o Refers to the Styx River: In Greek mythology, this river separates the realm of the living from the realm of the dead.
o One can also define ''stygian'' as a deep, foreboding darkness or gloominess.
The Stygian Crypt refers to the dark seed buried in every soul. It is the evil within, lurking, fighting its way out. It is both our fault and our hope. It is the place where evil is banished after its destruction, where our inner demons are sealed. It is a gate, between darkness and light, that reveals our dark nature whilst sustaining our pristineness.
An underground burial chamber
This research casts light on an elemental query concerning the human condition, namely the question of good and evil. The exploration of each polarity covers its definition, disclosure, and attributes. In a critical examination of how evil is depicted by different dramatis personae in works of literature, the scrutiny is carried through a psychological approach that aims to uncover psychic forces, concealed motives, and unconscious dynamics.
As Thomas Carlyle a Scottish cultural critic, historian, and philosopher asserts: “Evil and good are everywhere, like shadow and substance; inseparable (for men) yet not hostile, only opposed.”
It is with genuine regard that this research is dedicated to:
My beloved parents and sister who have been a steady source of encouragement and push for tenacity.
My friends for being great pillars of support.
My mentor for her continual impact and knowledge.
My classmates who shared their precious words of advice to complete this work.
YOU, the reader.
The completion of this research could not have been possible without the wise guidance of my supervisor, Professor Ilham El Majdoubi, whose expertise, knowledge, and recommendations defined the path of this work and whose insights made this an unforgettable endeavor.
A dept of gratefulness is owed to my family for their unreserved support during this intense academic year.
the
1. Statement of the Research Problem
Research Objectives
Research Questions
Organization
Methodology
Chapter 1: Good and Evil: A General Overview
o Evil in psychology: Why People Commit ‘Evil’
o The Veneer Theory
o The Philosophy of Good and Evil ..
Chapter 2: Literary Villainy
o Villain Archetypes
o Towards a Psychological Portrait of a Typical Villain
4
o Characteristics of a Compelling Villain: A Look into the Making of Evil Characters
o The Moral Dimension of Literature
The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde
o Overview and Plot Summary
o Adaptations
o A Comparison Between the Two Personas
26
26
.. 27
.. 28
o Jekyll’s Motive . 28
o The Duality of Human Nature
o Key Ideas
The Tragedy of Othello
o Plot Summary
o Iago: A Deeply Flawed but Unique Character
o Iago’s Motivation
. 29
.. 31
33
33
. 34
35
o A Psychoanalysis of Iago . 37
o Jealousy: The Green Eyed Monster
.. 38
o Appearance Vs Reality Perception and Deception …………….. 39
o High Mach Personality . 40
o Key Ideas
o Overview and Plot Summary
.. 42
.. 41 Hannibal Lecter
. 42
o The Origin of Dr. Lecter’s Cannibalism 44
o Wendigo Psychosis
o Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)
.. 44
.. 45
o Antisocial Personality Disorder . 46
o Key Ideas
Conclusion
References
. 47
.. 48
. 49
“If there were no going astray, there would be no seeking for the right path; there would be no merit in goodness. Blame and praise would have no sense. In the absence of want, imperfection, and all kinds of ill, there would be no ideal, no progress, no evolution to higher goals.”
1
Good and evil are capital concepts that have been constantly argued throughout history. The more we push our reasoning about these themes, the more their complexity appears stupendous. Grasping their true meaning means challenging the utmost limit of our understanding. The envisioned outcome, however; is worth a king's ransom. Psychologist Carl Jung propounded the idea of a personal “shadow” a delineation of our flawed nature and claimed that an in depth knowledge of it is fundamental for growth. He wrote: “One does not become enlightened by imagining figures of light, but by making the darkness conscious.” (Alchemical Studies, Vol 13).
The numerous forms and circumstances through which evil the dark force that pervades the world and resides within us as well is manifested have long enfolded my mind in a fog of bewilderment. The reason behind selecting this topic is that no other theme played havoc with my exploration of reality and understanding of people. No other theme raised questions that tormented my reasoning.
1 Carus, Paul. THE PROBLEM of GOOD and EVIL. Vol. 6, No. 4, Oxford University Press, July 1986, p. 581, www.jstor.org/stable/27897365.
This research intends to acquire and advance knowledge about the themes of good and evil and to comprehend the characteristics of each polarity.
Another goal is to further explore the manifestation of evil through the analysis of characters who embodied the concept in selected literary works.
Withal, this research aims to construct a comprehensive theory that explores and explains the genesis of nefariousness in order to recognize evil and cope with it.
o What exactly is good and what is evil?
o Is evil a preordained aspect of the human nature? or does the environment and circumstances in some way sow the seeds of evil?
The research is structured as follows:
The first part entitled ‘Good and Evil: A Philosophical Theme of All Time’ comprises two chapters. The first one presents a general overview of the concepts. It is an attempt to build up a definition of the concepts of Good and Evil that takes into account their meanings in the fields of philosophy, ethics, psychology, and literature The second chapter “Literary Villainy” introduces the main villain archetypes, draws the portrait of a typical malefactor, and proffers a look into the making of evil characters.
The second part entitled ‘Embodiments of Evil’ analyses three characters from selected literary works as the embodiments of evil. Orderly, the discussed villains are Mr. Hyde, Iago, and Hannibal Lecter.
Although this research is conceptual in nature due to the elusiveness of the concepts of good and evil, it is also explorative and analytical.
During the data collection process, the research relied on primary sources consisting of the original works of writers, monographs, and dissertations on the subject. In addition, secondary sources include interpretations and comments about primary sources, summaries, articles contained in encyclopedias, and reviews.
The first part follows deductive reasoning while the second part keeps to inductive reasoning as it enlarges the scope of the research based on selected characters.
A psychological approach is favored to address the selected villains’ behavior at both conscious and unconscious levels as well as the characters’ development through their actions. This method implants a scientific tone into literary criticism.
Life and death cannot exist side by side, ignorance cannot originate from knowledge. Yet good and evil subsist together. This coexistence hinders the forming of absolute definitions of these two polarities; accordingly, they must be expounded in comparison to one another.
Saint Thomas Aquinas explains that the good is what everything desires, which every being inclines toward. This is known as Metaphysical goodness: the most universal sense of goodness. The absolute goodness of a thing is ‘perfection’ and the lack of it is referred to as ‘evil’.
‘Good’ indicates a lack of self centeredness. It allows one to have empathy and compassion towards others, to emotionally understand their feelings, and to be able to put one’s self in their place. It implies, if necessary, sacrificing one’s well being for the sake of others. It also conveys meanings of benevolence, altruism, selflessness, and self sacrifice towards a greater cause. It suggests having the capacity to see beyond the superficial difference of race, gender, or nationality and relate to a common human essence beneath them.
In ethics, the good is that which conforms to the moral ideal. It is a fundamental normative concept. According to the German philosopher Immanuel Kant: “The virtue and happiness are the highest good” (Critique of Practical Reason). On the flip side, moral goodness refers to a human activity involving reason and utilizing relevant means to meet a good end.
Source : https://www.saatchiart.com/art/Painting
Entering the Realm of Eternal Goodness/705071/3963888/view
‘Evil’ represents what is morally reprehensible. It is defined as something that causes harm, brings sorrow, distress, or calamity. Another meaning is the inaptitude to empathize with others. Therefore, personal needs and desires become the uppermost concern. Traits such as selfishness, self absorption, and narcissism are often associated with evil.2 In philosophy, evil may be that which produces bad outcomes, harm, suffering, for instance, to kill, to cause pain and misery, to deny freedoms, to allow torment to be caused when it can be prevented. That is a fundamental moral evil.
