Character who goes insane

Yes, you are completely right. I shouldn't have used that term.

My point is that any mental "illness" is something we can all relate to if you think about it enough.

People who are bereaved often hear the voice of their loved ones. Some churches (Pentecostal being one of them, I believe) actively encourage people to hear the voice of God (so in these communities hearing voices are a positive thing, not something to be laughed at). There are many people who had visions and heard voices throughout history (Jesus and other religious people, William Blake, etc). Paranoia is surely something most of us have experienced (all be it in milder forms) particularly when we are feeling vulnerable. We all (I hope) have felt elated to one degree or another, and full of confidence and feel we can tackle anything. Most of us will have felt "down" (depressed is an overused word), so can relate to how it must feel if that feeling went on for weeks and months.

Therefore people who have mental health problems are not freaks. They are normal people who have experiences that are not within the "normal" range (this depends on which community they are living in) but if one thinks about it, enough, these experiences are understandable. You can therefore put yourself in their shoes (which is surely what we are trying to do).

It is wrong to stereotype people. We, as writers, try to avoid clichés. Or we should do.

 

You raise an interesting point. In psychiatry, if a belief is consistent with a religious belief or a cultural belief of the community a person belongs to, then even symptoms that would in another person be consistent with frank delusions and hallucinations, aren't considered psychotic. This is the power of peer pressure, (in it's extreme form) and even though it may sound bizarre on the outside, it is actually quite easy to work around in clinical practice.

One example is Koro (link to Wiki article). Basically it represents a somatization of other symptoms such as anxiety and depression, and it occurs in various parts of Africa but also elsewhere. People can develop a delusion that their genitalia are retracting back into the abdomen. The cause is thought to be a curse, the cure is given by shamans or similar. If a guy from a tribe that believes in koro comes to psych hospital with those symptoms, he isn't considered psychotic. But if a person from different culture came in with the same delusion (unshakeable belief) it would be considered to be a somatic delusion as a part of a psychotic disorder.

The key in differentiating illness from a temporary state is that illness doesn't go away as quickly, and more importantly, it's a matter of having versus not having insight. When a person is convinced that whatever is happening is real, and they can't distance themselves enough to allow that maybe their mind is playing tricks and that they might be ill, then they have psychosis.

 

with something like this, i suggest that you give subtle hints to the reader that the character is going insane worse and worst. For example, you can go into his thoughts have let the reader know what he's thinking when certain events happen to him. If you want a good example at how to do this, I suggest you read Anton Chekhov's story Ward No.6, it has a character that goes insane and ends up in a psychiatric ward.

 

What your describing sounds very much like manic depression, have him get VERY little sleep, twards the end when he starts thinking he is god he will have no sleep for days at a time and then sleep like a log for 12-14 hours if he is somewhere he feels safe, as he thinks he is god by this time it could be a kindly priest or something.

as the madness progresses so will his self belief as his perspective becomes skewed by his mental issues and he will stop paying any attention to ANY criticism as 'he will know better' what with him being god and all.

describe things like racing thoughts and a flood of information filling his mind so fast it goes past in a blur. (he could view this as the prayers of the faithful leading to violence as he want them all to stop praying and give him some peace by the end)

Lots and lots of energy - THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT as without it nobody will credit it as realistic in the slightest.


Hope this helps

 

..... why does your description sound like me? (I'm not going insane or anything... I don't think) Anyways, I know I'm a little... young to be trying to help with something as complicated as insanity, but I have had many characters in stories I write that are slowly descending into insanity. When I saw this post, I immediately thought, "Deathnote". Light, the main character, becomes obsessed with an object that gives him power, and by the end I'm pretty sure he views himself as a god of sorts. Power, obsession and revenge are a few things that motivate insanity, I think. Maybe check out Edgar A. Poe's "Tell Tale Heart". I thought that was a pretty good image of how insanity looks.

 

And I just can't agree with your comment. It doesn't matter which one is worth more, it's about which one suits the story. I have seen movies with batsh*t crazy psycos in it and I've seen One Flew Over Cuckoo's Nest. It was an amazing film, my second favourite of all time. But it was realistic setting and it told the story of how people suffered in wards, how people with mental illnesses are still human and they should be considered human. But it's not the same with every story. If you are writing about a crazy villain or something along those lines, you don't have to make it that realistic beacause after all, what people really want to see in those stories are the crazy stuff, not how they suffer and feel.

