Critiquing compulsion/addiction effects

Summary:

Is there an eloquent or succinct way to do so?

Critiquing compulsion/addiction effects

Petrograd 05 Jan 2016 04:49

So, I feel that this is a result of me stepping back from critique for a while, but I'm having trouble expressing why compulsions/addictions are problematic.¹ I currently try to mention that compulsions are an over-used trope, that they don't bring anything new or unique to an SCP, and perhaps that they tend to lock down a narrative rather than allowing it to develop in an interesting way.

I really feel I had other objections to compulsions, but they've slipped my mind, and I feel I'm not doing my best if I'm not at least aware of what's driving my criticism. So, what are the problems you folks see with (misused, if you like) compulsion effects, and do you have an eloquent way of putting that when giving feedback?

Footnotes

1. Yes, there are exceptions, but this is about when they're not helping an article.

Re: Critiquing compulsion/addiction effects

dankaar 05 Jan 2016 04:58

What I've seen is the following.

Simply put, a SCP potentially becomes more horrifying and/or compelling if someone willingly does horrible things with a SCP than if the SCP compelled them to do so. Because it drives home the idea that humans are bastards.

Re: Critiquing compulsion/addiction effects

TheFlyInYourSoup 01 Nov 2016 18:55

Simply put, a SCP potentially becomes more horrifying and/or compelling if someone willingly does horrible things with a SCP than if the SCP compelled them to do so. Because it drives home the idea that humans are bastards.

Is there not also an argument to be made for one being compelled into something against their own volition though? I feel like if it happens due to their own decisions it can seem like more of a punishment for some failure; something which is by no means without its own merit of course. On the other hand I also feel like there is a certain horror in the usurpation of ones own free will though.

I think something tends to be more disturbing when it is somehow forced upon the victim through no fault of their own. It feels like more of a violation then, as opposed to a penance. I think it's more disturbing to think of someone being attacked while simply walking down the street than to think of someone being attacked while wearing a Nazi uniform and walking into a synagogue.

Re: Critiquing compulsion/addiction effects

Zyn 01 Nov 2016 23:12

It feels like more of a violation then, as opposed to a penance.

Something something plausible deniability, also perspective of victim vs. aggressor and where the lines blur. But there's also the context of this site's history and the material posted on it, and we've got tooooooooons of compulsion articles, plus compulsion drafts that hit the forums/chat every week and get set aside for different ideas.

Last edited on 01 Nov 2016 23:12 by Zyn Show more

Re: Critiquing compulsion/addiction effects

Kalinin 05 Jan 2016 05:34

Compulsion effects are frequently used as a shortcut to getting characters to act in a certain manner, without doing the heavy lifting of establishing a person (with accompanying traits that will determine how they act), setting up an event, and writing about a reaction and the consequences thereof. What's more affecting, a mysterious letter that sends a man we've been introduced to into a cold sweat and trembling, or an anomalous envelope that scares someone no matter what they're like or what the circumstances are?

Additionally, compulsion effects frequently reinforce the idea that people are interchangeable. All people react the same way to the thing no matter what. No variances are present for differences in personality, individual history, etc. That's not only boring, but also so far removed from the human experience that there isn't anything identifiable to the reader. Why should you be invested in the story if the outcome is the same no matter the circumstances?

Generally, these kinds of effects short-circuit characterization, which is the way in which narratives are made interesting. All stories have been told before, on one level or another. What makes them interesting are the unique characters and perspectives we encounter in them. What motivates one person will have an entirely different meaning and effect (and attendant consequences) to another. A rock what makes you compelled to crazy to death or whatever the hell lacks any sort of soul. It's inherently boring, it's lazy, and if a piece succeeds, it's usually in spite of, rather than because of, a compulsion effect.