The question: What is evil? Is a central part of classical theism. In theory, ‘Evil’ does not exist as a self standing reality, but rather refers to a defect in something that does exist, and to that extent is ‘Good’. In other words, it is a ‘Privation’ of something that ought to exist. In this regard, blindness is evil as it is the lack of sight, and it falls in the category of Natural evil. Moral evil by contrast is a lack of conformity of human action with moral principles. Despite the defectiveness of such an action, it might bring about good effects. A sin that is part of a scheme aiming for a higher good is not evil. This is how Aquinas approaches The Problem of Evil; he sets the idea of natural evil in a broad context. It is an inevitable function of the world of time resulting in natural disasters, diseases, or genetic defects, etc.
Figure 2: The Triumph of Death3
2 Taylor, Steve, The Real Meaning of 'Good' and 'Evil': How are saintly people different from 'evil' ones? What does 'good' really mean? Psychology Today, August 26 2013, https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/out the darkness/201308/the real meaning good and evil
3 Pieter Bruegel the Elder. "The Triumph of Death"1562. Research Gate, September 2020, https://www.researchgate.net/figure/The Triumph of Death 1562 Painting detail by Pieter Bruegel the Elder Source Museo_fig3_344271838
On a different note, free and rational creatures experience two unique types of evil:
The Evil of Poena: pain penalty punishment
The Evil of Culpa: fault guilt
Theft, for example, is an act unworthy of a human being and contradicts morality. It is an evil of fault. If the thief is sentenced to prison and is deprived of his freedom, he suffers an evil in response to another one he committed. It is an evil of punishment that is considered ‘Good’ when it induces atonement and reparation of moral evil.
It is crucial to note that there are at least two concepts of evil: a broad concept and a narrow concept. The broad concept picks out any bad state of affairs, wrongful action, or character flaw. The suffering of a toothache is evil in the broad sense as is a white lie. Evil in the broad sense has been divided into two categories: natural evil and moral evil. Natural evils are bad states of affairs that do not result from the intentions or negligence of moral agents. Hurricanes and toothaches are examples of natural evils. By contrast, moral evils do result from the intentions or negligence of moral agents. Murder and lying are examples of moral evils.
We can further divide the concept of evil into the following two classes:
Physical evil: This means bodily pain or mental anguish (fear, illness, grief, war, etc.)
Metaphysical evil: This refers to such things as imperfection (criminals going unpunished, deformities, etc.)
4 Source : https://www.pinterest.com.mx/pin/460915343088472765/
5 Source : https://www.artmajeur.com/fr/thierry godefroid/artworks/12986438/guilty
Figure 3: The Evil of Poena4
Figure 4: The Evil of Culpa5
Over and above that, the narrow concept of evil picks out only the most morally despicable sorts of actions, characters, events, etc. For example, if only human beings are moral agents, then only human beings can perform evil actions. Evil in this sense is more often meant when the term ‘evil’ is used in contemporary moral, political, and legal contexts.6
As individuals, we belong to societies with dissimilar cultures, religions, and moral values, leading us to have varying interpretations of certain acts, situations, thoughts, behavioral patterns, etc.
For instance, it is justifiable to stand close to strangers in public spaces in countries like China or South Africa. Sometimes, it is even deemed polite to sit next to someone in a nearly empty bus or theater. Nonetheless, the greatest unspoken rule of bus taking in the United States is that one should never sit next to another person if other seats are available.7 Thus, it is only natural that concepts such as 'Good' and 'Evil' remain relative since it is absurd to define something as universally good or evil.
6 Todd Calder, The Concept of Evil, 2013
7 Cultural relativism article: https://www.khanacademy.org/test prep/mcat/society and culture/culture/a/cultural relativism article
8 https://www.mundusmaris.org/index.php/fr/recensions/expositions/1070 diversite
Khalil Gibran claims that Evil is good that has been corrupted.
« … For what is evil but good tortured by its own hunger and thirst? Verily when good is hungry it seeks food even in dark caves, and when it thirsts it drinks even of dead waters.
….
You are good when you strive to give of yourself. Yet you are not evil when you seek gain for yourself.
….
You are good when you walk to your goal firmly and with bold steps. Yet you are not evil when you go thither limping.
….
You are good in countless ways, and you are not evil when you are not good»
(Khalil Gibran, “The Prophet: On Good and Evil”)
He rejects the notion of evil as a stand alone element in the human heart and asserts that good and evil are different faces of the same coin. It is deprivation of any sort that corrupts good and might drive a person to become evil. Through the comparison of the human heart to a divided house, the author supports the incorruptible purity of the essential good. Although the house may contain thieves, the occupants, good and bad, are merely at odds with one another. The origins of corruption and the outcome of evil can be displayed in many ways. Still, the good within us is a constant. It continues to exist in the desire to try and grow in goodness.
The experimental psychologist Roy Baumeister considers that evil signifies causing harm to another person deliberately. In his book Inside Human Cruelty and Violence, he asserts that those who do evil mainly consider their actions as a mere response to a burdensome situation. Following a set of experiments he conducted, the psychologist concludes that people have contrasting perceptions of evil. From a victim’s perspective, it is described as a horrendous injustice with devastating consequences. Meanwhile, when the person is the perpetrator, the story introduces answers and justifications such as being pressured or forced.
Baumeister points out the complexity of the factors driving people to commit evil towards each other. Additionally, he posits that there are four main motives, along with their combinations, that lead human beings to behave in ways others consider as evil.9
The first reason is the desire for material gain. Not only does materialism initiate injustice and exploitation, but it also gives rise to greed and corrupt practices. As in a letter to Adlai Stevenson, the American writer John Steinbeck states, “If I wanted to destroy a nation, I would give it too much, and I would have it on its knees, miserable, greedy, sick.”
The second reason is threatened egotism: A theory that relates violence to an ego threat combined with a highly favorable perception of the self. In other words, a person may become violent or aggressive towards someone who disputes or tarnishes their favorable self images or reputations.
9 Roy F. Baumeister, Evil Inside Human Violence and Cruelty (New York: W. H. Freeman, 1997), p. 13. See also: Baumeister, R. F. (2012). Human evil: The myth of pure evil and the true causes of violence. In M. Mikulincer & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Herzliya series on personality and social psychology. The social psychology of morality: Exploring the causes of good and evil (p. 367 380). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/13091 020
Idealism is the third reason. Notably, when violent means are justified by noble ends. Although only a minority of perpetrators obtain amusement out of inflicting harm to others, the pursuit of sadistic pleasure remains unquestionably the fourth reason.
By the same token, Philip George Zimbardo, a psychologist and a professor at Stanford University, claims that the border between good and evil is blurry owing to the fact that ‘good’ can go wrong, and ‘evil’ can atone for its sins and be redeemed. Zimbardo’s definition of evil bears a resemblance to that of Roy Baumeister. He adds that people mostly do not regard themselves as ‘bad’, but could be bound to commit ‘evil’ in certain situations.
Zimbardo confirms that there is also the evil of inaction, which mean allowing evil to perpetuate without taking any measures to subdue it. He insists, however, that: “There will come a time in your life when you have the power within you, as an ordinary person, as a person who is willing to take a decision, to blow the whistle, to take action, to go the other direction and do the heroic thing.”
Source: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/11/27/the root of all cruelty
In another book entitled ‘Less Than Human’, David Livingstone Smith10 propounds that dehumanization is what induces cruelty and genocide. As a matter of course, it should be defined and described. The author debates why people demean, enslave and exterminate others if humans naturally have an innate impediment to harm others and treat them brutally. Smith fixes attention on historical events like the Holocaust and slavery to instantiate the essence of dehumanization. The latter appears to be grounded in human nature instead of culture. It is made possible when living creatures are fractionated to species, and by extension, humans are divided into ethnic groups. This cognitive architecture culminates in Dehumanization: The psychological ability to reject others’ humanity, to downgrade people to a non human position, and so to deny them the human rights granted by moral codes.
10 David Livingstone Smith is co founder and director of the Institute for Cognitive Science and Evolutionary Psychology at the University of New England.
