How bad can someone be before redemption isn't possible?

[paranoid marvin]

Unlike real life, there really isn't a point where a fictional character can't be redeemed - mainly because we know they've done no real harm to anyone. We like well-written good characters, we like well-written baddies as well. And any well-written story arc that sees a character travel from one side to the other (and some times back again) will be accepted by the reader.

 

[Ray McCarthy]

Unlike real life,

Really?

 

[Nick B]

Thank you all for your thoughts on the subject. It will be a long process spanning a series, the first is out to beta now so fingers crossed.

 

[thaddeus6th]

Ratsy, I also never disliked Glokta.

On-topic: you'd have to go pretty damned far before redemption became impossible. Murder or torture could be redeemable. Rape/child abuse, I'd say, are things which a character cannot come back from.

 

[Nick B]

Those are subjects I wouldn't touch anyway thad.

 

[HareBrain]

Why would murder be more easily redeemable than rape?

I'm not criticising anyone, by the way, because my own gut feeling is that this is true for fictional characters. But isn't that a bit weird? Not that we see rape as so serious, but that we see murder as almost "cosy"?

 

[thaddeus6th]

I think it's because murder can have a motive beyond the act itself (ie My name is Inigo Montoya etc). Rape (or child abuse) feels like it must always be utterly wrong in and of itself.

 

[HareBrain]

But I think there must be more to it. In fantasy you could have a situation where a magic spell requires either the murder or rape of a victim to release power. In both cases, the motivation is the same. But almost everyone (I think) would forgive the murder more easily than the rape. Why?

 

[Ray McCarthy]

Some random thoughts:
Female rapists are very much rarer than Female murderers, or male rapists.

Murder can be a very instantaneous act, done remotely. Can be a moment's loss of control. It may not have much additional violence, though can have.

Rape requires intimate personal involvement, violence, restraint and probably takes longer.

But actually many countries give much lesser sentences for rape than murder. Unlike murder there is often a suggestion the victim was consenting and changed her mind later. Or wanted "rough".

There can be many "degrees" of Murder from well planned premeditated, drunken rage, to the accused being cleared, (involuntary manslaughter) even though the accused has the smoking gun / bloody knife and found standing over the dead victim. Rape either is rape or it isn't. The amount of violence isn't a guide (drugged victim vs consenting adults that erm... )

Actually it can be harder to get conviction for rape? In some countries nearly impossible?

So is it true that people forgive murder more easily than rape? Or does it depend on the motivation, circumstances and relationship to victim?

 

[HareBrain]

I agree with much of that, Ray, but I think the situation is different in fiction. As Thad says, murder there is often part of a plot, a rational move like a play in chess. "Off the cuff" murder is quite rare in fiction. Where it occurs, it's usually the mark of an out-and-out bad-guy no one expects to be redeemed at all.

So is it true that people forgive murder more easily than rape? Or does it depend on the motivation, circumstances and relationship to victim?

I gave an example above where the motivation etc could be exactly the same for the two crimes, and I believe many more readers would forgive murder than rape in those circumstances. I'd be interested to know if anyone disagrees.

 

[Ray McCarthy]

I'd take it on a case by case basis.
But I do think it's odd that in the real world the penalties are usually more severe for murder (till 1950s in UK, terminally so, still so in much of USA).

Can I forgive G. R. R. Martin for the amount of rape he describes, and the motivation of the characters? Or his own motivations?

 

[Nick B]

The only reason I avoid the subjects of rape is the emotional can of worms that it can open, I want my stories to be entertaining and memorable for the right reasons.
Whether murder is 'less' 'bad' than rape or any sexual abuse is for another thread please.

Suffice to say this character does kill, though it is in combat situations ( although civillian casualties arn't rare when she is going full-on), she does not engage in any sexual abuse of of any kind.

 

[Ray McCarthy]

In my WIP, the "good girls" (a 13 and 18 yo) have killed at least 4 in combat situations, the bad folk five (in one case a pair of baddies killed each other). It's yet to be seen if any of the baddies are interested in any Redemption situations. One girl is very upset and the other is unhappy she wasn't more successful.

 

[Mouse]

Please, god, don't let this thread bang on about rape now...

But...

But I think there must be more to it. In fantasy you could have a situation where a magic spell requires either the murder or rape of a victim to release power. In both cases, the motivation is the same. But almost everyone (I think) would forgive the murder more easily than the rape. Why?

This reminded me instantly of Alex from Misfits. One of the other characters (Rudy, I think) even jokingly referred to him as The Raper, as Alex's power was to take someone's power from them by having sex with them. I don't think anybody watching the show ever thought Alex was evil.

 

[Avid Scifi Fan]

So it sounds like you may have the answer you were looking for.

If the characters bad things are the collateral damage during a combat situation, then you can tailor the degree of that damage in a way that everyone knows its wrong. The degree of intent is up to you as the writer.

 

[Venusian Broon]

Pinhead in Hellraiser II somehow managed to redeem himself, despite actively 'tearing souls apart' and all that that entailed. It kinda made sense...although I read that the writer got masses of hatemail for destroying a 'wonderful' evil character. So Pinhead reverted back to being just a monster in the the next one in the series.

 

[Brian G Turner]

Why would murder be more easily redeemable than rape?

IMO because murder remains distant for most people, with the possibility of extenuating circumstances to justify violence - especially for characters living through violent times.

Sexual violence of any sort is still too common among any readership for it to be treated abstractly.

Just a thought.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

There's a fairly detailed thread on the subject of rape in sff elsewhere. However:

The only reason I avoid the subjects of rape is the emotional can of worms that it can open, I want my stories to be entertaining and memorable for the right reasons.
Whether murder is 'less' 'bad' than rape or any sexual abuse is for another thread please.

Suffice to say this character does kill, though it is in combat situations ( although civillian casualties arn't rare when she is going full-on), she does not engage in any sexual abuse of of any kind.

I'm a bit worried that books dealing with difficult subjects such as rape asre described as not being memorable for the right reasons.... The Colour Purple certainly was - it opened peoples' eyes to something barely thought about in fiction before. For me, that's more right than any other reason.

 

[paranoid marvin]

Really?

In real life someone like Hitler couldn't be redeemed whatever he did. In fiction Darth Vader, responsible for the murder of innumerable people was redeeemed by one act.

 

[paranoid marvin]

There's two discussions here though; could one be redeemed in the eyes of the reader, or in the eyes of their (fictional) colleagues. Entirely different propositions in my opinion.