The Orion Team. discussion
CONVENTIONS OF SPYING
>
Sociopathic Hero. A matter of characterization.
date
newest »
newest »
Mod
When Vince started writing, I suspect when he characterized Mitch Rapp, the blunt instrument of American foreign policy, he wanted a character even more blunt than the original blunt instrument James Bond. He succeeded beyond his wildest imaginations, but at a potential cost. He set Mitch on the path to become a borderline example of a sociopath hero.
Now, this is not a criticism of Vince or Rapp, both whom I'm a massive fan of. It is more of an analysis of sorts about the difficulties of characterization. So, here goes. Mitch fits and did grow into the profile of a sociopath hero as the series went on.
He fights on the side of good and has a clearly defined black and white worldview. He would say moral ambiguity like that of Le Carre is for spineless wimps who don't believe in the cause.
Next, lets face it, he's not and would never be a very nice man, due to the nature of his work. Outside his brother, Irene, Tommy, Coleman's PMC, Claudia, and Ms. Ortmeyer, he's detached from other people outside the profession he lives in. Sure, he fights for them, but wouldn't give a toss about them on a deeper level.
Motivation? Well the two women he loved were stolen from him by acts of terror. The first time, he was not consumed by the abyss as a German philosopher would have said. But the second time was the catalyst which caused him to become much more ruthless than he was before Consent to Kill, and much more unpleasant to even his associates.
Method of operation? As a government assassin, Mitch wouldn't be considered dispassionate, unlike say, Forsyth's Jackal or Tom Wood's Victor. He does take pleasure in his work. It wouldn't be to the levels of twisted sadism, but I would argue that he considers it much more than a mere job.
Does whatever it takes to win? Dear lord yes. In the world Rapp lives in, filled with incompetent, backstabbing officials who would let the USA get annihilated if it could get them just that bit more power, Mitch has to do whatever it takes to win by necessity. Case in point, Memorial Day where he has to destroy the careers of the POTUS Chief of staff, and Attorney General's assistant in order to prevent Washington DC from getting blown up by a nuclear bomb.
And are the people they fight beside shocked? Sometimes, but ultimately, Irene decided to roll with it while at the same time, building her legendary political firewall that's served her and Rapp so well over the years.
Rationalization? Well the main one would be the first reason. All those Islamists and occasional treasonous officials like Garret in Protect And Defend are way worse than Mitch. For all his flaws, Rapp at the end of the day is defending his country from a tyrannical ideology that would have women, minorities and non believers in its crosshairs.
Mod
This had no affect on the plotting, sales or fans, but I guess there was a danger that Mitch would become a totally unpleasant individual, one of those men who "looked into the abyss for far too long".
Which I why I like what Kyle Mills did in "The Survivor". Pull Rapp from the edge. In my review, I mentioned about how the running theme was about change and letting go, and how Mitch is forced to acknowledge the possibility of his world changing in ways he really wouldn't want it to and ultimately finding the way to move on with his life, psychologically and spiritually, away from the baggage of his tragically short lived marriage.
One of the highlights of The Survivor in my opinion, was when Mitch went to meet Claudia to see her off before he went back to war with Pakistan's ISI. During that scene, he's polite, gentle and even tender with Ana Gould. He has every reason to resent Claudia but he forgave her unlike her husband who spat on Rapp's mercy.
Some reviewers believed that Mitch had gone soft, squishy and less ruthless. If so, then it concerns me a little about the possibility that a sociopathic hero is a really popular character archetype, even if said character does horrendous and ghastly deeds. As for myself, I believe giving Rapp back his humanity and returning him to the more anti-heroic role he had been was a necessary step in the right direction.
Mod
Mod
That's what Bond embodied back in the Cold War, and that's what Mitch Rapp and those who tried to copy him embody today.
Mod
Above are four books in an average spy thriller series which I find manages to deconstruct the Mitch Rapp type character and the sociopath hero trope in general.
Meet Ryan Kealey, decorated War Hero of the Bosnian conflict and one of the first officers of the Post 9/11 Special Activities Division. Having tried to retire, he is forced back into the company to hunt a terrorist.