Re: Critiquing compulsion/addiction effects

psul 05 Jan 2016 08:39

In addition to those reasons stated above, compulsion is often used as a narrative shortcut to attempt to make the anomaly more difficult to contain. I'm going to quote WrongJohnSilver, who I think put this point quite succintly:

It's not that compulsions are inherently bad things, it's that many new authors use them as a lazy method to make an object more dangerous. The logic I've seen tends to go like this:

• I've got a scary thing that kills you if you X.
• But people would figure out really quickly not to X.
• I'd better compel people and make them X.

Re: Critiquing compulsion/addiction effects

Petrograd 05 Jan 2016 10:48

Excellent responses all. Thanks, folks, I think I have my head back in the right direction.

Re: Critiquing compulsion/addiction effects

WrongJohnSilver 05 Jan 2016 12:44

Thank you, psul, for the mention! Here's a bit more on what's going on, regarding compulsions:

Narrative and story drive the action. Ultimately, narrative is about the choices we make, and the consequences of those choices. For example, SCP-2875 works not only because it's a story about too many bears, but also because the city council ended up choosing too many bears. Unfortunately, compulsions hijack choice. As a result, the narrative, in most cases, ends when the compulsion occurs.

Take SCP-012 for example, possibly the oldest compulsion on the site. In a vacuum, it doesn't kill you when you finally bleed out. It kills you when you look at it. Therefore, the story ends when the subject views it. We know how it goes from there. That's why things like experiments that prevent death from coming to the subject, or explorations into the subject's psyche that show that there are still decisions being made from within the compulsion help to strengthen the story.

So, many poor compulsions end up killing the story too soon in an attempt to increase the horror of an item. Yet horror can only exist when there's a choice to be made. There's nothing to fear when it doesn't matter what you do. So, many compulsions end up killing the horror when they kill the story.

How can a compulsion be used to good effect? There are a few ways.

• Recognize that the compulsion ends the story for a subjected character. This is mentioned specifically in SCP-571 and SCP-2310. As a result, the story revolves around what those who aren't under the compulsion do.
• Don't let the compulsion completely remove choice. SCP-2737 forces emotions on someone, but they are still free to choose how they act. SCP-586 forces people not to get it right, but there are still plenty of ways to be wrong.
• Let it be possible to become free of the compulsion. Amnestics are a common solution used for this. SCP-2852 doesn't affect everyone identically afterward. The story might still end for someone under the influence of the compulsion, but if other people can save that person, then there are still decisions to be made and story to be had.

This was all part of how I designed the compulsions in SCP-2459. I wanted to make sure that those affected were still fully capable of interaction, meaningful contribution, decision making. They won't leave the road, but you can still converse with them, coordinate humanitarian efforts with them, and they're all interacting with each other, redesigning their situation, and still doing all the things people do. In that way, they're still driving story. They're still making choices.

For all the new authors out there: compulsions are okay, as long as there's still someone involved able to make meaningful choices.

Last edited on 05 Jan 2016 12:46 by WrongJohnSilver Show more

Re: Critiquing compulsion/addiction effects

DrRoyal 08 Dec 2016 04:39

I think something tends to be more disturbing when it is somehow forced upon the victim through no fault of their own. It feels like more of a violation then, as opposed to a penance.

Yes. However, I feel that simply control, as if you are being taken over like some sort of android, is not as horrifying as emotional (or physical) control in an instance that you have the ability to resist, whether consciously or physically, but something terrible will come of it.

For instance, if there was an SCP that simply took over my mental and motor functions, and I did what it wanted because I could not do otherwise, it would not be as terrifying to me as the more realistic situation where either, I am strapped to a table, unable to physically resist but can still mentally resist, or I am held a gunpoint, knowing that I can physically resist, but it would yield terrible consequences.

So in essence, compulsive, addictive, control effects are not as scary as "things what can kill you" in horrifying ways, or things what you wouldn't like when they're angry. I dunno. Forgive my ramblings. And my necroposting.

---

Dr Roy ████, Junior Researcher