Home > Fiction In General > Fiction In General 1: Gratuitous Violence

Fiction In General 1: Gratuitous Violence


This time, I’m going to put out a few thoughts I’ve had about how violence is portrayed in fiction in general.  While this connects to some previous posts, the patterns that have been bothering me are properties of fiction in general rather than just science fiction, fantasy, or superhero stories.

This isn’t some nonsense like “video games make people violent” (there is no obvious such relationship).  It’s more indirect than that.  I’m worrying about how violence is portrayed in fiction and how that reflects and influences how people perceive violence in reality.

Why Are You Fighting Someone?

Let’s start with what may seem a relatively minor example: sports movies.  Most particularly football movies, hockey movies, boxing movies, and the recently-popular mixed-martial arts movies.  The generic plot goes something like this: underdog player gets beaten badly initially, goes through extended practice and training, and wins the championship/the big game against a rival.  The problem I have with this is not the basic hero’s journey plot.  It’s that people are inflicting horrendous trauma on each other, fundamentally for only one reason: the entertainment of others.  Some people would still like contact sports and fighting even if, in fiction and in reality, they weren’t glorified and paid for doing so.  But the rate would be lower.

Of the examples I gave, boxing is probably the worst.  Dementia pugilistica is documented in 15%-20% of former professional boxers, the legacy of a history of repeated concussions.  Mixed-martial arts fighters have a somewhat lower rate of serious head injuries, because not all fights go to knock-out.  The injury rates of American football and ice hockey are not quite as high, but are still horrendous.  You all may draw the boundary lines for the acceptable levels of injury at different points, but the idea of glorifying excessive violence that happens just for people’s entertainment should be opposed by everyone.  This is not a new point, of course.

In other cases, fictional heroes are motivated to violence by revenge.  Hunting down and killing everyone who was even remotely involved in hurting a child is a popular one.  But how is a Roaring Rampage of Revenge heroic?  Killing a bunch of people doesn’t reverse whatever it was that they did.  Sometimes overwhelming retribution is shallowly justified as “justice”.  But even someone who was as much of an authoritarian social dominator as  Hammurabi  was should be able to understand that retribution has to be limited.

Is Fighting Someone Really A Good Idea?

Other times, fictional violence may be in the name of a justifiable cause – fighting The Evil Empire, stopping a terrorist attack, taking down an organized crime syndicate.

But is that violence really a good way to accomplish your goal?  If the military of The Empire is willing to blow up a planet with 2 billion people on it just to scare more people, destroying the weapon that can do that may be the only way out – even if that kills 250,000 in the process.  But if destroying the replacement to it would sterilize an entire planet of civilians, that is not a good idea.

And in reality, extended wars usually kill more people indirectly from displacement and disruption of vital services than are killed directly in combat (e.g. consider the casualty figures from WWII).  Many war movies don’t acknowledge that at all, and glorify the violence as solving a problem without showing the incredibly high cost.  How much does that contribute to people not considering anything other than violent confrontation in dealing with social problems?

As a final example, consider the TV series 24.  Jack Bauer is supposedly heroic, but goes around torturing people  – not exactly a fight, but incredibly and gratuitously violent.  In real life, torture is not effective at obtaining information from people and causes horrendous pain.  Anyone who acts like Jack Bauer is not a hero.  He or she is a villain.

I will not say that violence in fiction is bad.  But when fictional characters who are gratuitously violent either for no good reason or in a way that defeats their supposed justifiable goal are presented as heroic, there is a potential problem.

Advertisements
  1. No comments yet.
  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: