Why do we find gratuitous violence, such as that in the climatic scene of The Odyssey, so much more appealing in fiction than in real life?
Or: why do we like samurai films?
After today's class discussion, the question continued to roll around my head all day. The evidence that we as a culture enjoy gory fictional violence is everywhere. Look at Game of Thrones, the Godfather, or any Tarantino movie. These aren't some fringe subculture; they're some of the most popular works of television and film ever created. Yet, to me at least, there's no immediately obvious explanation.
So, let's start by narrowing the question down a bit. What kind of violence do we want to watch? Surely we're not indiscriminate in what we'll consume. The first step to understanding the psychology of the consumer is identifying what they're consuming. Unfortunately, (and please correct me if you can think of an exception), there aren't many ways people can hurt each other that haven't ended up on the big screen. Revenge narratives are popular, sure, but so is literally everything else. Among the things we enjoy viewing is Anthony Hopkins wearing a skin made of people in Silence of the Lambs. The most psychologically horrifying crimes of our society are put up for our entertainment in Law and Order: SVU. We'll watch beloved antagonists being tortured (superhero movies), dogs being shot (To Kill a Mockingbird), the glorious battles of Lord of the Rings, but also the terror, confusion and horror of modern warfare as portrayed in Saving Private Ryan.
Basically, violence does not have to be morally justified to make us like it. It doesn't matter if you're Team Suitors or Team Odysseus; you'll probably keep reading as long as someone dies.
So we must toss out "moral satisfaction and catharsis", at least as the sole motivator. Some of the examples that don't fall into that category fit neatly into the converse: moral outrage. We like to see the bad guy hurt innocent people because then we get to hate him. And hating people satisfies our need for drama.
For the rest though (and surely there are examples that fit neither of the above, either because they are morally ambiguous or neutral) perhaps the attraction is similar to that of a roller coaster, jet ski or scary movie. Dangerous and violent situations in fiction give us the rush of adrenaline evolution gave us to stay alive, minus the actual life threatening situation. So when we read book 22 of the Odyssey, we're just getting our latest fix.
Please comment if you have other ideas! I'm still not totally satisfied with this explanation.
I think that the main reason we watch violence is because it is so different from our real life experiences. We would not be entertained by things we already know well, so we choose to watch things such as violence that are (hopefully) alien to us. Homer seems to have been one of the first entertainers to recognize this, and wrote epics that we still are entertained by today. I certainly enjoyed reading the slaughter book of the odyssey, and after reading your blog post I think I have a better understanding of why it was entertaining.
ReplyDeleteWhat you're writing about here reminds me of our very early class discussion about Batman. In Batman's case, the case of the suitors, and many of the cases you've written about above, the element of fiction is crucial to our enjoyment of the story. If we heard anything along the lines of "man and son slaughter dozens of men who were being extremely bad guests" in real life, I would definitely not be entertained. Of course, the gods and fate are always a factor to consider, but just as with the Batman scenario, our knowledge from the outside of the story is important to our ability to enjoy the story.
ReplyDeleteI agree that a lot of what consumers enjoy about violence is the story and the buildup, and like Batman our knowledge outside the story is vital. For me, knowing what I'm reading or watching is a work of fiction really lets me enjoy it because it's like a video game and when you watch the movie or read the book again, all the characters reset.
DeleteI think a sociological interpretation of Book 22 is very useful. I agree that Homer's exposing us to dramatic situations satisfies an evolutionary need. One thing I'll add is that in one way it's hard to compare The Odyssey to modern violence in film. In modern stories, the violence isn't a climax prefaced by 90% of the previous part of the film. So in The Odyssey, couldn't it be valid to say the audience appreciates Book 22 simply because it validates Odysseus' heroism, and represents an inevitable outcome? Our brains seek adrenaline release, but they also often look for patterns. We like things to happen as we predict, and Homer satisfies this need as well.
ReplyDelete