in this world because there will always be a percentage of humanity that simply doesn't care to follow the rules and laws laid down by civilized society. They just don't, and for whatever justification they come up with, they'd rather commit brutal atrocities at the expense of their fellow neighbors. But they are also a much smaller percentage of the population than we ever like to admit.
In many ways, we glamorize evil because it seems more attractive than being the proverbial starched-shirt, straight-backed Dudley-Do-Right. We recognize that aspect of human nature and romanticize it because we find our own darker impulses and potential intriguing. The darker and more diabolical we can make a character, the more exciting and appealing they become to us.
As much as we condemn Dahmer, Bundy, Lanza, Loughner, Pol Pot, Stalin, Hitler and the other historical evil figures, we also clamor for stories of characters like Hannibal Lecter, Michael Myers, Professor Moriarty, Leatherface, Norman Bates and other personifications of the very evil we've tried to eradicate for millennia.
The dichotomy will always exist, because we'll always want to know what makes supposedly "evil" people do what they do. We'll always want to study them because in doing so, we hopefully will learn more about ourselves and what we can do to evolve into something better than what we are now.
No comments:
Post a Comment