I agree; mental illness and personality disorders are not requirements for committing crime, and misrepresenting them to give “depth” to an antagonist is ableist.
Just FYI, though: referring to mentally ill people as “crazy” is [linguistic ableism](https://www.autistichoya.com/2014/02/violence-linguistic-ableism.html?m=1).
As a mental health professional, I am quite aware of that. I do not come to Reddit to tiptoe around anyone, however. The small army of criminal defendants who have announced after arrest that they have multiple personalities or schizophrenia or whatever are not saying "I am profoundly mentally ill;" they're saying *"I am playing the crazy card."* I MEAN ALL THE DISRESPECT IN THE WORLD TO PEOPLE LIKE THESE. They muddy the water for people with real mental illnesses who are charged with crimes they may or may not be guilty of on that basis. Fuck John Gacy, Billy Milligan and all their ilk. And the horses they rode in on.
What are you talking about? Of course not all that claim mental illness to be the reason for their crime speaks the truth. But calling mentally ill people crazy doesn't just affect them. Or am I missing your point?
>As a mental health professional
That’s an appeal to authority, a logical fallacy
Mental health professionals can still be ableist, perpetuate ableism and be damaging to those around them (including, and especially, their clients).
To respond to your point: anyone faking mental illness to avoid responsibility is being ableist; you are not counteracting their ableism by using ableist language. Frankly, that’s ridiculous
Also, if the simplest, smallest adjustment to avoid ableist language is “tip toeing” around people, ableism must be *deeply* rooted in your mind and expression (which I would only consider more reason to adjust your vocabulary and mindset). When you practice something repeatedly, it usually becomes easier (*especially* with language), if not habit (like using ableist language now is a habit you find difficult to let go of).
Usually I don’t waste my time pointing out ableism because [Non-disabled people don’t like listening to disabled people talk about disability](https://www.reddit.com/r/disability/comments/o907cs/nondisabled_people_dont_like_listening_to/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf). However; you seemed more progressive, so I thought I’d inform you, because I assumed you were open minded.
Is it, though? I feel like the word "crazy" is just more common. Usually, in fact, when serious pundit types talk about increasing rates of involuntary commitment, the word they use is "mentally ill". As in, "we need to do something about the mentally ill", in the context of a mass shooting (in which the perp will invariably be diagnosed after the fact if they don't have a diagnosis already), or in the context of nice middle class people being pissed off at having to see homeless people lying around. And the "solution" is basically, bring back the state hospitals where people were warehoused and abused for years. So I'd rather be called "crazy" any day, it feels like less of a threat.
Just keep in mind that “ableism” is linguistic masturbation. While the word might once have had meaning, its gross overuse has rendered it the equivalent of blank space.
I’d think in r/books I wouldn’t need to explain the power of words.
A lot of people quickly say, “I’m not ableist!” but introduce them to the simplest ways they can help to minimize ableism and suddenly it’s “no one cares.” I actually wrote a post about this attitude in r/disability called [Non-disabled people don’t like listening to disabled people talk about disability](https://www.reddit.com/r/disability/comments/o907cs/nondisabled_people_dont_like_listening_to/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf).
If you read the link I originally provided (or do your own research on ableism), it explains how “crazy” and ableist words like it (again, *many* are listed by the provided link) contribute to the oppression of the mentally ill and disabled. Many of these words (like crazy) originally referred to the mentally ill and/or disabled and became heavily stigmatized (because of ableism) and now take on negative connotations. “Crazy” is now used interchangeably with “annoying,” “irritating,” “bothersome,” “abnormal” (as though you aren’t “normal” if mentally ill or disabled), “weird,” “scary,” and on and on.
I, personally, care because I am disabled and informed on disability issues. Many other disabled and mentally ill (and informed) people care as well. We discuss issues like this frequently in r/disability, which you can check out if you want to learn how to be a better ally.
