This is a discussion on writing crime fiction within the INFP Forum - The Idealists forums, part of the NF's Temperament Forum- The Dreamers category; Originally Posted by Adonnus Have you tried measuring their skull shapes? And what am I expected to gain from that?...
Something happened yesterday that I thought I might share:
A colleague and I were discussing whether it was 'better' to chop someone's head off, or a hand. My colleague reasoned that chopping a hand was 'better' (for her) because the victim would be conscious and feel the wrath. So, an evil take to it. I reasoned that chopping off a head would be better, because I wouldn't have to suffer any more 'pain' (of killing), as the victim would instantly die. I didn't have any desire for the gratification of the victim feeling anguish, while my colleague did.
It's a fairly dark conversation, but I think the complexity lies in motives and eventual consequences. Some criminals feel intense remorse and do not necessarily take joy in what they do, but others do. Oddly, the crimes in which people make their victims suffer horrendously and unnecessarily so, are worse to me. There's disregard for human life, and then ....DISdisregard for human life. Of course, that changes when it's an act committed in self defense (I don't see it as disregard for human life, but protection of yourself).
I consider rape and child abuse to be the worst, as they are essentially acts of torture, and I have yet to determine a reason for why they would be committed as acts of self-defense.
Otherwise, you do not really have a creative preference and you are talking all over the place, which makes most of what you are saying senseless. I presume this is not the case and you do have an empathetic response to most criminal characters. I happen to have a different take. If you actually read the OP, you would see that that was the actual question there. I did not ask for advice to develop a criminal character. I asked about crimes themselves and not an assortment of a variety of criminals.
Why would they need to be hurt physically? I just don't see a reason for torture. In the few instances I've heard of it being used as a tactic... it's not been fruitful (the person remained silent / or perished). Physical threats just aren't my cup of tea. There are certainly non-physical threats, like going to jail or losing a job, but they aren't on the same level for me. It would still be evil to me. DOn't know why it's different, though.
Rape and child abuse certainly aren't acts of self-defense. If someone wanted to argue they were, I would need clear cut examples. Those two just don't need to exist. The epitome of evil, if you will.
2) The last thing I watched involving a situation like this was Pan's Labyrinth. A rebel was being tortured by an officer, but still did not yield, but rather asked the doctor to euthanize him. If someone is willing to be tortured to hold onto their secrets, why would they not be willing to die? I respect the rebel more for not yielding, and that gives the character backbone that I 'enjoy'. Even in this scenario, the rebel is a 'criminal', but so is the officer. Everyone is operating on some level of fear, but those who rise above it make for more intriguing characters.
That sounds more 'ideal', someone continuing to commit a crime until they lose their 'self' to chasing said crime. More likely, there's a reason for a crime to be committed (or motive), said crime is committed, then said person is caught and life goes on. Even if half of those who end up going to prison for their crimes, recommitted after release, it still would not add up to most being hardened. Most people who commit crimes do not commit them again after serving time.