In the proceeding books, Kealey, who for all intents and purposes, is Mitch Rapp with the serial numbers filed off, falls to pieces. He's a badass and fond of the sort of cowboy antics which would make Rapp give two thumbs up. Unlike Rapp however who has a iron will bordering on the fanatical, Kealey doesn't have the mental fortitude to resist the abyss.
Like any normal person who tries to work like a sociopath hero, the mental stress and strain slowly gets to him, causing him to make catastrophic mistakes which get friendlies killed on his side. Furthemore, all those cowboy antics are not commended. Reality ensures and because Kealey doesn't have the sort of political firewall that Rapp does, he's punished and dragged over the coals for his actions.
In short, he shows the costs and repercussions if anyone in real life tried to work like the trope. They would get into trouble and the mental stress that would inevitably build would take a toll on you psychologically and in your life.
Mod
1) Are most of the characters in modern spy/military fiction sociopathic heroes? Well meaning but if their allegiance was switched, they would make good villains too.
2) Would you say a sociopathic hero is basically an anti-hero without any empathy?
3) One for writers. Would you say there are any problems if you try make an anti hero, but make a sociopathic hero instead?
4) For the readers. Which do you prefer, a straight up anti hero or sociopathic hero?
5) Something both writers and readers who are members of this group should ponder.
Is there a difference between a character who "stuffs their humanity in a small, locked box", before going to work, and a individual with a distinct lack of empathy? Yes? No? A bit?
As always, love to hear your thoughts.
Mod
Also, do check out the pre - release review one of our group members wrote. Seems Mr Mills has done something Mr Flynn never did. Give Mitch Rapp a foil that could come very close to killing Iron Man.
https://therealbookspy.com/2016/06/27...
Mod
First, I would say that the sociopathic hero may be reflecting actual reality more than most people would think. Let's face it: spying and assassinations imply a lot of dirty, violent and sometimes downright cruel acts. You can't have the personality of an angel if you are going to be good at that kind of work. Even those who think that they have high moral standards in their spying/killing trade often use patriotism to justify to themselves things that would be hard to justify in most times. Example: the widespread use of torture (sorry, I meant enhanced interrogation techniques) and illegal rendition of prisoners by the CIA, justified by the 'need' to counter terrorism. More than a few innocent people were mistakenly rendered and tortured in the process, but some said that mistakes happen and that no apologies/reparations are needed. Another example: CIA support to the Argentinian junta in arresting and torturing 'communist suspects' in the 1960s, or the support given to Nicaraguan dictator Anastasio Somoza, all excused on 'the need to stop the spread of communism'.
My point is that the 'sociopathic spy/government assassin' may reflect more reality than many would like to admit, while the rather rosy image of the patriotic and compassionate but brave and determined spy may be more of a fiction, a fiction idealized in many books. I know that many spy novel authors may want to jump on me for those words, but I have seen too much of the realities of this world and of the hypocrisy and duplicity involved in international affairs to believe in the 'good assassin' template.
My point is that the 'sociopathic spy/government assassin' may reflect more reality than many would like to admit, while the rather rosy image of the patriotic and compassionate but brave and determined spy may be more of a fiction, a fiction idealized in many books. I know that many spy novel authors may want to jump on me for those words, but I have seen too much of the realities of this world and of the hypocrisy and duplicity involved in international affairs to believe in the 'good assassin' template.
Glad you enjoyed the change, Samuel! It continues in my third book in the series.Vince did a great job with Mitch's character arc as you point out, but I felt that his level of violence, frustration, and anger, would be hard to sustain long term. People who had a relationship with Mitch understood, but someone just picking up The Last Man might have been startled.
It's a bit of a tightrope walk--you want him to be incredibly tough and efficient, but also to have some humanity. How much is too much? I don't know. I have to keep checking myself.
Michel makes an interesting point, too. I've know a number of people in this business over the years and some have been pretty good friends. Many, though, I thought might kill me without a second thought if ordered to do so. Not a normal bunch in many ways...
Mod
Good points Michel, some which on reflection I'm inclined to agree with. The profession itself has no room for boy scouts, whether in real life or that of the fictional variety. Idealists and sensitive souls need not apply to the Special Activities Division or the Kidon Teams. Perhaps the early (Film) James Bond under Connery and Moore is to blame for the dislocation that you describe and the birth of the more romantic view.....