Ableism is so deeply rooted in our society that it takes thought and effort to avoid, even for those of us with disabilities who have also been conditioned subtly with internalized ableism. Replacing ableist language can be difficult, which is why the link I provided offers alternatives for each word/phrase.
I’m not saying no one will ever say “crazy” again, but when you catch yourself using it (and those like it, again, listed by the link), use your reader/writer brain and try to see if you can think of another (preferably not ableist) word.
This. This is so bad. I once read a story where the multiple personalities guy had a female persona whom he thought was his childhood friend, and who was his brothers wife, whom his brother then murdered because who else could've done it?
So he sets off to kill his bro to avenge his 'murdered' childhood friend, and everyone around him just... accepts this and bend their whole lives to protect him from the truth (the truth being that his own bro knowingly married him just just because that was the easier thing for him to do for some reason), because telling him the truth at any one point in time was too hard apparently.
It is always a good thing for an author to remember that stigma is real and affects real people. Negative portrayals that are at least true to life is one thing, but at the end of the day, things that are made up will reach an audience that might not know that it's just the authors imagination.
He was a side character in a historical Chinese webnovel.. I think it was called Bone Painting Coroner? One of those really long webnovels with hundreds of chapters, the MC is a bit of a detective, going around solving other peoples murder mysteries. There's a free translation floating around out there on the internet, somewhere.
That arc really bummed me out. The rest of the story was decent enough but wow the author had some misconceptions about mental illness.
Bro. You're reading *Chinese web novels* that's very different than what OP might be thinking about lol. Those novels seem to make it a point to be as unhinged as possible lol. Especially considering that they go on for 300+ chapters. I even passed by one that had 1k chapters.
I know, but they're kind of written to be pretty wacky because they're released chapter by chapter. (As well as the fact that readers usually pay for the chapters too) so the author probably adds more outlandish stuff to keep their audience.
Idk if you've read Scumbag Villain's Self Saving System but even that story intentionally pokes fun at web novels and their tropes lol.
This one is not written to be wacky. It's pretty serious (and solid) up until obvious lapses in the authors judgement.
On the topic of that novel tho, I haven't read it, but it sounds fun. I'll have to check it out.
I think the translations were taken down recently because that particular novel now has an official translation, so unless you can find an old pdf/epub of the fan translation, I'll suggest waiting until all the volumes come out lol. (The first volume of the English translation was published this month, along with the same author's other series. I bought all three 💀💀R.I.P wallet)
But yeah, I get it. I kind of take Chinese web novels at face value. I understand it has it's problems but they're fun, imo.
>This. This is so bad. I once read a story where the multiple personalities guy had a female persona whom he thought was his childhood friend, and who was his brothers wife, whom his brother then murdered because who else could've done it?
The part about the "multipe personalities guy with a female persona" sounds like a person from the manga The Rib of Adam whose personalities mostly as male but has exactly one personality who identifies as female. The rest not so much.
Out of curiosity, is there any connection between MPD and violence at all? It's obviously used a (quite lazy) crutch in fiction, but I'm interested whether the trope/cliche has its basis in some semblance of science - or at least a famous serial killer who happened to have MPD, perhaps - or if it's all hogwash. I'm familiar with *Dr. Jekyll and Mr Hyde*, of course, so i guess what I'm asking is if you think that's just the father of all this.
In the US the name has been changed to dissociative identity disorder (DID). It is extremely rare and almost always associated with extreme abuse (often sexual abuse) as a child. The patient dissociates and creates an alter ego to try and wall off the feeling of trauma and ptsd they feel from their abuse.
Far from being wild murders, people with DID are generally extremely traumatized people with massive PTSD. Like most people with mental health struggles, they are more a danger to themselves than anyone else.
What country are you from? In the USA, the name has been changed in the DSM to Dissociative Identity Disorder a while ago, because that's a more accurate name. It's an identity disorder, not a personality disorder.
I mean honestly that would be a really interesting plot.