11 George Morland, ‘SlaveTrade’ (1814). Financial Times, November 26 2020, https://www.ft.com/content/7f439543 36dd 410d 9e58 cd6c3b5eaa0b
Figure 7: Slave Trade11
The theoretical term "Veneer Theory" was formulated by the Dutch primatologist Frans de Waal. It describes a view according to which human ethics and morality are nothing more than a cultural overlay, a thin veneer covering the raw human nature in its most selfish and brutal form. Thustly, humans are evil beneath the thin layer of civilization.
Figure 8: The Veneer Theory: Layers of the Human Nature
Source : https://www.pressian.com/pages/articles/131870
This theory dates back to Thomas Henry Huxley12, a contemporary of the English naturalist Charles Darwin. Even so, Darwin saw that human morality emanates from social instincts. Following that, many psychologists, economists and anthropologists indicated that humanity is more altruistic and cooperative than was assumed by self interest models. They stressed the fact that moral judgments are achieved while activating emotional areas in the brain.
12 An English biologist and anthropologist specializing in comparative anatomy.
The concept of evil poses a complex epistemic question that draws its roots from the theory of the Greek philosopher Epicurus. It is a major section of theism and philosophy of religion.
Both theists and atheists concede that evil engulfs the world in darkness. They agree that evil, if it is meant to be everything within the vast spectrum of badness, exists.
Theists believe in an omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent God.
Contrastingly, atheists expostulate that evil continues to roam around in spite of the existence of The Creator, ergo, a contradiction comes to light.
Throughout their venture into evincing that the presence of evil doesn’t obliterate God’s existence and in order to sort out The Logical Problem of Evil, philosophers put forward many theodicies. One of the prominent theodicies was developed by Alvin Plantinga, an American analytic philosopher, in God, Freedom & Evil (1977). It is a distinct argument known as The Free Will Defense. It implies that one is deemed free as long as one is equally at liberty of performing an action or giving it up.
A world containing creatures who are sometimes significantly free (and freely perform more good than evil actions) is more valuable, all else being equal, than a world containing no free creatures at all (…) The fact that these free creatures sometimes go wrong, however, counts neither against God’s omnipotence nor against his goodness; for he could have forestalled the occurrence of moral evil only by excising the possibility of moral good. (Plantinga 1974, pp. 166 167) 13
13 Beebe, James R., Logical Problem of Evil, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy: https://iep.utm.edu/evil log/
On this matter, freedom indicates the aptitude of doing both good and evil of one’s own volition. Hence, it is moral evil which the Free Will Defense addresses. This latter also reveals that polarity is fundamental, for darkness is entailed to appreciate light.
Plato, Aristotle, Dionysius, Maximus the Confessor, John of Damascus, and many other major Greek philosophers and theologians proclaimed that people can choose to oppose the ontological foundation of the cosmos because of the freedom they have been granted. Therefore, evil appears when a rational being decides to counteract his creator.
Nowadays, it is apparent how thoroughly societies have changed in view of what is ethically right or wrong. From cultural aspects to ideologies, there has been a shift in the definition of general concepts, making us ponder the question of how valid the philosophy of good and evil is.
Each and every individual forges a personal set of criteria to delineate what evil stands for and describe the forms it takes. It could be a point of view, a personality type, a party, a country, or another person’s own perception of good. Consequently, the collective consciousness encompasses uncountable versions of ‘evil’.
Source : https://www.wondriumdaily.com/iblis and god the nature of evil in islamic tradition/ttps://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fdubai news.online%2Fimage%2Fwhat does the nature of evil mean&psig=AOvVaw1hijlMfu8KDa9D7QiFK8t6&ust=1649758914935000&source=images&cd =vfe&ved=0CAsQjhxqFwoTCKiG4oPli_cCFQAAAAAdAAAAABAD
We approve and we disapprove because we cannot do otherwise. Can we help feeling pain when the fire burns us? Can we help sympathizing with our friends?
Edward Westermarck (1912 [1908]: 19)
Why should our nastiness be the baggage of an apish past and our kindness uniquely human? Why should we not seek continuity with other animals for our “noble” traits as well?
Stephen Jay Gould (1980: 261)
“If only it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?”
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago 1918 1956
Behind most of the compelling movies and literary works we admire, is an ineradicable character opposing the protagonist and driving the conflict. That is the Villain. In nearly all cases, the evildoers fall into certain categorizations termed “Villain Archetypes”.
“The most interesting villains are not completely evil. They have a soft spot for puppies or they write cheesy love poems. Contrary personality traits add depth and realism to all characters.”
Melissa DonovanThe Sympathetic Villain is a villain with ‘hero’ traits. Some meritorious characteristics are affixed to the character’s personality making him more relatable and human. The degree of similarity between the villain and the hero can differ, but it remains identifiable. For instance, Sherlock and Moriarty are both geniuses. Still, their beliefs and senses of morality are contradictory. Besides, a sympathetic villain always has a tragic backstory that justifies his wickedness.
“The contrast between hero and opponent is powerful only when both characters have strong similarities.”
K. M. WeilandThe Altruistic Villain: Although this villain tends to fight for freedom, justice, or another commendable cause, he is bewitched by his vision to the extent of making significant sacrifices to that end. By way of illustration, an altruistic villain may engage in mass killing in order to save the planet, thinking that the human race only makes the world a terrible place. A good example is found in the X Men comic books and movies. After witnessing how outrageous humans can be, Magneto ventures to eradicate all humans so as to save the mutants.
The Monster is non-human. It could be an alien or a supernatural being. This villain is mostly found in the science fiction or horror genres and cannot be reasoned with.
The Machine is analogous to the monster. Still and all, it is a technological construct that is insensitive to pain, fear, and emotion. For the most part, this type is found in science fiction thrillers.
The Evil Incarnate portrays the embodiment of evil and serves as a hindrance to the hero’s journey. It is essentially found in superhero and fantasy genres. Amongst others, Sauron from The Lord of the Rings and the Joker from The Dark Knight elucidate efficiently this archetype.
The Mastermind superintends a devilish plan. This type is a competent schemer who strives to vanquish the protagonist mentally. Lex Luthor from the Superman series falls into this category.
The Killer is a requisite for crime fiction. In Stephen King's Bill Hodges trilogy, Brady Hartsfield (Mr. Mercedes) obtains gratification from the anguish of his victims.
The Bully habitually ill treats or torment those who appear to be vulnerable. This type is sometimes characterized by a backstory intending to delineate the oppressive inclination. Other times, there are no solid grounds for tyrannical conduct.
The protagonist’s opposition doesn’t always originate from an external source. Sometimes, it emanates from within. One might as well say that the real opponent is one’s self. Internal conflicts differ from one character to another. Substantially, these include:
• Something dark in the past
• A repetitive or past mistake
• Unimpeded emotion
• Over confidence …
“The General Dark Factor of Personality” (D factor) is a concept put forward by a research team from Denmark and Germany. The study hypothesizes that some individuals’ personalities have a “dark core” depicting to what extent they are ‘evil’. The research was conducted by Morten Moshagen14 along with Benjamin E. Hilbig15 and Ingo Zettler16 .
The D factor is defined as “the basic tendency to maximize one’s own utility at the expense of others, accompanied by beliefs that serve as justifications for one’s malevolent behaviors.”17
Those with the highest scores in the D factor tests are likely to do their utmost to accomplish their goals, even if the process is detrimental to others. In certain circumstances, the purpose itself may be causing distress to others.
The researchers predicted that it was conceivable to measure maliciousness the way intelligence is estimated; ergo, they identified nine traits that evil people will presumably display.
1) Egoism: The tendency to consider only one’s interest. It is an excessive self concern, sometimes to the detriment of others’ well being.