Mod
Vince did a great job with Mitch's character arc as you point out, but I felt that his level of violence, frustrat..."
Indeed Kyle. I distinctly remember one of the featured interviews with fans. The subject was a football coach. He said that when reading "The Last Man", he was slightly shaken about how intense Rapp had become, but observed that its justified considering what he's seen and done on the job.
Not to mention that by that point, Mitch had been "married to the job", for quite some time. Along with the sacrifice of a normal life, perhaps the biggest sacrifice he's made in his job of defending the American state is that of his humanity. Aside from drinks with Coleman, coaching Tommy in Sports and what I assume would be meetings with his hedge-fund manager brother, his life solely revolves around his job and nothing else.
I'm believe that you're on the way to nailing the balance with the characterization and will do so in good time. In some ways, what Rapp went through in "The Survivor", might, for lack of a better term be considered a mid - life crisis (although I imagine he would be loathe to admit it)....
But unlike most 40 somethings who do odd things like buy Ferrari 458 super cars when they hit that stage in life, Rapp's midlife crisis was more on the lines of stepping back, taking stock of his life and assessing what was and was not sustainable as you put it.
Mod
He worked with a psychologist who has proposed a pretty interesting theory, namely that there's a spectrum. Good and bad and that the spectrum can be controlled. Such a thing could be applied to Mr Rapp......
Book Website:
http://www.thegoodpsychopath.com/
Statement by Mr Mcnab about the research project he did:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/artic...
Article:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinki...
Mod
Vince did a great job with Mitch's character arc as you point out, but I felt that his level of violence, frustrat..."
Amazon link to the book.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Good-Psychop...
Mod
Mod
Did the test using what I believe Mitch would have picked. He's either 22 or 23. This is because I don't think he would be totally heartless if he saw an injured animal in pain, blame others for disasters and most certainly is not a cheater. He's decisive, self confident and ruthless, but has empathy for a select number of people.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/artic...
Mod
Mod
After reviewing this book, a question that's been in the back of my mind is whether, Victor, the anti -hero of this story is a sociopathic hero......still haven't come to a definite answer but I'm getting very close!
Mod
Mod
After reviewing this book, a question that's been in the back of my mind is whether, Victor, the anti -hero of this story is a sociopathic hero......still have..."
Come to a conclusion. Victor isn't a sociopathic hero because the only reason why he's on the side of good is because of the fat paycheck the CIA NCS sends to his Swiss bank account every now and then. Not to mention he's polite and professional with the people he kills and does not take sadistic pleasure in his work.
Mod
After reviewing this book, a question that's been in the back of my mind is whether, Victor, the anti -hero of this story is a sociopathic hero...."
Now the question for him is to ask Tom Wood whether Victor is a sociopath or not. No problems with impulse control and he's hasn't got empathy. Perhaps he's like Benedict Cumberbatch On Sherelock. A high functioning sociopath.....
Samuel wrote: "Samuel wrote: "Samuel wrote: " After reviewing this book, a question that's been in the back of my mind is whether, Victor, the anti -hero of this story is a so..."
That was always the most plausible theory for me!
Mod
After reviewing this book, a question that's been in the back of my mind is whether, Victor, the anti -hero of thi..."
I recently came across a book written by a Cambridge Psychology lecturer and legendary UK SAS trooper Andy Mcnab. They propose that there's a spectrum of psychopaths, certain traits that are much more emphasized than others.
Title is The Good Psychopath's Guide to Success
It's helped me come to a greater understanding about thriller characters like Victor and Mitch. I highly recommend it.
This is an interesting topic for discussion...I remember when I first read The Bourne Identity. Ludlum has Marie spend pages justifying her affection for Jason Bourne despite his sociopathy, and I found this quite forced at the time. It didn't seem 'real' to me.
When I set out to write No Free Man, I made a conscious decision to make my heroes villains, partly to avoid the temptation to rationalise any sociopathic tendencies. I actually found this quite liberating while writing.
Incidentally, there is a character in my book who could be considered the 'Mitch Rapp' sociopathic hero. That is, he's a government agent whose task is to hunt down the villains. The feedback I've received from readers to date is that nobody likes this character at all. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that he's universally hated. Meanwhile, readers speak of my villains with great affection.
Food for thought.