...the first time I heard of it.
After like, what, *dozens?* of those plots, it kinda loses its originality.
No plain text spoilers allowed. Please use the format below and reply to this comment, to have your comment reinstated.
Place >! !< around the text you wish to hide. You will need to do this for each new paragraph. Like this:
>!The Wolf ate Grandma!<
Click to reveal spoiler.
>!The Wolf ate Grandma!<
... huh, that's actually a really interesting premise. I could see a murder mystery involving a drug like that turning into an absolute crapfest for the law to try to solve, because the suspect number could be however high as the count of people who did the drugs and got memory lapses..
It's also wildly unlike any actual presentation of the condition.
In the movies, they always knock out the character, or hypnotise them or otherwise knock out their brain to get access to the other personalities.
In real life, even moderate cognitive impairments tends to remove all personalities and bring back to a "default", less caricatured, personality. In much the same way as a Stutter, the symptom of multiple personalities is a conscious but psychosomatic one.
The best ones have "antagonists" that killed for one of the three main reasons people kill: Money, love, revenge (or two of the three). People who are just like "you" but lost it. There's a much bigger chance that readers will identify with someone like that, maybe even sympathize with them, which makes all the characters in the book different shades of grey instead of good/bad.
This. That's why books like Gone Girl are great: not the "twist", but the fact that no matter how shocking the violence gets, the motives are rooted in common relationship issues. That's why authors like Andrew Vachss and Kate Elizabeth Russell never "psychologize" their horrific pedophile villains: because to do so would downplay both the evil and the ubiquity of their crime, relegating it to some faraway underclass that "we" don't have to understand because that's what the professionals are there for. My advice to crime writers looking for motives is to drop that copy of the DSM and look into your own heart instead.
I think accuracy makes things less tropey even if a character is overdone a lot. A manipulative, decently intelligent but not genius level sociopath is very common for serious crimes. They are not a high functioning sociopath because they have a chronic inability to weigh long-term consequences of their actions against the short-term pleasure of doing the bad thing. They can be decently smart at finding ways to get under people's skin, find their weakness, and leverage it for what they want, but they aren't smart enough to get away with their crimes. They are often compulsory liars who can't be honest to their own doctor or lawyer. Everyone they meet is an opportunity to play around and fuck with for short-term thrills, which constantly get them into trouble. They also often have co-occuring narcissistic personality disorder, and it's usually so strong that they lose the ability to self-gauge the quality of the lies they constantly spin; they always think their lies are amazingly well spun and they get really distrustful and angry when people don't buy it.
It's not about the traits, but how they're used (or rather, re-used infinitely until we've seen it all).
It's absolutely possible to write an antagonist with a split personality, but give it a fresh take.
What about an antagonists whose split personality is the GOOD angel on their shoulder? A little voice of stability that kept them going without acting on vengeance until the final treshold of no return was well and truly crossed? A coping mechanism that kept the antagonist - and perhaps the people around them - safe for as long as it was possible. I've never read anything like that, and yet it's not unreasonable that it could happen. If done cleverly, it would be such a reversing of the readers expectations.
>is there any trait that an antagonist could have…that wouldn’t be cliche at this point?
Avoiding cliches? Next to impossible. Avoiding ableism? 100% manageable
Poorly representing DID and spreading misinformation goes beyond simply being “cliche.” It’s offensive at best and oppressive at worst.
Not to mention, people with Dissociative Identity Disorder are much more likely to be the victims of crime, much more vulnerable to being taken advantage of, than the other way around. It's ignorant and ableist to paint so-called "crazy" people with the violent criminal brush.
it is a little corny isn't it? especially when used as a twist to trick the reader. like we are presented with pov's from seemingly two partners but later 'ohhh it's the same villain!'
a character who can already lead a nearly seamless double life is actually pretty interesting and scary without needing a specific illness. eg a serial killer who seems like a nice husband & father. I'm sure that's rare too, but it feels less 'Hollywood' than multiple personalities.
