Rule Breakers
A certain member of my writers' group, who shall remain nameless (but perhaps will drop by), and I almost came to blows over the issue of rules. Not really. First of all, I live in Virginia, and he lives in Florida, making actual blows impossible. But things did get a tiny bit heated.
All over rules. (At least how I saw the debate.)
Here's the thing . . . I hate authority figures and will ALWAYS (or most of the time) choose to break the rules. But it's more than that . . .
Over a year ago, I once got out to my van after a trip to the pet store to discover the clerk had not rung up 79-cent doggie bows. Now, lest anyone think pink doggie bows are ridiculous (doggie bows--with bells), they are. But I had two girls, two puppies, and one set of bows, plus an entire cart of dog stuff, and the bows were an item Baby Girl wanted for her puppy, Dreamer. But somehow, amongst all the stuff in the cart, they were missed and not rung up. So I took the two girls, two squirming puppies, and 79-cent bows and went back INTO the pet store, to the end of the now-long line . . . to pay for them. Could PetSmart AFFORD to "give" me the 79-cent bows? Yes, indeed. The markup alone for the doggie bows was probably 78-cents. When the clerk saw I had returned to pay for them, his mouth dropped open. And I said, "It's important that my child see me do the right thing." Had she not been there? I still would have done it. Maybe because it was important for the clerk to see me do the right thing, maybe someone else. In any case, in some karmic sense, I would rather pay the 79 cents and do what's right.
Now . . . different set of circumstances. I used to mentor unwed teen mothers in some of the worst of the worst 'hoods. Mothers as young as 12, girls as young as 13 pregnant with Baby #2. I did this as a volunteer for a couple of years. Ostensibly, the program got its funding from the government (and by funding, I mean I had one supervisor/case worker working with 20 mentors and a hundred girls and babies, and he had one crappy desk and a set of filing cabinets from the 1950s . . . and a low-paying salary, but that was it--no money for the girls, no nothing . . . so this wasn't some expensive program). Because of this, we were not technically "allowed" to discuss abortion or birth control. Think about that. Especially point #2. Now, had, at any point in time, a 12-year-old girl, pregnant by her stepfather, approached me and said, "I don't want to have this baby," or "I need to talk to you about birth control" I would likely have broken the rules. I wouldn't--and I mean WOULDN'T--have discussed what she "should" or shouldn't do. Because that's between her conscience and God or the universe or whatever. But I would have counseled her to search her heart. And I wouldn't have pretended that birth control was something imaginary. And--more to the point--if I had an opportunity, by fudging something a tiny bit, to help an impoverished, abused young girl and her baby to get out of an abusive home, even if it meant LYING, I would do it and not waste a fraction of a second of time feeling bad about it, even if ostensibly the housing allowance I got her was a LOT more than 79 cents.
I am the type of person that the very SIGHT of a cop makes me break out in hives. I don't break the law, so there is no reason I should be nervous . . . but I nonetheless freak out. Maybe because I KNOW I WOULD break the law for some internal scale of "greater good." What appoints me guardian of "greater good"? Nothing more than wanting to help people.
There is a federally funded group home nearby. I wanted to organize a food drive and a drive to give them used computers--nowadays people throw out and let gather dust perfectly good laptops and TVs and all sorts of things. I was told I couldn't. The government won't allow that. Only government-funded crappy computers can be there. "But what if I had a really great laptop to give them?" "Nope." So I am allowed to have an ink cartridge drive to put cartridges in the government's said-crappy computers. If it were up to me, I'd march in with a big-screen TV and a new iMac and screw Uncle Sam. But there I go again . . . breaking rules.
And so in ANY book, I will root for the person who breaks the law, like Robin Hood. The person who never follows the rules. The anti-hero. Even if he's not doing it for greater good but just to be a rebel.
My friend's character breaks all the rules. And he has a lesson to learn about that. And me? I argue that . . . I don't know . . . I don't feel he's doing anything too awful by running away, by getting into trouble, by . . . I root for this character. Part of that is my friend is an awesome writer, and it's a terrific book. Part of it is inherently, I think, the world is draw up into people who routinely break rules and people who routinely follow them. And this translates very clearly in fiction.
Thoughts?
32 comments:
For me, it would heavily depend on what rules are being broken.
Much would depend on the literary execution, of course, but I would probably have a hard time getting behind a "rebel" if s/he were infringing on other people's rights or wrecklessly and needlessly putting innocent people in danger.
So the Long Arm of Orloff is once again reaching down to Florida ... I (of course) have a few points about this.
I haven't said this out loud, but I've been secretly pleased with your reaction to Murph and his predicament. In my mind, you have strongly identified with Murph. Like him, you automatically dismiss the authority figures in his life. Like him, you think They are all wrong, and that he is justified. Thank goodness I've finally created such a sympathetic character.
