| Me and my friend had this conversation, which I thought would be pretty interesting to share and ask opinions about. (What you're about to read is purely fictional story and not meant to call out any particular individual). Let's say there's a book. A well-recieved, highly acclaimed book about a murder mystery, which gave its author quite the fame. But more than author, the book benefitted a lot to a person who served his sentence in prison. He used to read that book, and started to reflect on his crimes, just the way the protagonist of that book did. He started changing his life once he started his life back into the society. But a few years later, the author of that book was arrested for being a culprit behind a murder case. Ironically, they found out that the woman he killed, was before he even published that book and he published his own story. He's waiting at the death row to be hanged. Now let's say that book is given to you right now. Would you view that book as; A work that changed someone's life for better, Or, A work done by a murderer? Why or why not? |
| inb4 separate the art from the artist thats the general sentiment around here |
| It depends on if I can separate a work from its author and how what the author did may affect my enjoyment of a book. We are human, and sometimes people just cannot separate artistic creations from their authors for whatever reason, and that is perfectly fine. For some people it is a personal issue, and in other cases there is no real separation. An example of this is the original Jeepers Creepers. The director, Victor De Salva, raped a young boy on set of a previous movie while filming it, and served I believe 18 months in prison for child rape. Jeepers Creepers is ostensibly a film where a winged creature chases after and hunts down young men and boys. So yeah, I cannot separate the artists from the art in that scenario because Jeepers Creepers follow De Salva's real life crime too closely. So if the murder mystery includes details of his original, actual murder in lurid details, then I would view it as a work of a murderer. Not that I would find such a book interesting. I hate works that treats gore with all the cold intimacy of a porno. Otherwise, I may separate the art from the artist. Yeah, maybe someone can attribute their life changing event from this same book, and you know what? More power to them. It's none of my business. Then again...I don't watch Roman Polanski films. He's still a fugitive that is welcomed with open arms. I don't doubt he is a great filmmaker, and I don't think something like The Pianist would be nothing but a marvel to watch. I just don't want to be any more apathetic to awful things in the world than I already am, I suppose. |
PeripheralVisionFeb 21, 2023 6:55 AM
 |
| I seperate the artist from it's art. I would view it as neither "A work that changed someone's life for better" nor "A work done by a murderer" and simply as a experience to get an better understanding of people like him. Something like: "why had he done it" or "what had him driven into such an act" and to see how these people think. Psychology is something very interesting, so I would like to better understand such a mindset. |
 |
| It would be work done by a murderer in the literal sense but as to whether I like the actual work or not is an entirely different question. But overall I do have prejudice based on it's creator, I won't be touching any new series that Takabayashi writes with a 10 foot pole because it's bound to be shit. |
 |
| I mean it is a work created by a criminal, regardless what "value" it brought culturally. Individual feelings by other people I wouldn't account on this. First off I would need to judge what are good enough effects caused by the work for it to be in my eyes the first option even. Something can be helpful/inspirational to some, but at the same time cause damage or negative feelings. Like in this example the book is exploiting an actual crime, and the relatives of the victim prob aren't that happy about it. Actually as an real life example Issei Sagawa wrote books about his crime, and had for a while fame due to it. Is there any reason for those books to be viewed in more positive light and not as a reminder someone was killed and her body defiled? |
 |
| I would view it as a work by a criminal, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have value in some way. It's a glimpse into the mind of a sick individual, something like that doesn't always present itself in such detail. |
DreamWindowFeb 21, 2023 11:24 AM
 This ground is soiled by those before me and their lies. I dare not look up for on me I feel their eyes |
EyeAmTheI said: That' is not really how it works, if I had to take a stab at it (Hah). You're mixing up genres, basically. Many murder mysteries are not necessarily psychological thrillers or have heavy psychological elements. I honestly do not see how murder can contribute to writing a mystery in the vein of Sherlock Holmes or Knives Out anymore than being a soldier would help with a Michael Bay-esque action film. This is versus say being a stalker would would contribute to the narrative of One-Hour Photo by Robin Williams or being a killer for something like Psycho. If nothing else, it makes the work even more authentic... I mean, who else could write a murder mistery more realisticly than an actual murderer? The book gives you the special rare opportunity to look into the mind of a murderer. So yeah, I definietly look it as a book which was written by a murderer, but it is actually adds extra value, and makes it more thrilling (which is the point of a murder mistery, isn't it?). If I want to read a fantasy than I just open up some crappy power fantasy isekai manga... Honestly, I kinda find hypocritical when someone reads a book about murders or watch an action movie and then the same person freak out over something like this. Everything is based on reality to some extent. Just because we stamp on it that "everything what is depicted here is a work of fiction and any similarites with the reality is pure coincidence" it doesn't make it less real (only makes it more impresonal). It is interesting though that the human mind kinda don't care anymore if it cannot connect a case to a specific event or person. (*sigh* Just to be PC for the trigger happy ones: No, I didn't say that everyone who is writing a murder mistery should go on a god damn killing spree, nor did I say we should pat the author's head for killing someone) In addition, being able to translate that effectively would be better in the hands with someone with a degree in criminal psychology than the average murderer. Many people who murder are not the sharpest tools in the shed. Many prolific murderers are barely literate if we want to go into serial murder, and let's be real. Murder for many people isn't that complicated in terms of motive or mindset. |