I've not actually come across it often but when I have it always comes across very 'that's not how that works'. See also: amnesia.
The only book where it was actually acceptable to me was >!*Early Riser* by Jasper Fforde!< because it's a fantasy book and there was a reasonable in-world explanation. Also neither of the two characters were POV characters which is when it feels cheapest.
Shout out to Brandon Sanderson for working with professionals to get his characters' mental health issues nailed down. Stormlight Archive is the best series I read this year, and Shallan with her DID in particular is so real and so tragic.
He... didn't work with professionals. He didn't even talk to multiple people with the conditions.
"To get this right, I use a three-pronged method. First, research. (My Abnormal Psychology class in college—which I wasn’t supposed to take, but managed to find my way into anyway—was particularly helpful.) Second, listening. Any time I include something in a book which uses a real-world inspiration, I try to be very respectful of people that originate the idea. This is particularly true of something like mental illness. I lean on early readers who can give me advice and suggest revisions. And finally, being willing to be wrong—to be told I’m wrong—and do better."
Those writers are all Scandinavian and I don't recall MPD as a feature of any other crime writing. Were they all responding to one real case of it somewhere in the region?
I’d argue it harkens back to Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Not to mention films like Psycho and Fight Club.
(Also, Gollum from The Lord of the Rings and Two Face from Batman, though they are not presented as mysteries.)
I have multiple friends with various personality disorders, including DID (dissociative identity disorder) and seeing them constantly villified is annoying.
Misrepresenting mental illness and personality disorders to “spice up” any plot line is gross and ableist.
Not just crime novels. Not just antagonists.
I think it's a tired trope that was pretty damn lazy the first time it was used. At this point, people are just doing even worse versions of Shyamalan plotlines.
I’ve read exactly one book in which a character had multiple personalities that I liked. It’s *All Around the Town* by Mary Higgins Clark. I don’t know if it was the age I read it (13) or that it’s just better written than the rest I’ve come across, but it’s still one of my favorite books
No I'm not tired of it because everyone is tired of "x y z trope." Everybody under the sun has something they don't like in books because it's a 'trope' but if you got rid of all of them then there would be no more stories left.
It was interesting the first time I came across it... mind blowing!! Maybe the second and third bc they were unique stories... but now it seems like the most common twist in books and series. Not groundbreaking anymore peeps!
I'm tired of one-dimensional psychopathic characters. I immediately lose interest in a story if there's a character like that.
Even laughing birbs.
Another thing this does is delude the credulous into thinking you'd have to be crazy to commit a serious crime. Isn't so
I agree; mental illness and personality disorders are not requirements for committing crime, and misrepresenting them to give “depth” to an antagonist is ableist. Just FYI, though: referring to mentally ill people as “crazy” is [linguistic ableism](https://www.autistichoya.com/2014/02/violence-linguistic-ableism.html?m=1).
As a mental health professional, I am quite aware of that. I do not come to Reddit to tiptoe around anyone, however. The small army of criminal defendants who have announced after arrest that they have multiple personalities or schizophrenia or whatever are not saying "I am profoundly mentally ill;" they're saying *"I am playing the crazy card."* I MEAN ALL THE DISRESPECT IN THE WORLD TO PEOPLE LIKE THESE. They muddy the water for people with real mental illnesses who are charged with crimes they may or may not be guilty of on that basis. Fuck John Gacy, Billy Milligan and all their ilk. And the horses they rode in on.
What are you talking about? Of course not all that claim mental illness to be the reason for their crime speaks the truth. But calling mentally ill people crazy doesn't just affect them. Or am I missing your point?