But it goes one step deeper than that. In your post, you gave a few examples of rule-breaking behavior ... but you drew the line in your actual examples when it came to breaking the law. I think there's a difference between ignoring rules and breaking the law, especially in a YA book with a YA character.
This character in question isn't just a charming rebel who flouts a few minor rules. He engages in a pattern of self-destructive and outright illegal behavior. He runs away as a 12-year-old with money that isn't his to spend, into a busy city, and convinces other kids to get involved. He commits a felony in the course of his travels (breaking and entering). He has been thrown out of several schools for severe vandalism. He manufactures and sells dangerous toys (you'd have to read the book). And he has no regard for his own father.
Don't get me wrong -- I love this kid. Shoot, I basically WAS this kid. Growing up, I also engaged in a pattern of self-destructive and outright illegal behavior.
This character is a "bad boy," and he is charismatic, but he is also immature and unformed. He has yet to learn how to channel his enormous, original energy into something productive, something that will not land him in a jail. He could be a great criminal, but even great criminals meet tragic ends. Or, if he learns to play within the law and stop self-destructing, he is the kind of kid who, as an adult, can shatter the status quo and reorder his world. I think it's worth remembering that Bill Gates dropped out of college, but he didn't use his energy to grow the best pot in the world. He used it to create the largest computer company in the world.
So how do you want your rebels? And how do you define rebellion? Ghandi was a rebel; Jesus was a rebel; Buddha was a rebel. All of them ignored and broke rules and laws in their early days. But they also channeled their energy into productive projects (like freeing countries and building religions). In the case of this main character, you are meeting him in his formative years, when he is still learning the difference between being a criminal and being a free thinker.
Jon VanZile
Jude:
Agreed. But I know there are people who ALWAYS follow rules. If you have a chance, since you are interested in screenwriting, go read back interviews with Syndey Pollack about The Firm. It differs significantly from the book is what the hero "gets away with." Pollack felt it needed a morality bit tacked on. I disagreed. I wanted him to get away with EVERYTHING.
E
Hi JVZ:
Believe me, I know at its heart, it is because I don't just LIKE your character, I adore him. An out-of-the-box thinker. Love his rebellious nature. SEE that he is smarter than EVERYONE in the book, save his hidden mentor perhaps. Sympathy? You have it from me in spades.
And I hear, on a pure logic level, all of your arguments. I also appreciate your examples of great men, thinkers, rebels. I think the anti-hero resonates on many levels with a lot of us. Channeling it is important. How do you channel it? To what cause? Or only to anarchy?
A couple of things. . . one, I have no problem breaking the law. The 79 cent thing (stolen puppy bows) was as much about I COULD afford it and didn't NEED it (versus, say, needing to steal bread to feed my family, a la Les Miz). But the law? No, not part of it.
And . . . I guess it also says something, too, as I read your post . . . I am more apt to forgive someone like Murph, who is the smartest kid in the room, than someone dumb who does it not from outside-the-box thinking, but just "because." If that makes sense. My admiration, for example, of heist flicks. We forgive smart. Sometimes.
E
Hmm. I suspect I'll come off as lainey shades of grey today.
"And so in ANY book, I will root for the person who breaks the law, like Robin Hood. The person who never follows the rules. The anti-hero. Even if he's not doing it for greater good but just to be a rebel."
But Robin Hood was doing it for the greater good.
I do love anti-heros, but I usually like them to have a moral compass.
Kidnapping for a ransom=illegal & bad
Kidnapping to rescue an abused kid=not breaking the law IMO
Unless you kidnap a bad person and need the money to save a good person. :)
I've read plenty of books where a charismatic character wins me over regardless of the crime. Mafia is one example. According to the media, they are horrid in every way, and yet, in a well told story, you can be lulled into seeing a character only trying to stay loyal and protect "The Family"
And because no ones moral compass swings in exactly the same direction, what irks one reader might be fine for another. In Jon's example, I probably wouldn't have a problem with him spending money that wasn't his, the B&E or him having no regard for dad (cuz dad probably deserved it to raise such a troubled kid) Dangerous toys that might hurt other kids. tweak. Vandalism--having witnessed and been the victim of needless destruction--big tweak.
So there ya have it. Lawbreaking is okay, provided it's a law I think should be broken.
Must go now. Getting mighty uncomfortable with this fence post in my butt!
Erica and Jon--
I'm not exactly clear as to what your debate is about. Are you, Jon, suggesting revising the character, making him less of a rebel to elicit reader sympathy? And are you, Erica, suggesting the character is fine as is?
Please clarify your positions. :)
P.S. Erica--I haven't read The Firm, nor have I seen the movie. I know. I'm the only one. ;)
Lainey:
All great points. Which is why books/fiction are great fodder for discussion because every person's moral compass runs a little differently.