Mod
I remember when I first read The Bourne Identity. Ludlum has Marie spend pages justifying her affection for Jason Bourne despite his soci..."
Indeed Graham. A very creative characterization move on your part. Opens up plenty of moral ambiguity and dynamism.
Mod
I remember when I first read The Bourne Identity. Ludlum has Marie spend pages justifying her affection for Jason Bourne despite his soci..."
Quote from "The Good Psychopath's guide to success" about the poster boy for sociopathic hero.
"Bond is a secret service vampire. he throws no reflection in the looking glass of guilt and casts no shadow in the glare of mortal danger. He is an icon of icy ingenuity and lord of the beatifically brutal whose union jack brain possesses some of the most functionally psychopathic neurochemistry in cinematic history."
And on the looks of things, that analysis hits the mark. Think of Casino Royale "06". Killing for queen and country with barely a flicker of doubt or unease. The body works exhibit scene where he's giving Mr Dimitrios a granite glare of the kind one would give when squishing an insect rather than ramming the man's own knife through his lung is a particular highlight where that's the case.
Mod
I remember when I first read The Bourne Identity. Ludlum has Marie spend pages justifying her affection for Jason Bourne despite his soci..."
Graham, regarding the sociopathic hero government agent type character in your book, would you say it's the character's personality which has given him the reception he has or the fact he's in a traditionally heroic role but just so happens to be an anti hero which has thrown people off?
Samuel wrote: "[W]ould you say it's the character's personality which has given him the reception he has or the fact he's in a traditionally heroic role but just so happens to be an anti hero which has thrown people off?"That's a good question. Perhaps it's different for every reader. I've had readers say they didn't like the character 'as a person'. That is, they question his conduct and motives. But he acts to secure the interests of the country that he serves. He'll do whatever it takes to eliminate a threat. And I wrote him that way deliberately.
Nobody has ever mentioned the fact that he's an anti-hero cast into a heroic role, as you say. In fact, when I point out that the character would traditionally be the hero, it makes readers pause and smile a little bit.
Anyhow. Readers define him by his first line, and immediately decide they hate him. Even this despite leaving clues to his humanity within the narrative and, in fact, leaving much of his story only half-told, opening up questions that readers never feel inclined to ask.
Of course, I could also be accused of manipulating the reader's impression, and I don't think it would be an unjust accusation.
If you stumble upon my story, I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.
Mod
New case study. The bad guy in this book. He's brutal and doesn't really care about life in general but is he a sociopath. Man is like
A. Chigurh in the sense he's got a twisted logical code he lives by but said rules are incomprehensible to the rest of us.
The Orion Team.
Books mentioned in this topic
Active Measures: Part I (other topics)The Bourne Identity (other topics)
The Bourne Identity (other topics)
The Bourne Identity (other topics)
No Free Man (other topics)
More...
When reading a pre-release review of "Order To Kill" by Kyle Mills, my mind turned to a characterization trope/convention that in the last decade, was shamelessly indulged in by writers.
Please, welcome the "sociopath hero".
This is a trope which was very popular in 1970's Crime Films, the most famous example being a certain San Francisco detective with a penchant for Smith And Wesson Model 29 revolvers.....And in the 21st century, it finally invaded spy/military thrillers.
The trope is defined as such:
They fight for the good guys. They might even believe in the cause (to a point). But they are a hero only in name.
They are antiheroes who have a fundamental Lack of Empathy, a sociopathic disregard for their enemies' lives.
They may be motivated by boredom, or by some sort of carrot-and-stick arrangement - a chip in the head, an attachment to some person or thing that requires them to do good, or a pragmatic code that prevents their truly inhuman nature from landing them in jail.
They may solve their problems in much the same way as a villain would—ruthlessly manipulating and killing their way to their goal.
They may routinely torture, murder, and/or commit evil acts nearly as bad as the Big Bad.
They'll do whatever it takes to win. The people they fight beside are shocked with their behavior, but try to tell themselves, "At least they're on our side."
Common rationalizations either by the hero himself or on the hero's behalf include the targets he's sent after being far worse than he is, the greater good or "It's what I do".
Basically, think of the sociopathic hero as a character that would slip into the role of an antagonist like a glove, but just so happens to be working with the protagonists.