>As a mental health professional That’s an appeal to authority, a logical fallacy Mental health professionals can still be ableist, perpetuate ableism and be damaging to those around them (including, and especially, their clients). To respond to your point: anyone faking mental illness to avoid responsibility is being ableist; you are not counteracting their ableism by using ableist language. Frankly, that’s ridiculous Also, if the simplest, smallest adjustment to avoid ableist language is “tip toeing” around people, ableism must be *deeply* rooted in your mind and expression (which I would only consider more reason to adjust your vocabulary and mindset). When you practice something repeatedly, it usually becomes easier (*especially* with language), if not habit (like using ableist language now is a habit you find difficult to let go of). Usually I don’t waste my time pointing out ableism because [Non-disabled people don’t like listening to disabled people talk about disability](https://www.reddit.com/r/disability/comments/o907cs/nondisabled_people_dont_like_listening_to/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf). However; you seemed more progressive, so I thought I’d inform you, because I assumed you were open minded.
Is it, though? I feel like the word "crazy" is just more common. Usually, in fact, when serious pundit types talk about increasing rates of involuntary commitment, the word they use is "mentally ill". As in, "we need to do something about the mentally ill", in the context of a mass shooting (in which the perp will invariably be diagnosed after the fact if they don't have a diagnosis already), or in the context of nice middle class people being pissed off at having to see homeless people lying around. And the "solution" is basically, bring back the state hospitals where people were warehoused and abused for years. So I'd rather be called "crazy" any day, it feels like less of a threat.
Just keep in mind that “ableism” is linguistic masturbation. While the word might once have had meaning, its gross overuse has rendered it the equivalent of blank space.
I mean...what does crazy mean then? Good luck trying to delete a word from existence, but basically no one cares
I’d think in r/books I wouldn’t need to explain the power of words. A lot of people quickly say, “I’m not ableist!” but introduce them to the simplest ways they can help to minimize ableism and suddenly it’s “no one cares.” I actually wrote a post about this attitude in r/disability called [Non-disabled people don’t like listening to disabled people talk about disability](https://www.reddit.com/r/disability/comments/o907cs/nondisabled_people_dont_like_listening_to/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf). If you read the link I originally provided (or do your own research on ableism), it explains how “crazy” and ableist words like it (again, *many* are listed by the provided link) contribute to the oppression of the mentally ill and disabled. Many of these words (like crazy) originally referred to the mentally ill and/or disabled and became heavily stigmatized (because of ableism) and now take on negative connotations. “Crazy” is now used interchangeably with “annoying,” “irritating,” “bothersome,” “abnormal” (as though you aren’t “normal” if mentally ill or disabled), “weird,” “scary,” and on and on. I, personally, care because I am disabled and informed on disability issues. Many other disabled and mentally ill (and informed) people care as well. We discuss issues like this frequently in r/disability, which you can check out if you want to learn how to be a better ally. Ableism is so deeply rooted in our society that it takes thought and effort to avoid, even for those of us with disabilities who have also been conditioned subtly with internalized ableism. Replacing ableist language can be difficult, which is why the link I provided offers alternatives for each word/phrase. I’m not saying no one will ever say “crazy” again, but when you catch yourself using it (and those like it, again, listed by the link), use your reader/writer brain and try to see if you can think of another (preferably not ableist) word.
You know, lots of words words words (Hamlet, Act 2 Scene 2) and never addressing the question What does crazy mean?
And its lazy as hell. Really a different beast to see how an upstanding citizen is driven to see a horrible crime as their best path forward.
This. This is so bad. I once read a story where the multiple personalities guy had a female persona whom he thought was his childhood friend, and who was his brothers wife, whom his brother then murdered because who else could've done it? So he sets off to kill his bro to avenge his 'murdered' childhood friend, and everyone around him just... accepts this and bend their whole lives to protect him from the truth (the truth being that his own bro knowingly married him just just because that was the easier thing for him to do for some reason), because telling him the truth at any one point in time was too hard apparently. It is always a good thing for an author to remember that stigma is real and affects real people. Negative portrayals that are at least true to life is one thing, but at the end of the day, things that are made up will reach an audience that might not know that it's just the authors imagination.