E
Hi Jude:
No. The character, as Jon has created him, is sympathetic to ME . . . and I don't judge him too harshly at all for the rules he breaks. Hence my later point which is that sometimes we forgive the smart ones more. Jon, on the other hand, has some torment in store for our young hero so he learns a lesson about randomly breaking the rules.
Re . . . the Firm. Pollack had Tom Cruise (as hero) NOT get away with millions at the end. The book has a more "get away with it" feeling in all respects.
E
I don't remember the ending of "The Firm" in book form, but I like characters getting it all, especially if I think they're deserving and the other people are not. One of the great things about writing is we can play God and give the good guys what they deserve, and give the bad guys what they deserve too.
I agree with everything Lainey said. When Jon's book comes out, I hope you tell us. I want to read it.
Jude:
Ha ha. No, I'm not going to revise the character to make him "more sympathetic." I deliberately made him an anti-hero. And Erica's problem isn't with the character -- it's with the adults around him who heap reprobation and punishment on him.
Throughout this edit, Erica and I have been going around because Murph keeps getting in trouble -- for doing things that she thinks are justified (i.e., running away before his dad sends him to reform school). And Lainey is right ... Murph is not exactly being raised in a great environment. At one point, his dad makes him work in the family's Dickensian toy factory as a punishment.
But we've had several heated discussions over the consequences of his behavior ... in the toy factory part, for instance, she thought it basically amounted to child abuse to make him work in the family factory after school. My position was that it was a punishment, and while his dad is a lousy dad and it's a lousy punishment, Murph did bring this upon himself (he got in trouble AGAIN ... he's on the verge of costing his family their whole business).
I don't want to speak for Erica, but I think the issue we've had on this book is one of justification and consequences. She has dinged me a bunch of times for punishing Murph with harsh consequences for behavior that she believes is justified by his crappy situation, while I see his problems as a natural function of his own behavior. I'm not sure life cares about your situation when the fates are meted out.
But, ultimately, we're still moving through this story, and there is redemption for Murph in the end. Put it this way, he might lose most of the battles, but he wins the war. If I sell this thing, I'll send you a copy and it will all become clear :)
Jon VanZile
Ah. I see.
Hmm...
I think Jon's character is going to have to suffer some sort of consequences for his actions. I'm thinking about Catcher in the Rye and One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest as examples.
Best of luck on selling it, Jon. It sounds like a marvelous story!
Edie:
See . . . we're alike in that. I like to see them get it all, too.
:-)
E
Jon:
That is exactly how I feel. You have nailed my view exactly. And that's it, I suppose. Jon has created the "perfect" anti-hero in that I KNOW he is breaking the rules, but the people around him frustrate me so much that I cheer him on and am sad when he has consequences. But that will make his final arc in the story that much more worth it.
E
Jude:
Yes. And those movies . . . upset me so much. I very much identify with these kinds of characters--which says a lot about those kinds of books, but also me as a person. Which is true of all fiction. We don't create in a wind tunnel. We each bring something to our reading.
E
We each bring something to our reading.
So true.
And I think one of the themes of stories like Cuckoo's Nest and Dead Poet's Society is that meaningful change comes slowly (if it comes at all), is hard-fought, and often involves a sacrificial lamb.
To me, punishing the rebel is not a statement of morality but one of extreme sacrifice moving toward supreme metamorphosis. Crucifixion toward salvation, if you will.
Jude:
Tres deep today!
E
So... to weigh in on this... I think that Jon has the right of it as far as I have read this commentary/dialog.
What is hear in Erica's argument is that there is an overarching sense of fairness that is separate and distinct form the rules or from the law. It may coincide in places because ostensibly that is what the rule of law is there to protect and enforce. But in the codification of those rules in almost all societies and cultures, we find that the true sense of what is fair and what is law have become separated.
So Erica may be rooting for the MC who has fallen into that gap, that separation.
Jon's argument seems to me to reflect a sense of the world as a more distopian place where the punishment for breaking rules is not in proportion to the rules being broken, and does not take any sense of fairness into consideration - meaning that circumstances are immaterial to the rule of law and that authority seems to have distinguished itself from reality and serves none but the rules themselves.
Or at least it may seem that way to the teenage protagonist of the story.
For myself, I started out as an avid rule follower. I didn't question much, just assumed that the rules were there for a good reason, or they wouldn't be there.
Then I switched gears - circumstances altered my point of view and gave me some clarity - and subjected all rules to investigation. Fast forward a few decades and I came to a sort of compromise. I feel that the rule of law is a very important part of a functioning and healthy society... BUT, rules are created, enacted, codified, interpreted and enforced by people - meaning they are imperfect, fallible and sometimes completely wrong. You have to use your head. You have to look at the circumstances. You have to look at the "why" for both the rule and the individual to see if there is a fit.