And lies aren't all that bad. We love fantasy not because it is real but because it makes us believe the lies they are telling are real.

 

It might be because I've had mental health problems myself - I view things like the 'batshit crazy psychos' as being on the same level as racial stereotypes. Such stereotyping often leads to ignorance, which actually further stigmatizes the mentally ill. I'm sorry, I don't see the difference between your objection here and saying racial stereotypes are alright when they fit the story. And personally I don't want to be merely entertained.

 

Totally agree. It's much harder to write the mentally ill without the stereotypes - they definitely aren't as much fun that way. And it's so much easier to write the stereotypes than to produce a character who's realistic. Wouldn't want writers to actually work at it, would we?

 

I completely agree with Lemex that we shouldn't sacrifice truth for entertainment.

That said, I stumbled upon a couple of books you might want to check out:

Too Bright To Hear Too Loud To See by Juliann Garey, is a new release about a man who suffers from bipolar disorder. It has received wonderful praise for its treatment of the condition, and the author herself has it, so it's written from a position of knowledge. I'm about halfway through it and so far think it is very good.

Another book you might want to investigate is The Center Cannot Hold: My Journey Through Madness, by Elyn Saks. I have not yet read this one, which is a memoir about a person with schizophrenia. She wrote a piece in the New York Times this weekend discussing her condition, which I found very interesting. She was told at one point to forget about doing anything other than menial jobs, but she is now a professor of both law and of psychiatry, so I think the insights in that book might help you a lot with your story.

 

While I agree with the notion of researching the nature of mental illness to get a better grasp on how it might progress, it's just as critical that you write this out in a way that the reader falls into his demise as well. You see the beginning and the end, but the descent is kind of gray. Hell, that is like 90% of my writing process. One way is to literally draw a line and brainstorm plot arcs that propel the madness deeper and deeper. You need to envision scenes that will cause this person to fall further into their God complex. The trick is if you are really blank now, don't edit yourself too much. Sit down and say "what if" a lot and explore some branches here and there. The important part is not convincing the reader that your character has a clear cut case of schizophrenia, but instilling a rabid curiosity about what that guy is going to do next!

 

Well that all really depends on what kind of god complex he has. There's no one set criteria for what constitutes a god complex (except maybe the DSM IV and I'm fairly sure that there isn't something in there labelled "God Complex"). With all due respect, I don't think you can really say that a god complex is about controlling the world around you, and not being better than other people, because mental disturbances are all so nuanced and different. That will apply to some, and not others.

 

Also, Jazzabel raises a good point. I'm referring to a delusional belief that one is God, not a term people brand narcissists with.

 

I'm sorry if I have been rude in any way, that wasn't my intention. I guess I couldn't make my point good enough. I'm not saying that we shouldn't do any research and just go with what comes to mind. What I'm saying is that not everything needs to stick to realism for it to be good. Isn't that why sci-fi and fantasy genres exist? To escape from our reality to another reality, to have fun. Sure, they have realism to feed from, but a lot of stuff is made up. And batshit crazy psychos are fun too, if done well. Let's take a look at Joker. He is one of the craziest psycopaths, but he is one of the most popular comic characters of all time. Would Batman be the same without Joker or Harley? No. Would Batman be the same if Joker and Harley were more realistic? I don't think so. Maybe our disapproval comes from the fact that I think more in terms of comics rather than books but I still think the same applies to books more or less.

I also understand that you worry people who read these characters will think that mentally ill people are the same as those. But this is the same as saying that "There should be no sex in books, it's affecting our children!". In this case, it's not the books that need change but minds and view points. Education should raise children who are able to tell "made-up" from reality.

Those are my thoughts on the matter.

 

You were not rude, don't worry about it.