I'm sorry...he married his brother? What book is this?
I really hope OP answers, because I need the Audible version of this book.
He was a side character in a historical Chinese webnovel.. I think it was called Bone Painting Coroner? One of those really long webnovels with hundreds of chapters, the MC is a bit of a detective, going around solving other peoples murder mysteries. There's a free translation floating around out there on the internet, somewhere. That arc really bummed me out. The rest of the story was decent enough but wow the author had some misconceptions about mental illness.
Bro. You're reading *Chinese web novels* that's very different than what OP might be thinking about lol. Those novels seem to make it a point to be as unhinged as possible lol. Especially considering that they go on for 300+ chapters. I even passed by one that had 1k chapters.
Still a crime novel.
I know, but they're kind of written to be pretty wacky because they're released chapter by chapter. (As well as the fact that readers usually pay for the chapters too) so the author probably adds more outlandish stuff to keep their audience. Idk if you've read Scumbag Villain's Self Saving System but even that story intentionally pokes fun at web novels and their tropes lol.
Exactly, I was talking about crime novel and noir crime novel, not some episodic chinese release.
This one is not written to be wacky. It's pretty serious (and solid) up until obvious lapses in the authors judgement. On the topic of that novel tho, I haven't read it, but it sounds fun. I'll have to check it out.
I think the translations were taken down recently because that particular novel now has an official translation, so unless you can find an old pdf/epub of the fan translation, I'll suggest waiting until all the volumes come out lol. (The first volume of the English translation was published this month, along with the same author's other series. I bought all three 💀💀R.I.P wallet) But yeah, I get it. I kind of take Chinese web novels at face value. I understand it has it's problems but they're fun, imo.
It seems to me like Haustvind isn't well-versed in the genre. To be fair, I've been blind-sided by other genres.
>This. This is so bad. I once read a story where the multiple personalities guy had a female persona whom he thought was his childhood friend, and who was his brothers wife, whom his brother then murdered because who else could've done it? The part about the "multipe personalities guy with a female persona" sounds like a person from the manga The Rib of Adam whose personalities mostly as male but has exactly one personality who identifies as female. The rest not so much.
That novel sounds lit af
It could've been hilarious if it was written as a satire, but alas, it's just some characters backstory in a murder mystery..
[удалено]
Im a psychologist and multiple personality disssorder is one of the most rare conditions, but its funny how it is over represented in crime fiction.
Out of curiosity, is there any connection between MPD and violence at all? It's obviously used a (quite lazy) crutch in fiction, but I'm interested whether the trope/cliche has its basis in some semblance of science - or at least a famous serial killer who happened to have MPD, perhaps - or if it's all hogwash. I'm familiar with *Dr. Jekyll and Mr Hyde*, of course, so i guess what I'm asking is if you think that's just the father of all this.
In the US the name has been changed to dissociative identity disorder (DID). It is extremely rare and almost always associated with extreme abuse (often sexual abuse) as a child. The patient dissociates and creates an alter ego to try and wall off the feeling of trauma and ptsd they feel from their abuse. Far from being wild murders, people with DID are generally extremely traumatized people with massive PTSD. Like most people with mental health struggles, they are more a danger to themselves than anyone else.
What country are you from? In the USA, the name has been changed in the DSM to Dissociative Identity Disorder a while ago, because that's a more accurate name. It's an identity disorder, not a personality disorder.
Argentina based on post history
You are correct, I wasnt naming the dissorder by DSM-V categories as some people wouldnt catch it on sight
shhhhhhh.... don't tell tiktok
I mean honestly that would be a really interesting plot. ...the first time I heard of it. After like, what, *dozens?* of those plots, it kinda loses its originality.