2) Machiavellianism: This trait is centered on cunning, duplicity, and manipulative behavior. It also refers to a lack of moral code. 18
14 Morten Moshagen is a professor of Psychology at Ulm University, Germany.
15 Benjamin E. Hilbig is a professor of Psychology at the University of Koblenz Landau, Germany.
16Ingo Zettler is a professor of Psychology at the University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
17 Utility maximization refers to people’s attempts to maximize their positive outcomes, such as money, power, pleasure, and other desired goals.
18 The word originates from the Italian philosopher Niccolò Machiavelli’s political treatise The Prince, written in the 1500s, that puts forth “the end justifies the means” behavior.
3) Moral disengagement: The theory argues that individuals are disposed to cognitively set apart the moral component from an otherwise unprincipled act to rationalize engaging in it (Bandura et al., 1996; Bandura, 1999, 2015). Such individuals contrive extenuating circumstances to justify unethical behaviors.
4) Narcissism: An excessive self-admiration and interest in one’s physical appearance. Pathological narcissism is fueled by a sense of grandiosity that induces a lack of empathy, attention seeking, and superiority complex.
Figure 10: NARCISSUS: The vanity of human beings19
5) Psychological entitlement: An inflated sense of deservingness and self importance, as well as exaggerated expectations to receive special treatment without reciprocating (Fisk, 2010; Grubbs & Exline, 2016). It is the elemental belief that one merits more than others do.
6) Psychopathy: is characterized by the lack or absence of empathy, detachment, and a lack of remorse. Other traits include antisocial behavior, impulsivity, and manipulation.
7) Sadism: The enjoyment of inflicting suffering on others.
8) Self-interest: The pursuit of one’s advantage without regard for others. Personal interests encompass material goods, social status, academic achievement, etc.
9) Spitefulness: An inclination to harm others socially, financially, physically, or else ways, together with being vindicative.
19 Narcissus is a painting by the Italian Baroque master Caravaggio, painted circa 1597 1599.
There is a set of criteria that should be met by a villain in order to be multi layered, complex, and enthralling.
What makes villains unforgettable? What is the secret to crafting such a compelling figure?
The following list intends on no account to be all embracing, but it incorporates dominant ingredients to make memorable villains:
✓ An obsession: Naturally, villains are obsessed with things such as power, wealth, or revenge. These obsessions overlap on numerous occasions, they set the story in motion and call for the rise of a hero.
✓ A secret: Secrets become more intriguing as the veil of the truth is never pulled back completely. The best villains carry inside the darkest secrets and exert themselves to keep them buried.
✓ A wound: This can be a physical or an emotional wound, sometimes both; resulting in disfigured or scarred characters. Accordingly, the villain becomes more alluring. This reveals that no human is born a monster.
✓ An unstoppable drive: Under no circumstance will a villain with strong motivations ever give up.
✓ A morality of their own: In point of fact, villains don’t necessarily lack a sense of right and wrong. Conversely, they subscribe to their own moral
20 Source : https://www.saatchiart.com/art/Painting obsession/706753/4117437/view
Figure 11: Obsession, painting by Dominique Mondo20
code. They firmly believe in the uprightness of their cause that they reject the normal standards of moral conduct.
✓ Intelligence: A compelling villain does need to be intellectually gifted. Rather, he carefully considers every option, creating a real challenge for the hero.
Evil grows unchecked due to its ability to flee recognition. Philosophy fails to capture it within its net of concepts, which adds to the question of its recognition a sense of exigency.
Literature, alternatively, is capable of unveiling the self concealment of evil. It does so by focusing on the surrounding circumstances and grasping the absent. The very restlessness its descriptions instigate is itself a giving of what cannot be given. In such unmasking, literature accomplishes what philosophy cannot and earns its special, moral dimension.
Simultaneously, the interpretation of the good is multifunctional in literature. Good is regarded as a model, an ideal of morality, and a practical norm.
Besides, literature enables us to put together a simple but extensive and coherent theory of evil. In this respect, the Russian writer Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoyevsky locates evil within us. Only by acknowledging this fact, can we obtain freedom to act.
“Evil has always been an important literary topic. We might even say that evil has assumed many forms in the work of literature. Different from philosophy and theology, literature probes into the body of evil not to find its divine message. Literary ways of thinking keep, within evil, something transcendent that escapes the grip of 'the good'.”21
21 Donny Gahral Adian, LITERATURE AND EVIL: Dostoyevsky's Poetic Thinking On Evil, p242, 24.2.2008
The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is a novella by the Scottish writer Robert Louis Stevenson, published in 1886. This distinguished example of Gothic fiction depicts the complexities of science and the duplicity of human nature. Doctor Jekyll is a well respected man and a brilliant scientist who enters the dark realm of science to uproot his 'second' evil nature. Consequently, the protagonist invents a potion enabling him to transform into a malicious being known as Mr. Hyde. This latter is the doctor’s alter ego who doesn't repent or assume responsibility for his crimes. Briefly; Jekyll triumphs over his evil side and keeps Hyde tamed. However, towards the end of the novel, the scientist succumbs to his altering identity, resulting in their deaths.
Robert Louis Stevenson believed that humans had both good and evil margins. In other words, good and evil exist side by side in every single human being. Accordingly, both versions are contained in the same receptacle. Notwithstanding, the evil psyche is constantly downtrodden by society. The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde explores an array of questions about human nature. Within its beguiling essence, the novel enthralls the reader and melds psychology with literature and philosophy.
A plethora of stage and film adaptations have been produced, despite the fact that few of them were faithful to the original narrative structure and plot. Besides stage and radio adaptations, as well as parodies and imitations, there are over 123 film versions.
Some eminent examples are enumerated below following a chronological order:
✓ 1887:stage play, opened in Boston. Thomas Russell Sullivan's Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.
✓ 1912 movie, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. First USA production based on Richard Mansfield's stage performance. Thanhouser Company Starring J ames Cruze and Florence Labadie.
✓ 1931: movie, Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde This version following the Sullivan plot, is notable for its acting, visual symbolism, and special effects.
✓ 1991: stage play, opened in London and written by David Edgar for the Royal Shakespeare Company. The play is notorious for its faithfulness to the novel’s plot.
✓ 2009: for the first time in over 100 years, Ursinus College brought Sullivan’s play back to the stage in its complete form.
Well liked, respectable doctor
A friend of both Lanyon, a fellow physician, and Utterson, a lawyer
A seemingly prosperous man
Well established in the community
As a young man, he was too light hearted. He owns up to many youthful indiscretions, which he reveals that he enjoyed very much, and carefully kept secret.
His appearance is displeasing. He is disfigured and repugnant
- Mr. Hyde’s ‘troglodytic’ (nonhuman / apelike) appearance marks him out as a criminal and as someone who is unacceptable in polite society
22
A man who was without bowels of mercy and who felt no guilt. Hyde is Jekyll’s dark side, released from the bonds of conscience and loosed into the world by a mysterious potion.
This striking contrast clarifies how every human being contains two polarities within him or her. Indeed, taken alone, neither of the rivaling identities is riveting; it is their interrelationship that grants the novel its power.
Although Jekyll appears to be a courteous man, he never entirely embodies virtue the same way Hyde incarnates evil.
-
The motivation that ultimately destroys Doctor Henry Jekyll stems from his desire to uphold appearances, his need for answers, and the Victorian society’s repression.
22 Physiognomy Italian criminologist Cesare Lombroso (1835 1909) introduced a theory that the ‘born criminal’ could be recognized by physical characteristics, such as asymmetrical facial features, long arms or a sloping forehead.
- Jekyll’s tragedy originates from his belief that a clear limit can be drawn between good and evil, whilst at the heart of humanity lies a knot binding both polarities, often amalgamating them to the extent of a blurred distinction.
He was obliged to kill for the first time so that he would be forever purged of the same desire to kill ever again. In this respect, murder was supposed to be a form of catharsis, the coffin for Jekyll’s manifestation of evil through Hyde.
When he first drank the potion, Jekyll was driven by dark urges such as ambition and pride which led to the emergence of Hyde. It follows that, had the scientist begun the experiment with pure motives, an angelic being would have come to the fore.