Fantasy and sci-fi both rely on the things they are representing not being real. Be it the Krogan of Mass Effect or the Orks of Lord of the Rings, you don't consciously assign them properties of actual people in the real world because the thing they are (not what they represent) is not real. If some literary critic makes the claim that the Orks of Lord of the Rings unconsciously represent the Germans, and Saruman is representative of Kaiser Wilhelm (for the record, this isn't impossible) I don't think anyone would really be offended. Things like Lord of the Rings often come from the writer dealing with their own prejudices in a safe way, and often they are not even aware they are doing it. Does this mean you can criticize Lord of the Rings for nationalism? Sure. And many actually do.

H.P. Lovecraft, that tower of 20th century horror, is often heavily criticized and parodied for his depiction of mental illness, mostly because everything he wrote about mental illness was wrong. To be fair to the guy, both his parents died in the throws of syphilis, or 'general paralysis of the insane', which is where I honestly think a lot of this idea about the mentally ill comes from. It would explain a lot if my little theory is right.

I don't read comics. From the sound of it I'm just not the sort who would enjoy them. And to be honest in that respect you do show your ignorance of mental illness. You seem to equate psychopathy as being 'crazy'; dangerous and violent and uncontrollable when it is infact diminished emotional responses. This includes things like shallowness, coldheartedness and superficial charm are aspects of psychopathy. In this respect Bill Clinton and Henry Kissinger are psychopaths, going off the things they have said and done. The 'crazy guy who poops in the corner and thinks he's an onion' is merely the most popular form of psychosis to represent, and people forget that most mental illnesses are not remotely like that.

It's not like saying 'there should be no sex in books because it's affecting children' at all. It's more like a book saying sex is sticking a man's penis into a woman's nose. If you don't know any better you might possibly believe it, but it only take a two second check to find out the truth. But yes, people do need to be able to tell truth from reality, but sadly they don't know any better when they have had little actual contact with what is represented.

 

What education are you talking about? That that our children get from reading books? Whose responsibility should it be ensure accuracy?

 

Along this line, as far as keeping to accurate depictions, especially about subject areas that many people don't know a whole lot about --
1) if you're writing a story that touches on a subject that a reader knows a lot about, and you get the details wrong, you've completely blown your credibility with that reader. If there are glaring inaccuracies, the reader will be distracted by the thought, "that's not right!" This harms the reading experience and may cause the reader to completely give up on reading your story

2) The same story, read by a reader who has no knowledge about that subject area, will not have the same problem as far as credibility. However, there's another danger, in that the reader could accept too readily what you have said or implied. The reader is not likely to go off on a research mission to learn more about the subject area. His limited reading time is not likely to be spent reading more scholarly or realistic treatments of whatever subject matter you're discussing. So, eventually, this chunk of knowledge becomes a significant part of what that reader thinks he knows about that subject matter. (We don't always remember where we read something, especially as time goes on, or how we learned it. Sometimes it's something we read in a novel.) Sometimes, the misunderstanding doesn't really affect us much. But if it's a subject such as mental illness, which can be encountered in real life by anyone at any time, that does have an effect. A misunderstanding can affect how the person treats the person with the illness, which affects a whole host of other people and affects policy areas in many fields -- healthcare, gun control, childcare, criminal sentencing, etc., that are influenced by public opinion.

So, if we're writing stories that are based on realistic issues -- that in any way purport to take place in the "real world," as opposed to a fantastical sci-fi world of the author's creation, it is important to get the details right, both for the author and for the reader. Because as much as we don't want our own inaccuracies to get in the way of our communicating the story we want to tell the reader, we also don't want our own inaccuracies to harm the reader by eventually making it into his understanding of the way the world works.

 

@Lemex

First of all, I'm not equating insanity with psychopathic behavior, but I believe they are related and not a slight enough relation to be unworthy of consideration. And I'm pretty sure Joker is both a psychopath and insane. And even if you don't read comics, have you never heard the Joker? Batman movies maybe? Cartoons? ( But you are correct, I don't know much about mental ilnesses.)

You've mentioned that H.P Lovecraft is criticized because of his wrong depiction of insanity, but he is still one of the best and most known authors. I haven't read the books but from what I've seen from the video games based on his works, I can say his depiction of was interesting and fun to experience. And I honestly think this is what's important. And I'm not claiming that every insane character should be depicted as homicidal murderers, that is wrong and discriminating. But I see no harm in tweaking mental ilnesses a bit and creating interesting characters.

