The Extremes of Conflict in Literature: Violence, Homicide, And
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – FIRST-PROOF, 03/22/12, NEWGEN PART 5 Conclusions and Future Directions for Evolutionary Perspectives on Violence, Homicide, and War 224_TodShacelford_Chap24.indd4_TodShacelford_Chap24.indd 441111 33/22/2012/22/2012 112:04:392:04:39 AAMM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – FIRST-PROOF, 03/22/12, NEWGEN 224_TodShacelford_Chap24.indd4_TodShacelford_Chap24.indd 441212 33/22/2012/22/2012 112:04:392:04:39 AAMM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – FIRST-PROOF, 03/22/12, NEWGEN CHAPTER Th e Extremes of Confl ict in 24 Literature: Violence, Homicide, and War Joseph Carroll Abstract Literature depicts emotions arising from conflict and makes them available to readers, who experience them vicariously. Literary meaning lodges itself not in depicted events alone but also, and more important, in the interpretation of depicted events: in the author’s treatment of the depicted events; the reader’s response to both the depicted events and the author’s treatment; and the author’s anticipation of the reader’s responses. This chapter outlines possible stances toward violence, makes an argument for the decisive structural significance of violence in both life and literature, and then presents a representative sampling of violent acts in literature. The examples from literature are organized into the main kinds of human relationships: one’s relation to oneself (suicide); sexual rivals, lovers, and marital partners; family members (parents, children, siblings, aunts, uncles, and cousins); communities (violence within social groups); and warfare (violence between social groups). Key Words: literature, emotions, interpretation, author, reader, suicide, lovers, family, community, war Introduction characteristics of human nature. Literature arises What a book a devil’s chaplain might write on the out of and depicts human nature, so confl ict is inte- clumsy, wasteful, blundering, low, and horribly cruel gral to literature, too. works of nature! Literary works sometimes depict hostile encoun- —Darwin, 1903; 1: 94; letter to Joseph Hooker of ters between alien groups, but more frequently, the July 13, 1856 emotional interest of literary works arises out of confl icts among people who are intimately related Th e world is a violent place. More are born, in every to one another. Such confl icts are a natural prod- generation, than can survive. Natural selection fi l- uct of inclusive fi tness. Like other animals, human ters out weaker organisms. Among creatures with beings share fi tness interests with their mates and nervous systems, those that do not survive seldom off spring. Except for identical twins, though, the go quietly into that good night. Th ey struggle and fi tness interests of even the most closely related kin often suff er horribly before they die. Many become are not identical. Inclusive fi tness produces a per- food for other animals. All compete for scarce petual drama in which intimacy and opposition, resources against other creatures, including mem- cooperation and confl ict, are closely intertwined. bers of their own species. Human beings, despite Th e evolved reproductive strategies of men all their technological and cultural contrivances, include both paternal investment, which requires have not escaped this universal struggle. Confl ict mate guarding, and low-investment short-term and struggle are integral to the evolved and adapted mating, which often requires eluding the vigilance 413 224_TodShacelford_Chap24.indd4_TodShacelford_Chap24.indd 441313 33/22/2012/22/2012 112:04:392:04:39 AAMM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – FIRST-PROOF, 03/22/12, NEWGEN of other men. Men form coalitions for coopera- interpretation of depicted events: in the author’s tive endeavor but also compete for mates (Geary treatment of the depicted events; the reader’s & Flinn, 2001). Women have evolved strategies response to both the depicted events and the author’s for securing a bonded attachment with men will- treatment; and the author’s anticipation of the read- ing to commit resources, but they have also evolved er’s responses. It is worth pausing to emphasize the strategies for taking advantage of short-term mating fundamentally social and psychological character of opportunities with other men, especially men who literature. Meaning in literature cannot be reduced have higher genetic quality than their own mates to plot. Meaning consists in an imaginative expe- (Buss, 2000, 2003; Geary, 1998). Th e pleasurable rience at least partially shared between an author feelings associated with sexual relations are thus and a reader. When we analyze narrative/mimetic necessarily tinged with suspicion, jealousy, frustra- literature (stories, plays, and novels, as opposed to tion, and resentment. Much