The notion of the “double” was extensively explored during the 19th century, distinctly in German literary discussions of the doppelgänger. The theme was made explicit in Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s The Double (1846), Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley’s classic Frankenstein (1818), Oscar Wilde’s The Picture of Dorian Gray (1891), along with The Island of Doctor Moreau (1896), and The Invisible Man (1897) by H.G. Wells.
In philosophy, dualism indicates that the universe contains two radically different kinds of substances which are matter and spirit, or body and mind.23 In this perspective, the ancient Greeks differentiated tremendously the soul and the body as the dictum states: “The body is a tomb.” Therefore, evil was the ramification of an infinite soul trapped in a finite body. Alternately, Descartes described the mind solely as a substance that thinks and matter merely as an extended substance. In this scheme, the psyche is inestimable and thus not open to either understanding or intervention.24
23
Hart WD. Dualism. In: Guttenplan S, editor. A companion to the philosophy of mind. Oxford: Blackwell; 1996. pp. 265 7.
24 Robinson H. Dualism. In: Stich S, Warfield T, editors. The Blackwell guide to philosophy of mind. Oxford: Blackwell; 2003. pp. 85 101.
Physical Duality
Moral Duality
Social Duality
Epistemological Duality
Jekyll vs Hyde
Good vs Evil
Public appearance vs Private reality
Knowing too much vs Knowing enough
In Stevenson’s novel, the protagonist intervenes in his “normal” mental processes and unbinds Mr. Hyde. This persona’s countenance implies “Satan's signature” and has a body that is “something troglodytic”. 25 Not only is the
psyche manifested as a process that can be altered by tangible methods, but also that such modification involves a change in the physical appearance.
It is not the chemical or the experiment that is responsible for the emergence of Hyde’s evil, but rather, it is Jekyll’s flawed human nature and repressed impulses that pushed him toward picking the dark side.
“This is me, as I take it, was because all humans beings, as we meet them, are commingled out of good and evil: and Edward Hyde, alone in the ranks of mankind, was pure evil” (108). Dr. Jekyll grows frustrated with the idea that separating the two forces is absurd. As he carries on with his transformations, Jekyll explains that when he is Hyde, it feels normal, almost as if he enjoyed that version of himself. He states: “Yes, I preferred the elderly and discontented doctor, surrounded by friends and cherishing honest hopes; and bade a resolute farewell to the liberty, the comparative youth, the light step, leaping impulses and secret pleasures, that I had enjoyed in the disguise of Hyde” (114 115).
Jekyll asserts that “man is not truly one, but truly two,” each struggling for mastery. Once unleashed, Hyde slowly overrules, until Jekyll ceases to exist. Both Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde were real; they both were the same, only opposites.
Human beings possess both kindness and maliciousness, honesty and corruption, and so on. Even though the proportion of each opposing trait vary
25 Stevenson RL. Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1886) New York: Bantam Books; 1981.
The types of dualities included in the novel are as follows:
from one person to another, one verity persists - it is impossible to obtain a purely angelic essence or a totally evil soul.
Dr. Travis Langley26 assumes that it is difficult nowadays to recognize good people from evil people; defects are evident in heroes, as are righteous traits in some villains.
Duality cannot last forever, and as in the novel, either good or evil will dominate. That being the case, white and black no longer symbolize good and evil; there is a grey area in between. Good and evil will incessantly exchange victory.
What determines character is one’s capacity to synergize these opposing forces within one’s self.
- If we split the dual nature of man right down the middle, might it not produce a creature that embodies all that is evil unchecked by anything that is good; in short, a monster? It is impossible to liberate only the most upright version of human beings.
“Between these two, I now felt I had to choose. My two natures had memory in common, but all other faculties were most unequally shared between them. Jekyll (who was composite) now with the most sensitive apprehensions, now with a greedy gusto, projected and shared in the pleasures and adventures of Hyde; but Hyde was indifferent to Jekyll, or but remembered him as the mountain bandit remembers the cavern in which he conceals himself from pursuit. Jekyll had more than a father's interest; Hyde had more than a son's indifference. To cast in my lot with Jekyll, was to die to those appetites which I had long secretly indulged and had of late begun to pamper. To cast it in with Hyde, was
26 Dr. Travis Langley, distinguished professor at Henderson State University, is a psychologist best known as the author of the book "Batman and Psychology: A Dark and Stormy Knight”
to die to a thousand interests and aspirations, and to become, at a blow and forever, despised and friendless.” (10.16)
Choosing between good and evil comes with many consequences.
“There comes an end to all things; the most capacious measure is filled at last; and this brief condescension to my evil finally destroyed the balance of my soul. And yet I was not alarmed; the fall seemed natural, like a return to the old days before I had made my discovery.”
Both good and evil are fighting side by side in Jekyll’s psyche. Any semblance of balance is destroyed here in this passage.
“But if all men must learn wisdom tomorrow from violence today, then who can expect there will be a tomorrow?”27
No amount of scientific advancement can ever change the fact that good and evil are “polar twins”.
27 Retrieved from the 1968 Canadian American TV film based on the 1886 novella Strange. (1:57:49)
Written in 1603, William Shakespeare’s Othello is, beyond shadow of doubt, one of the best classic tragedies. The 5 acts play takes place in 16th century Venice and Cyprus. It tells the story of Othello, the Moor of Venice and the protagonist of the tragedy, who is deceived by his friend and right hand man Iago. The latter is infuriated by the promotion of Michael Cassio28 and plots to take revenge against his general together with the lieutenant. Accordingly, Iago precipitates Othello's jealousy and manipulates him into doubting his wife Desdemona, believing her to be unfaithful and putting an end to her life. Soon after her innocence is disclosed, and Iago’s deceit unveiled, Othello in a fit of anguish and sorrow kills himself and Iago is arrested. 29
Figure 22: Characters Map
Source: https://ivypanda.com/lit/othello study guide/characters/
28 One of Othello's soldiers, recently appointed the general's second in command.
29 Arogundade, Ben. ‘OTHELLO Play: Short Plot Summary Historical Background Synopsis of Story’. Arogundade.com N.p., 2015. Web. 20 May 2015.
Iago is appreciated for his loyalty and is considered to be honest and straightforward. In point of fact, he is frequently greeted as ‘honest Iago’. He listens attentively to everyone as they vocalize their worries to him and seek his help. Even so, the qualities he displays are forged. He is, in truth, hypocritical, manipulative, unsympathetic, and ruthless. He spends loads of time establishing his nefarious plan to rain despair on the moor. Iago, in his iniquitous glory, transforms Othello’s love into suspicion and hate.
Meanwhile, no character is fully aware of Iago’s cruelty. It is only the audience/ reader who sees his true self from the very beginning through his soliloquies.
Iago is introduced as an assemblage of unsolvable puzzles and contrasts. For instance, he maintains a reputation for honesty, yet he lies persistently in order to exploit others. He downgrades tender emotion, yet he is a married man, and so forth.
As Iago’s maleficent scheme starts gathering momentum, he goes on a rampage and ends up destroying Roderigo, Emilia, Desdemona, and eventually himself. Ironically, the only major character left standing at the end is Cassio.
William Hazlitt30 wrote: "Iago is an extreme instance . . . of diseased intellectual activity, with the most perfect indifference to moral good or evil, or rather with a decided preference of the latter, because it falls more readily in with his favorite propensity, gives greater zest to his thoughts and scope to his actions. He is quite or nearly indifferent to his own fate as to that of others; he runs all risks for a trifling and doubtful advantage, and is himself the dupe and victim of ruling passion an insatiable craving after action of the most difficult and dangerous kind."
30 William Hazlitt (10 April 1778 18 September 1830) was an English essayist, drama and literary critic, painter, social commentator, and philosopher. He is considered one of the greatest critics and essayists in the history of the English language, placed in the company of Samuel Johnson and George Orwell.
