it’s interesting to me that torture just works to us, as a literary device. It’s everywhere in movies and stories and whatnot, from big-budget dramas to little grindhouse short stories. It fits neatly into the requirements of plot: character doesn’t want to offer information, Gets Tortured, has to offer information.
the issue with this is that it isn’t how it works.
torture is a display of power. It fouls interrogation, this is known; a person being tortured will tell you whatever you want to hear to make it stop, which is more often than not a lie, made up on the spot, or if the truth an incomplete and useless version of it. It isn’t generally done for information’s sake anyway, but as a form of what the ancient Greeks called hybris, the violent exhibition of your power over another person.
This is, every once in a great while, done right in fiction, but it’s a challenge to write vs. the idea that it’s a shortcut to one character revealing plot-critical information to another. Pretty much every form of torture works this way, even the ones that are legally permissible. Psychological torment or physical discomfort also produce an animalistic desire to escape harm and foul interrogation. The forms of torture the cops can do? The cops do it not to gain information (or if they think it will, they’re lying to themselves) but because it makes them feel powerful.
There’s probably a master’s thesis in it for somebody studying the rise of torture as a plot device since the beginning of the war on terror and the contemporaneous development of the Broken Windows theory of policing. I’m not really aware of any similar level of disconnect between what Works in fiction and what happens in real life!
Comment