of the time, men and lyric poems), we have to consider the interplay of women manage workable compromises, but sexual perspectives among characters, authors, and readers: relations sometimes break down in rejection, vio- how characters regard one another, what they think lent emotional struggle, and physical abuse, includ- about one another, what the author thinks of them, ing murder (Buss, 2000; Daly & Wilson, 1988). what the author anticipates readers will think, and A parent and child both have a fi tness interest in what readers actually do think about the characters the child surviving and reproducing, but a child has and also about the author’s responses to the char- a 100% genetic investment in itself; each parent has acters. Consequently, in this chapter, the literary only a 50% genetic investment in a child. Mother– examples do not consist only in plot summaries. child confl ict begins in the mother’s womb, with Th e chapter also takes account of authorial stances the embryo struggling to acquire more resources and readers’ responses. Authorial stance and reader from the mother than the mother is willing to give. response are the substance of literary experience; Siblings share fi tness interests but also compete for they are, accordingly, the proper subject matter of resources. Parents must often distribute resources literary criticism. across multiple off spring, all of whom want more After outlining a range of stances toward psy- than an equal share. Parents often prefer some chil- chopathic violence, this chapter makes an argument dren to others, and they must also make choices for the decisive structural signifi cance of violence in between eff ort devoted to parenting and eff ort both life and literature. Th e chapter then presents a devoted to mating. Such tensions can and do erupt representative sampling of violent acts in literature. into homicidal violence, in both life and literature. Th e examples from literature are organized into the Th e confl icts generated from diff ering fi tness main kinds of human relationships: one’s relation interests manifest at the proximal level as motives to oneself (suicide); sexual rivals, lovers, and mar- that are driven by emotions: desire, love, jealousy, ital partners; family members (parents, children, guilt, shame, frustration, resentment, rage, and siblings, aunts, uncles, and cousins); communities hatred (Cosmides & Tooby, 2000; Ekman, 2003; (violence within social groups); and warfare (vio- Plutchik, 2003). Literature depicts such emotions, lence between social groups). evokes them, and makes them available to readers, who experience them vicariously (Oatley, 1999, Stances Toward Cruelty 2002, 2003; Tan, 2000). An author and a reader Psychopathic cruelty is relatively rare (Baumeister, inhabit an imagined world created by the author, 1996; Grossman, 2009). Even in genocidal warfare, who chooses a subject, adopts a stance toward that people seldom regard their own behavior as inten- subject, organizes the presentation of the subject, tional harm infl icted for pleasure. Instead they and modulates style and tone to aff ect the reader’s rationalize violence as self-defense or as a means responses. Readers can passively register the images toward a greater good. Th ey also minimize or turn a and sensations thus evoked, but they can also stand blind eye toward the suff ering of victims and instead apart from them, situating them in their own ana- magnify threats to themselves (Baumeister, 1996; lytic and evaluative frameworks. Literary criticism is Smith, 2007). Studies of soldiers in warfare support only the most explicit and highly developed form of the contention that most people in postagricultural readers’ refl ections on the imagined worlds created societies are on the whole reluctant to harm oth- by authors. ers. Even after heavy conditioning, and even when Literary meaning lodges itself not in depicted they are themselves in danger, many soldiers never events alone but also, and more important, in the fi re their weapons, or they fi re to miss (Grossman, 414 the extremes of conflict in literature 224_TodShacelford_Chap24.indd4_TodShacelford_Chap24.indd 441414 33/22/2012/22/2012 112:04:402:04:40 AAMM OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – FIRST-PROOF, 03/22/12, NEWGEN 2009; Marshall, 1947). (Wade [2006] and Cochran Oates’s frequently anthologized story “Where Are and Harpending [2009] argue that sedentism, a pre- You Going, Where Have You Been?” requisite to agricultural and industrial economies, A few narratives adopt a structurally ironic has selected for personalities less prone to violence.) stance, taking psychopaths as ostensible protagonists Psychopaths, people who actively enjoy killing and but treating them with implicit contempt and anger. feel no remorse, evidently constitute only about 2% Instances include Henry Fielding’s caustic 18th-cen-