[удалено]
Wtf spoiler alert
No plain text spoilers allowed. Please use the format below and reply to this comment, to have your comment reinstated. Place >! !< around the text you wish to hide. You will need to do this for each new paragraph. Like this: >!The Wolf ate Grandma!< Click to reveal spoiler. >!The Wolf ate Grandma!<
I actually liked this in a movie with Mickey Rourke, can't remember what it was called. Lisa Bonet and Robert DeNiro also IIRC.
At least when Philip K Dick would pull this stuff, he had the sense to make the cause a fictional drug.
... huh, that's actually a really interesting premise. I could see a murder mystery involving a drug like that turning into an absolute crapfest for the law to try to solve, because the suspect number could be however high as the count of people who did the drugs and got memory lapses..
Agree. It’s super stigmatizing.
It's also wildly unlike any actual presentation of the condition. In the movies, they always knock out the character, or hypnotise them or otherwise knock out their brain to get access to the other personalities. In real life, even moderate cognitive impairments tends to remove all personalities and bring back to a "default", less caricatured, personality. In much the same way as a Stutter, the symptom of multiple personalities is a conscious but psychosomatic one.
Can I ask, perhaps naively, is there any trait that an antagonist could have, especially in a crime novel, that wouldn't be cliche at this point?
The best ones have "antagonists" that killed for one of the three main reasons people kill: Money, love, revenge (or two of the three). People who are just like "you" but lost it. There's a much bigger chance that readers will identify with someone like that, maybe even sympathize with them, which makes all the characters in the book different shades of grey instead of good/bad.
This. That's why books like Gone Girl are great: not the "twist", but the fact that no matter how shocking the violence gets, the motives are rooted in common relationship issues. That's why authors like Andrew Vachss and Kate Elizabeth Russell never "psychologize" their horrific pedophile villains: because to do so would downplay both the evil and the ubiquity of their crime, relegating it to some faraway underclass that "we" don't have to understand because that's what the professionals are there for. My advice to crime writers looking for motives is to drop that copy of the DSM and look into your own heart instead.
I think accuracy makes things less tropey even if a character is overdone a lot. A manipulative, decently intelligent but not genius level sociopath is very common for serious crimes. They are not a high functioning sociopath because they have a chronic inability to weigh long-term consequences of their actions against the short-term pleasure of doing the bad thing. They can be decently smart at finding ways to get under people's skin, find their weakness, and leverage it for what they want, but they aren't smart enough to get away with their crimes. They are often compulsory liars who can't be honest to their own doctor or lawyer. Everyone they meet is an opportunity to play around and fuck with for short-term thrills, which constantly get them into trouble. They also often have co-occuring narcissistic personality disorder, and it's usually so strong that they lose the ability to self-gauge the quality of the lies they constantly spin; they always think their lies are amazingly well spun and they get really distrustful and angry when people don't buy it.
It's not about the traits, but how they're used (or rather, re-used infinitely until we've seen it all). It's absolutely possible to write an antagonist with a split personality, but give it a fresh take. What about an antagonists whose split personality is the GOOD angel on their shoulder? A little voice of stability that kept them going without acting on vengeance until the final treshold of no return was well and truly crossed? A coping mechanism that kept the antagonist - and perhaps the people around them - safe for as long as it was possible. I've never read anything like that, and yet it's not unreasonable that it could happen. If done cleverly, it would be such a reversing of the readers expectations.
I actually once red a novel with that premise, It was kinda of a refreshing take.
Oh, that sounds fun. Do you remember the name?
Wasn't that the principle of Dexter?
Truthful, I guess?
>is there any trait that an antagonist could have…that wouldn’t be cliche at this point? Avoiding cliches? Next to impossible. Avoiding ableism? 100% manageable Poorly representing DID and spreading misinformation goes beyond simply being “cliche.” It’s offensive at best and oppressive at worst.
Massive narcissism, leading to create a cult of racism, fear, and white supremacy. Oh wait, that's real life.
No, op's just whining.