Samuel Taylor Coleridge described Iago’s soliloquies as the “Motive Hunting of Motiveless Malignity”; which implies that the antagonist has no other motive but resentment and spite. At first, it may not be evident; however, with scrupulous analysis, one can comprehend how this character manipulates others for his own malicious intentions.31
Coleridge wrote: “The last Speech, the Motive Hunting of Motiveless Malignity how awful! In itself fiendish while yet he was allowed to bear the divine image, too fiendish for his own steady View. A being next to Devil only not quite Devil - & this Shakespeare has attempted executed without disgust, without Scandal!”
Source: https://medium.com/lantern theater company searchlight/the pathological psychology of iago 4d21f80d2caa
31 Samuel Taylor Coleridge is the premier poet critic of modern English tradition, distinguished for the scope and influence of his thinking about literature as much as for his innovative verse. He is one of the most influential and controversial figures of the Romantic period.
Coleridge’s lectures on Shakespeare, 1818 19: The notes were made in preparation for Coleridge’s course of six lectures on Shakespeare, between December 1818 and January 1819.
32 Othello and Iago, 1857, Solomon Alexander Hart, depicting the pivotal Act III scene where Iago plants doubt in Othello’s mind.
Figure 13: Othello and Iago32
Therefore, Iago's grounds for his wickedness were his sense of intellectual superiority and yearning for exerting power. Furthermore, his malignity issues from racism as he does not accept that Othello is a Moor. He is envious and believes he deserved the promotion Cassio was rewarded with, adding outrage to his hatefulness. Besides, he is jealous of Othello and Desdemona’s marriage and supposes that the Moor had an intimate relationship with his wife Emilia.
Now I do love [Desdemona] too, not out of absolute lust though peradventure I stand accountant for as great a sin […] For that I do suspect the lusty Moor Hath leaped into my seat
(II. i. 220 221)
Figure 14: Desdemona, Othello and Iago33
Source : https://www.mediastorehouse.com.au/uig/art/painting sculpture prints indoors/italy desdemona othello iago illustration 9570223.html
33 Italy, Desdemona, Othello and Iago, illustration for the opera Otello (1887) by Giuseppe Verdi (1813 1901), oleograph 19th century, Civica Raccolta Delle Stampe Achille Bertarelli (Library).
Iago’s conduct can be looked into through a psychoanalytic lens. This viewpoint stipulates that narcissism presupposes excessive self esteem and self involvement, and draws from emotional immaturity. The play exhibits the antagonist’s emotional immaturity34 as he endeavors to wreak havoc on Othello for overlooking him as his new lieutenant. At that stage, his exorbitant ego and arrogance are displayed.
Shakespeare initiates Iago as a self absorbed persona through his discourse. Whether it be the ceaseless use of “I” or his unpleasant language, he is presented as one enmeshed in his own devices, as a beast of the shadows who evades from exposure, the puppet master who has no intention of being seen for his true self.
Admittedly, he seems to be emotionally immature from the very beginning of the play, when he divulges two incongruent reasons for disliking Othello. As he is convinced to be above his entourage; he demonstrates his immoderate self esteem for he finds no indignity in playing the judge and executioner in the Moor’s life.
In essence, the psychoanalytic lens reveals Iago’s standing as a remarkably narcissistic character who is the offspring of a fusion between self involvement35 and ego. Despite starting as the manipulator, he ends up subjugated to the outcomes of the plan he engineered. In psychoanalytical terms, he can be marked as a victim of his inner turbulent emotions. At last, he takes refuge in a footling refusal to acknowledge his crimes, leaving no room for atonement.
34
A person who is emotionally immature is unable to defeat their negative feelings; they are petty and shrouded by malevolence.
35 Self involvement taken to excess is a high degree of self absorption or an exceptional enthusiasm for oneself.
Jealousy is a perilous emotion that lays down the deadly netting which ensnares Othello, and so, it is worth plunging into.
“Oh, beware, my lord, of jealousy! It is the green eyed monster which doth mock the meat it feeds on. That cuckold lives in bliss who, certain of his fate, loves not his wronger, but, oh, what damnèd minutes tells he o'er who dotes, yet doubts suspects, yet soundly loves!” (3.iii.170 175).
In Renaissance England, most emotions were related to colors. Green symbolized jealousy. In the play Othello, Shakespeare develops this concept into a more visual idea, making it a powerful monster. Additionally, the English playwright adds the caution ‘beware’ to make envy more spine-chilling.
The fact that Iago is fully aware of the potency of jealousy and harnesses it against Othello, reveals the evil that is lurking beneath the surface.
Source : https://www.deviantart.com/shauna o connor/art/The green eyed monster 196655740
Jealousy encompasses feelings such as suspicion, rage, fear, and humiliation. This complex emotion can be provoked by many factors. Perhaps, feeling a threat aimed at a relationship one values is the most common trigger. In other words, envy generally stems from a feeling of being replaced by a third party.
Psychological factors that make people more prone to jealousy include: Low self esteem, anxiety, moodiness, depression, possessiveness, fear of abandonment, attachment issues …
Figure 15: The Green Eyed Monster by Shauna O ConnorDuring a conversation with Roderigo36 , Iago asserts that he is not what he appears to be. He best portrays the theme of appearance vs reality, as he seems to be honest and obliging, whereas, in reality, he is a manipulative character who brings about mayhem for revenge
Certainly, we cannot help but run after a sparkling outwardly world and be enchanted by appearances to a certain degree As such, only a few care to know what nestles behind the curtains, granting cunning people the opportunity to shape others’ perceptions.
In this regard, perception serves as a lens through which we see reality and influences the way we process, remember, understand, decide, interpret and act in real life Be that as it may, this lens is often misshaped by our genetic predispositions, past experiences, prior knowledge, emotions, self interest, and cognitive distortions.37
The challenge this implies is how to secure that perceptions remain as close to reality as possible. This alignment is a requisite to find consensus with others, and maintain the indispensable individual and societal structures
36 Young, rich, and foolish, Roderigo is convinced that if he gives Iago all of his money, Iago will help him win Desdemona’s hand. Roderigo is ultimately desperate enough to agree to help Iago kill Cassio after Iago points out that Cassio is another potential rival for Desdemona.
37 Daniel Kahneman, the noted psychologist who received the 2002 Nobel Prize winner in economics, created a veritable cottage industry by identifying what he termed cognitive biases that are systematic ways in which humans create a subjective social reality that deviates from objective reality.
I am not what I am. (I.i)
In the psychological literature (e.g., Christie and Geis, 1970; Jones and Paulhus, 2009), Machiavellianism is defined as a personality trait that refers to “a strategy of social conduct that involves manipulating others for personal gain, often against the other’s self interest” (Wilson et al., 1996, p. 285).
Several mechanisms can explain the use of unethical strategies. First and foremost, Machiavellian individuals have a cynical, negative worldview, always expecting the worst from other people (Christie and Geis, 1970). In the second place, High Machs are emotionally detached from their own actions, allowing them to engage in unethical behaviors without experiencing negative feelings like guilt or remorse (e.g., McHoskey et al., 1998; Wastell and Booth, 2003). Finally, Machiavellianism comes with a strong self-focus and egoism (Fehr et al., 1992) resulting in a lack of attachment and commitment toward others or the organization (Zettler et al., 2007).39
Dale Hartley, a retired professor of business and psychology, believes that Iago is a master manipulator by nature, a schemer who utilizes lies, tricks, and other people to achieve his goals.
While Iago displays several typical characteristics of “High Mach” individuals such as emotional detachment, friendliness, and performed honesty, the question of motive makes “diagnosing” him impossible. As things go, Machiavellianism requires a goal, but Iago’s motivations alter throughout the play. This aspect has led many to forego a psychological examination of the character, seeing in Iago pure evil and viciousness made flesh.