| |
EyeAmTheI said: It is a public forum, why else would you be here if not to be annoyed by overly pedantic 20-something know-it-alls? PeripheralVision said: My comment was my own opinion, hence it is not a topic of discussion. However, since you spent the time to write, I'll give you an answer as well.That' is not really how it works, if I had to take a stab at it (Hah). You're mixing up genres, basically. Many murder mysteries are not necessarily psychological thrillers or have heavy psychological elements. I honestly do not see how murder can contribute to writing a mystery in the vein of Sherlock Holmes or Knives Out anymore than being a soldier would help with a Michael Bay-esque action film. This is versus say being a stalker would would contribute to the narrative of One-Hour Photo by Robin Williams or being a killer for something like Psycho. In addition, being able to translate that effectively would be better in the hands with someone with a degree in criminal psychology than the average murderer. Many people who murder are not the sharpest tools in the shed. Many prolific murderers are barely literate if we want to go into serial murder, and let's be real. Murder for many people isn't that complicated in terms of motive or mindset. " I honestly do not see how murder can contribute to writing a mystery in the vein of Sherlock Holmes" Just because you don't see the added value in it, I can still see it in it... By the way Sherlock Holmes' father was a psychotic alcoholist... " That' is not really how it works, if I had to take a stab at it (Hah). You're mixing up genres, basically." I was expecting this... Though, I'm not mixing up anything, you've arbitrarily expanded the range of interpretation. You brought in things that my statement doesn't apply to. In addition, the OP pointed out that the book was about self-reflection, which requires a first person narrative. " Many murder mysteries are not necessarily psychological thrillers or have heavy psychological elements." Yes, not neccessarly, but they pretty often are. You have deliberately narrowed the range of interpretation so that your statement became true... " Many people who murder are not the sharpest tools in the shed. Many prolific murderers are barely literate if we want to go into serial murder, and let's be real. " Yeah, but they are not gonna write a book either (especially not a successful one)... Again, we can talk about marginally related topics and we can bend the argument until we get to an apparent counter-argument, but that still remains just self-deception. " Murder for many people isn't that complicated in terms of motive or mindset." I wouldn't say this to a criminal psychologist though... All in all we are not talking about the same thing. That being said, you did mention murder mysteries, but many murder mysteries are whodunits or by the books crime procedurals rather than character studies. Part of what makes that genre work is having multiple characters have a motive to murder the victim that the audience can understand, such as money or revenge. Those aren't particularly complex or esoteric motives. The main reasons for having easily understandable motives is that it is important to have the audience follow along with the main characters. Characters who are just "killers" might not invite the same level of intrigue if done poorly, and come to resemble Saturday morning cartoon villains than actual individuals. The psychological aspects are often secondary if not non-existent in most detective mysteries. Neither One Hour Photo or Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer are mysteries, but it is easy to understand why being a murderer or stalker would help with writing those types of stories; at best you would be referring to a show like Criminal Minds, but that is the gimmick of that show compared to Monk or CSI: Miami, Bones and else have you, not a common aspect of the mystery genre. So I do not understand your reasoning, and I think you just got confused. Which I get confused too on a weekday. I'll give you this. Less "episodic" series, or at least those with a longer narrative, like Midsomer Murders or a given South Korean procedural/mystery do tend to delve further into the psychological aspects compared to their more episodic counterparts, because longer series that are mysteries have time for and can benefit from character drama advancing the mystery and furthering audience intrigue. So yeah...being a decent writer who can write complex narrative probably works better for the mystery genre than being a murderer, at least given how the genre is generally approached. You set the mystery in motion, you have a character find clues and interview suspects, who are suspects because they are given a motive the audience can understand, the detective is stuck until they find one final clue that fits it all together, before they reveal who killed who in the climax of the episode or story. I don't see the psychological aspect here, and I don't see why it is an inherent part of a mystery, especially if their psychology isn't that abnormal compared to their circumstances. |
PeripheralVisionFeb 21, 2023 3:00 PM
| |
More topics from this board
» When did more women start to work than being houswifes in the USA?Zack312 - Yesterday |
22 |
by traed
»»
38 minutes ago |
|
» Do your dress nice? ( 1 2 3 )PopArt - Jul 6, 2023 |
106 |
by Rebellion128
»»
2 hours ago |
|
» Has anyone here tried learning an artificial language?Malkshake - Jun 14 |
29 |
by MalchikRepaid
»»
2 hours ago |
|
» What do you think about tourism in your country?Sad - Apr 19 |
21 |
by Cielord
»»
2 hours ago |
|
» How did you invent your username?DesuMaiden - 12 hours ago |
22 |
by Cielord
»»
3 hours ago |