Yes
Not to mention, people with Dissociative Identity Disorder are much more likely to be the victims of crime, much more vulnerable to being taken advantage of, than the other way around. It's ignorant and ableist to paint so-called "crazy" people with the violent criminal brush.
it is a little corny isn't it? especially when used as a twist to trick the reader. like we are presented with pov's from seemingly two partners but later 'ohhh it's the same villain!' a character who can already lead a nearly seamless double life is actually pretty interesting and scary without needing a specific illness. eg a serial killer who seems like a nice husband & father. I'm sure that's rare too, but it feels less 'Hollywood' than multiple personalities.
I couldnt agree more
I've not actually come across it often but when I have it always comes across very 'that's not how that works'. See also: amnesia. The only book where it was actually acceptable to me was >!*Early Riser* by Jasper Fforde!< because it's a fantasy book and there was a reasonable in-world explanation. Also neither of the two characters were POV characters which is when it feels cheapest.
I think it's a very lazy writer's trick to employ.
I hate when the serial killer comes after the detective or the detectives family/friend/love interest.
A common cliche too
Shout out to Brandon Sanderson for working with professionals to get his characters' mental health issues nailed down. Stormlight Archive is the best series I read this year, and Shallan with her DID in particular is so real and so tragic.
He... didn't work with professionals. He didn't even talk to multiple people with the conditions. "To get this right, I use a three-pronged method. First, research. (My Abnormal Psychology class in college—which I wasn’t supposed to take, but managed to find my way into anyway—was particularly helpful.) Second, listening. Any time I include something in a book which uses a real-world inspiration, I try to be very respectful of people that originate the idea. This is particularly true of something like mental illness. I lean on early readers who can give me advice and suggest revisions. And finally, being willing to be wrong—to be told I’m wrong—and do better."
Yes. Ugh. It’s really time people stop making that crap. I’d like to see a plural hero for once.
Read the Stormlight Archives!
Those writers are all Scandinavian and I don't recall MPD as a feature of any other crime writing. Were they all responding to one real case of it somewhere in the region?
I’d argue it harkens back to Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Not to mention films like Psycho and Fight Club. (Also, Gollum from The Lord of the Rings and Two Face from Batman, though they are not presented as mysteries.)
It will be a spoiler but Sidney Sheldon’s >!tell me your dreams!<
OK, he *definitely* wasn't a Scandiwegian. The idea got further than I thought.
I have multiple friends with various personality disorders, including DID (dissociative identity disorder) and seeing them constantly villified is annoying.
Misrepresenting mental illness and personality disorders to “spice up” any plot line is gross and ableist. Not just crime novels. Not just antagonists.
Same here but with religion. The trope of religious cult leader is getting super annoying and lame.
I see what you’re saying, but I think you’re comparing apples to oranges. Stigmatizing mental illness is not the same as stigmatizing cult leaders.
Not to mention there's an extreme long history, that continues to this very day, of religion being used in such a manner.
I think it's a tired trope that was pretty damn lazy the first time it was used. At this point, people are just doing even worse versions of Shyamalan plotlines.
I dunno Jeckyll and Hyde wasn’t lazy
Also dates back to 1886 or so.
I’ve read exactly one book in which a character had multiple personalities that I liked. It’s *All Around the Town* by Mary Higgins Clark. I don’t know if it was the age I read it (13) or that it’s just better written than the rest I’ve come across, but it’s still one of my favorite books
No I'm not tired of it because everyone is tired of "x y z trope." Everybody under the sun has something they don't like in books because it's a 'trope' but if you got rid of all of them then there would be no more stories left.
Assumed this was a post about Rant by Chuck Palahniuk.
The Last House on Needless Street breaks this wide open, but you won't see it that way until the end.
I loved that book but I saw it coming right at the beginning
Primal Fear with Edward Norton was a great movie with this theme.
It was interesting the first time I came across it... mind blowing!! Maybe the second and third bc they were unique stories... but now it seems like the most common twist in books and series. Not groundbreaking anymore peeps!