38 Short for Machiavellian
39 Belschak, Frank D., et al. “Angels and Demons: The Effect of Ethical Leadership on Machiavellian Employees' Work Behaviors.” Frontiers, Frontiers, 1 Jan. 1AD, https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01082/full.
The question of Iago’s motivation has no single answer. Although he begins by affirming that he is irritated by losing a promotion, his voiced motives become dubious as the play evolves. He entwines a tangled web for numerous characters without plainly articulating a reason. He is inscrutable and frightening in his inexplicability.
Beyond Iago’s wickedness, there is wisdom to be gained about human nature:
Jealousy is often indicative of deeper insecurities; it is disastrous and ultimately self destructive.
We should beware of who we trust for they shape the way we perceive the world around us.
One ought to recognize the distortions that may twist perceptions, and be open to modifying viewpoints if the preponderance of evidence dictates it.
Good leaders should have a bit of darkness within them to uncover the darkness in their adversaries.
Shakespeare has Iago discern that:
Poor and content is rich and rich enough (3.3). Hence, it is essential to accept even the poor or less desirable, aspects of one’s personality. He implies that being content with who you are signifies that you are enough.
Figure 16: Love, Jealousy, Deceit: Exploring Shakespeare's Othello in Art40
40 Othello painting by Edouard Frederic Wilhelm Richter (1844 1913) Kirklees Museums and Galleries
Red Dragon is written by the American author Thomas Harris. This psychological horror novel was first published in 1981. It follows the story of Will Graham, an FBI profiler, who captured Hannibal Lecter, a gifted psychiatrist, and cannibalistic serial killer. Three years after Graham’s retirement, he reaches out to Lecter in order to capture another serial killer nicknamed “The Tooth Fairy”: A criminal who believes murdering people can aid him to become an alternate personality called “The Red Dragon.”
In 1986, the novel was adapted as a film titled Manhunter and directed by Michael Mann41. The adaptation did not do well, it fared poorly at the box office and received mixed reviews.
BOOK 2: The Silence of The Lambs
First published in 1988, it is a sequel to Harris's novel Red Dragon, and it comprises continuing characters such as Dr. Hannibal Lecter.
The plot follows Clarice Starling, an FBI agent in training, as she becomes progressively involved in the investigation of a serial killer whose name is Buffalo Bill.
In 1991, the film adaptation directed by Jonathan Demme42 was released. This adaptation won five Academy Awards and brought about widespread critical acclaim along with prodigious box office success.
Published in 1999, it is the third novel in Harris’s series featuring Dr. Hannibal Lecter. Additionally, FBI Special Agent Clarice Starling is featured for the second time.
The story takes place seven years after the events of the previous novel: The Silence of the Lambs and revolves around the considered revenge of Mason
41 Michael Kenneth Mann is an American director, screenwriter, and producer. 42 Robert Jonathan Demme was an American filmmaker.
Verger, one of the psychiatrist’s victims and a sadistic psychopath. In 2001, the novel was adapted into a film of the same name directed by Ridley Scott43 .
This prequel to the three previous books was published in 2006. It is the origin story of Hannibal Lecter.
After the passing of his parents in the midst of World War II, young Hannibal Lecter moves in with his aunt and starts plotting revenge on the barbarians accountable for his sister's death.
In 2007, The novel was adapted into a film of the same name by Harris himself under the direction of Peter Webber44 .
Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/18/books/thomas harris new book.html
Dr. Lecter was so strikingly evil that the American Film Institute named him ‘The Top Cinematic Villain of The Last Hundred Years’ . In an effort to decipher Dr. Hannibal Lecter’s personality and motivations, it is only natural to start by studying his cannibalism45, as it is the most prevailing trait associated with his evil nature.
43 Sir Ridley Scott is an English film director and producer.
44 Peter Webber is a British film and television director and producer
45 Human cannibalism is the act or practice of humans eating the flesh or internal organs of other human beings. In some cultures, cannibalism involved eating parts of one’s enemies to take on their strength. Elsewhere, the consumption of human flesh had a more ritual significance.
Figure 17: Hannibal Book seriesAlthough Hannibal Lecter followed a precise pattern for the victims he cannibalized, he made frivolous jokes about his cannibalism and did not reveal any signs of spirituality in his act.
Some might argue that his motive is solely the enjoyment of the taste of human flesh. It is some factor that propelled him to engage in cannibalization, something unassociated with taste.
Others might proclaim that he feels a biological tendency to commit such atrocities. Under those circumstances, he would not be picky over whose flesh he consumes.
Hannibal Lecter was born in 1933 in Lithuania to a prosperous family. When he was eight years old, the Nazis conquered Lithuania, obliging his family to flee to a hidden lodge. Three years later, Lecter’s parents were killed, leaving him and his younger sister Mischa behind. After a short period, a group of Nazi collaborators seized Mischa intending to kill and cannibalize her. Hannibal’s attempt to rescue his sister was ineffectual Much later, he learns that he also ate a part of her. This trauma is the starting point of his cannibalism. In other words, Lecter’s cannibalism is a ghastly obsession from the crippling ordeal of his youth.
One can draw links between Dr. Lecter’s condition and the ‘Wendigo psychosis’, which is considered an endemic psychiatric disorder related to culture. It comes to play through compulsive attacks of cannibalistic conduct
The Wendigo46 is the incarnation of the sin of cannibalism. In the light of Algonquian47 beliefs, the monster arises from the possession of a met person who develops an overwhelming urge to eat another human being.48 Over the
46 “The Wendigo is a demonic spirit believed by Algonquin based Native American tribes to possess humans and turn them into cannibals” http://www.gods and monsters.com/wendigolegend.html.
47 Algonquin, North American Indian tribe.
48 Brightman, Robert A. (1988). "The Windigo in the Material World" (PDF). Ethnohistory. 35 (4): 337 379. doi:10.2307/482140. JSTOR 482140.
years, the disorder lost its significance and is introduced, nowadays, as a part of mythical legends and history.
In the American Television series developed by Bryan Fuller, Will Graham had repeated imaginary manifestations of a wendigo that, in reality, symbolizes the cannibalistic serial killer Hannibal.
Source : https://www.deviantart.com/jakubjagoda/art/Wendigo 853445448
The brief background story explaining the origin of Hannibal’s cannibalism leads us to believe that the character possibly suffers from PostTraumatic Stress Disorder. Psychologist Dr. Amanda Frechin explains that PTSD is a dissociative disorder that results from extreme physical or psychological trauma. It is somewhat peculiar because it does not stem from an internal source but rather from the traumatic event itself (Hockenbury, 563).
While looking at the “emotional numbing”49 symptom of PTSD, I think the films provide the best reference for Lecter’s personality. Anthony Hopkins
49 "Emotional numbing is the mental and emotional process of shutting out feelings and may be experienced as deficits of emotional responses or reactivity"
Figure 3: Wendigo: A painting b Jakub Jakudaportrayed Lecter with a gleeful malevolence that managed to chill even Hannibal’s creator, Thomas Harris (McIntyre 32). There is such serenity in Lecter’s character when he slaughtered the two prison guards in Silence of the Lambs, which displays the PTSD symptom quite clearly. Even a serial killer must be suffering from some sort of disturbance to have that level of emotional detachment (Frechin).50
Hannibal Lecter portrays several behavioral patterns that indicate he is suffering from a psychological condition. An in depth analysis of his behavior implies that he meets the criteria set for a person suffering from an extreme case of Antisocial Personality Disorder51, also referred to as ASPD. It is a mental problem characterized by a ‘defined disregard’ for what is regarded as right or wrong (Thomas & Pope, 2012). In addition, the patient fails to respect the rights and feelings of others. (Nolen Hoeksema,2011). People suffering from this disorder tend to manipulate, provoke, and treat others with callousness. In addition, they express no remorse or culpability for their actions.
People suffering from Antisocial Personality Disorder fail to conform to social norms. As a result, they engage in repeated crimes, which lead to constant arrests. Hannibal is portrayed as a prisoner found guilty of murder and cannibalism (Saxon, Utt & Bozman, 1991).