To be a rebel for the sake of rebellion is, in my opinion, stupid. There is no thought, no understanding, no willingness to examine either the self or the society to see why there is no fit.
Anyway, that's my $.02 for what its worth :)
Thanks for a great post Erica and for a great discussion everyone who posted.
ewoh:
That's it! I was thinking, actually of the old Venn diagrams. Remember those from school? There's a time when the rules do mesh with my values. And a time when they don't. And the middle area is where I agree with Jon.
:-)
E
Hmmm ... my latest WIP is about a thief. She stops for the most part, once she doesn't need the food. But I think I need to delve deeper.
(No deep thoughts from me today. I got a cold, and it makes my brain stupid, LOL.)
Thanks Erica. I had not thought about the Venn Diagram, but yes that does work.
Spy, I too have a WIP with a thief as the MC. Fun story, but it was the first novel length story I ever wrote and it needs major surgery. When/if I get back to it I will be pulling from the comments on this thread for sure.
I would do the same thing in both of the situations you mentioned at first. Hell, I *have* done frighteningly similar things in both situations. I think that it's all about the moral compass. Your morals set your own rules for you. You're not a rule-breaker--not of your *own* rules. But if others' rules clash with your own, which will you follow and which will you break? I'm big into looking at the greater good. If a rule is silly, and it's preventing good from being done, I see if there's a way to change it or, barring that, will sometimes, uh, go around it. Which is the better outcome: keeping a silly rule intact, or doing what's morally right? That said, I do think that we need rules and laws, and that most of the time they should be followed, since not everybody has the same moral compass, and this would lead to anarchy. Just saying. It's messy, but when is life ever not?
I completely agree! I am very by the book. I show my kids to return money if they gave me too much change. The other day I found an over $10,000 diamond ring in front of a restaurant and I went to the owner, who I know very well, and gave it to her and made clear that the person who lost it would be sure to come back. I am all about following the rules. But then there is a time and place for them and I absolutely believe that some rules are meant to be broken. Great post!
Rules and laws are two different things. Rules I'll risk breaking, laws are another matter. Ok, so I do speed.
As a commander, I was famous, or notorious depending upon who you ask, for bending if not breaking rules. My main rule was, "It is easier to beg forgiveness than ask permission."
In the military environment, rule-breakers are also usually the best tacticians. Rules and conventions say to do certain things a certain way. A commander who does not, keeps his enemy off balance.
Once upon a time during a training exercise, I led a tank company through a swamp (supposedly impossible by "normal" conventions) and attacked an infantry battalion from behind. As tanks "can't go through swamps" the battalion was caught totally by surprise.
Of course if I had sunk any of my tanks in the swamp, I would have been in deep doo-doo!
booklady:
I love all this morally gray stuff. Whose rules? Which rules? It's the stuff of life . . . and fiction!
E
ello:
Amen.
And did anyone collect it??? The ring?? I bet they are grateful YOU found it.
E
JLK;
Thank you! I love it . . . rules vs. laws. I hadn't really thought of that. I am froma long line of rulebreakers. And some lawbreakers thrown in for good measure.
;-)
E
I think "rules" belong to mortals. Doing whats "right" comes from a higher place. Its something that you know in your soul is the right thing to do. You don't owe it to anyone, rules or no rules, its just the right thing.
When I was seven I started a riot in the local Sears because they put a dying fish in with turtles. The teenage boys working there thought it was funny watching the turtles chase the fish. I caused quite a scene (to the embarrassment of my parents) that they free the fish. They said, "its dying anyway." I was seven but faced down these boys like the some fish-guardian-angel. Finally, to shut me up, they bagged the fish and gave it to me. I didn't start off wanting the fish, but I didn't want it to die like that. I took it home, gave it a nice bowl, food and a few days later it died. But I know I did the right thing.
Aimless:
That is a GREAT story. A really cool illustration, also, of how some of us are really the way we are from the time we are very young!
E
I have a fondness for anti-heroes too. Heros often do what's right "because it's right" or out of some sense of "sacred duty" and an anti-hero often does the right thing reluctantly (but that's honest) or for completely their own self involved reasons (which is also honest)
I think it's really easy for a hero to become self righteous and "above the people" to the point that no one identifies with them and you can't find their humanity.
zoe:
oh, those are really good (!!) points.
E
air jordan Xiii
nike air force one
Air Jordan retro shoes
Bape Shoes
Gucci shoes
wholesale Pumas
adidas shoes
nike air max
nike shox
retro air jordans
nike air force
air force 1
air force 1 low
custom air jordans
air max
retro air jordans
jordan 11 shoes
cheap Air Jordan Shoes
nike air jordan shoes
air force one
wholesale air force one
nike dunk
cheap jordans
nike shox
Ugg Boot
Air Jordan
Air Jordans
Nike shoes
Jordan Shoes
wholesale Jordan
Post a Comment