While committing crimes, Hannibal does not show any signs of remorse (Harris, 1991). In his conversations, he shows signs of extreme arrogance. Hannibal uses these antics to instill fear in his victims and intimidate those around him (Saxon et al., 1991).
explains Mayra Mendez, Ph.D, LMFT, a licensed psychotherapist and program coordinator at Providence Saint John's Child and Family Development Center.
50 “Hannibal: A Method behind His Madness? Visionary Archive.” Hannibalvisionsarchive.wordpress.com, hannibalvisionsarchive.wordpress.com/2010/03/12/hannibal a method behind his madness/amp/.
51 Antisocial Personality Disorder is a complex form of mental illness. It is associated with spontaneous and reckless criminal tendencies. If not well managed, the problem affects both the patient and those around them
Patients suffering from Antisocial Personality Disorder fail to minimize the consequences of their actions (Nevid, Rathus & Greene, 2013). It is evident that Hannibal deploys no effort to lessen the repercussions of his deeds. On the contrary, he often magnifies the results. Such comportment highlights the fact that Dr. Lecter does not empathize with the damage he inflicts upon his victims (Harris, 1991).
Hannibal pins his hopes on trickery and psychological techniques and it is grinding to quantify the ploys he makes use of.
The desire for mental superiority drives Lecter more than the concern with physical domination, for this latter is not an authentic route to gain control. Lecter’s violence aims to make his victims fear him as they should. Admittedly, he treats those who already fear him with a semblance of kindness. He knows he can control them through fear and thus by adding up a sense of concern to the inferred fear of violence, he arouses conditions in which people act even more unreasonably, allowing him to study their psyche manipulate them further.
Hannibal himself is contended to be labeled as Evil. He rejects attempts to address him else how, like “destructive”, believing it to be a futile venture to countervail the truth.
He does not assume that morality exists in any relevant way, but he knows assuredly that, by the norms of society, he is evil. He wants people to recognize that he had a choice and that he deliberately chose to torture, cannibalize and murder despite his intelligence and sophistication.
Dr. Lecter’s psychological problems are dispersed all over the texts and movies. Seeing that his flaws are greatly concealed, laying hold of enough hints to establish who or what Dr. Hannibal Lecter is, becomes a strenuous challenge. On that account, he will, without fail, remain an unsolved enigma to generations of readers and viewers.
For every man, there is evil. Hence, this research offers no precise definition or solid consensus as to what Good and Evil truly stand for. We cannot all agree on every aspect of the given designations of these concepts. Nonetheless, one thing is for certain: We all know ‘evil’ when we are exposed to it. A staggering amount of evil is among us, roaming freely in the world, and the question of Why are people evil? will always remain one to debate.
The selected characters reveal that villains do not always have clear motivations. At last, the blood curdling thing about evil is its total mindlessness and self concealment ability.
Being of an exploratory nature, this research opens up opportunities for further study of goodness and villainy to comprehend their correlations, the specific conditions of their emergence, and the internal contained logic of evil.
Another implication of the research is to establish a comparative matrix concerning villains from different literary works.
Verily, evil only exists as a small fragment of the human experience, which is a trivial fraction of the universal whole. Accordingly, we ought to cultivate goodness and exalt it so it gives rise to ripples of societal renewal.
“Each person has inside a basic decency and goodness. If he listens to it and acts on it, he is giving a great deal of what it is the world needs most. It is not complicated, but it takes courage. It takes courage for a person to listen to his own goodness and act on it.”
Pablo Casals, Spanish composer and cellist• Taylor, Steve, The Real Meaning of 'Good' and 'Evil': How are saintly people different from 'evil' ones? What does 'good' really mean? Psychology Today, August 26- 2013, https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/out the darkness/201308/the real meaning good and evil
• J. S. Mackenzie. “The Meaning of Good and Evil.” International Journal of Ethics, vol. Vol. 21, No. 3, Apr. 1911, pp. 251 268, www.jstor.org/stable/2376991.
• Donny Gahral Adian, LITERATURE AND EVIL: Dostoyevsky's Poetic Thinking on Evil, p242, 24.2.2008
• Moshagen, M., Hilbig, B. E., & Zettler, I. (2018). The dark core of personality. Psychological Review, 125, 656 688.
• Bagnall, Kyla. “The Ultimate Guide to Creating an Authentic Villain.” Writer’s Edit, writersedit.com/fiction writing/secret creating authentic villain/.
• “What Makes a Good Literary Villain? (with Pictures).” Language Humanities, www.languagehumanities.org/what makes a good literary villain.htm.
• “Dark Personality Theory” Reveals the 9 Traits of Evil People in Your Life.” Ideapod.com, ideapod.com/dark personality theory reveals the 9 traits-of-evil-people-in-your-life/.
• Miller, Kevin. “7 Qualities That Make for a Great Villain.” The Brave Writer, 26 May 2021, medium.com/the brave writer/7 qualities that make for a great villain f6d4a509bd10.
• “5 Characteristics of an Epic Villain.” Mythic Scribes, 22 May 2011, mythicscribes.com/character-development/5-characteristics-epicvillain/.
• Petric, Domina. Psychological archetypes: Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde,2019.
• "Good vs Evil Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde." StudyMoose, 5 May 2016, https://studymoose.com/good vs evil dr jekyll and mr hyde essay
• Cardenas, Andrea. “Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde: The Duality between Good And...” Exploring Your Mind, Exploring your mind, 11 Apr. 2019, exploringyourmind.com/jekyll and hyde duality between good evil/.
• “Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde: Good and Evil in the Human Nature.” SCIplanet, www.bibalex.org/SCIplanet/en/Article/Details?id=13636.
• “Adaptations of Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.” Academic Dictionaries and Encyclopedias, en academic.com/dic.nsf/enwiki/11662339.
• Colderidge, Samuel Taylor. Lectures 1808 1819 On Literature.
• Ed. R. A. Foakes. Volume 2. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1987. (Lectures 1808 1819 On Literature is Number 5 in The Collected Works of Samuel Taylor Colderidge. Ed. Kathleen Coburn. 13 numbers to date. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1969 .)
• “Iago.”,www.cliffsnotes.com/literature/o/othello/character analysis/iago#:~:text=Iago%20is%20a%20man%20with.
• Shadaab, Shafqat. “A Psychoanalysis of Iago from William Shakespeare’s “Othello.”” Medium, 29 May 2019, medium.com/@sshadaab06/a psychoanalysis of iago from william shakespeares othello 69efcb6a57cd#:~:text=Iago
• “Iago, Othello.” No Sweat Shakespeare, 2019, nosweatshakespeare.com/characters/iago othello/.
• “AFI’s 100 Years… 100 Heroes & Villains.” AFI.com. 2003. American Film Institute. 27 October, 2003 http://www.afi.com/tv/handv.asp.
• Braund, Simon. “Silence of the Lambs: Murderous Intentions.” Empire 2000.
• Bruno, Anthony. “All About Hannibal Lecter Facts and Fiction.” Crime Library. Courtroom Television. 27 October, 2003, http://www.crimelibrary.com/serial_killers/weird/hannibal_lecter/.
• “Silence of the Lambs: What Is the Origin of Hannibal Lecter’s Cannibalism?” Game Rant, 20 Sept. 2021, gamerant.com/hannibal lecter cannibalism origin/.
• "Lecter's Psychological Profile in "The Silence of the Lambs". IvyPanda, 24 Aug. 2020, ivypanda.com/essays/lecters psychological profile in the silence of the lambs/.
• Kolan, Michalina, Leis, Kamil, Baska, Aleksandra, Kazik, Jakub and Gałązka, Przemysław. "Wendigo Psychosis" Current Problems of Psychiatry, vol.20, no.3, 2019, pp.213 216. https://doi.org/10.2478/cpp 2019 0014.