Also, the reason I'm continuing the argument is that I think everyone can learn something from it, especially me.

@evelon

Please let's not start an argument on how education should and should not be. This is not the place for it. The only reason I mentioned it is because I think it is wrong to blame books for misleading(!) children while the one we should blame is the parents who did not teach their children to differentiate right from wrong.

 

I think this comes down to the personality of the writer. Everyone knows that successful novels and writers don't take anything lightly and the amount of research and creative interpretation of real life is apparent in those works.
And then there are poorly researched books that rely on ridiculous plot twists to the point that most readers will either roll their eyes or scratch their heads in confusion. It's up to individual writer which one he will strive for.

 

Then you didn't make that clear with sentences like 'He is one of the craziest psycopaths' so you'll have to forgive the misunderstanding.

Yes. Why do you ask?

I don't like the word insane because it is just a cheap way of saying psychosis, which is a word I like more because it doesn't have the baggage of ignorance.

The fact that he is well known now is meaningless (he became popular with the internet it seems) and him being the 'best' is hugely debatable. But this doesn't make his depiction of mental illnesses dignified or accurate. Lovecraft never stopped being a dorky teenager, and I can't help but notice most of his fan base are dorky teenagers. He's sort of like Ayn Rand, one of those people who you just sort of grow out of when you learn more about the world. So I must ask, would you honestly rather have kitsch and cheap thrills over works of art that stay with you across the years? I used to love H.P. Lovecraft when I was one of those dorky teens, and now I've just moved on whereas the novels that continue to stay with me are the more realistic, complex and beautiful ones.

Stephen King's The Shinning features a gift based on other apparent psychic gifts, since it wasn't anything real he gave it a fictional tag to set it apart from other apparent psychic gifts. In the novel the difference between the Shinning and other supernatural things. If writers did this, separating it from real illnesses and making that clear, as Harris did with Hannibal Lecter, then I wouldn't have a problem - when writers pass off lazy ignorance with a 'hey, don't ask why he does these things, he's just a crazy motherfucker' then I have a problem.

 

@Lenex
I asked because you simply said that you don't read comics, and what I understood from that sentence was that you did not know Joker. And considering he is so popular, both because of cartoons and the new films, I didn't find it likely that you do not know him. That's why I asked, to be sure.

You make it seem like insanity only means mental disorders. But it also contains things like mental instability, psychopathic behaviour and such which may or may not have any connections with mental disorders. Extreme trauma followed by strange and unstable behaviour can be called insanity too. And most of these batshit crazy characters which you accuse of being shallow are generally in these groups and don't really have any mental disorders. Well, at least most of the characters I've seen.

And you seem to forget that it's not always the best we seek for. The best example is the taste in music. You may find a superior song less attractive than the others

 

I don't mean to seem rude here but your ignorance of mental illness is shining through in this post. Insanity (not a word any good psychologist would use) or psychosis is abnormal behavior resulting from mental disorders. Psychopathy is a mental disorder, with symptoms including a lack of empathy and emotion. Trauma, especially when young, can lead to mental disorders developing. At least, that's according to the psychology books I've read.

Again, you seem to be thinking psychopathic = poo-throwing crazy. This just isn't the case.

As I've said, I don't want to be merely entertained. It's the difference between forgettable kitsch and unforgettable art.

 

I can't seem to get my point across because we're talking about totally different things. I think it's because of my poor English. Anyway, I'm tired this is going nowhere. I'm dropping from herem on.

 

The term "insane" or "insanity" is today only used formally in law - which, in the very way it is defined, shows how antiquated and ignorant the court system is. It is a word which should be used in writing just like the "N" word - to show ignorance and/or prejudice on the part of the speaker.

I just find it very difficult to understand why so many writers fight tooth and nail against coming into the 21st century when it comes to the mentally ill and their depiction in literature. Is it because they really don't understand how detestable the stereotypes are - or are they just too damn lazy?

 

I am astonished how you just don't get it. PTSD, "mental instability" as you refer to it and even psychopathy all have everything to do with mental disorders because that's exactly what they are. What is worrisome that you as a writer who wants to write about them, don't know that. This is what everyone is saying to you - any quality representation of "insanity" is always based on real mental disorders and illnesses, and it would do you good to familiarise yourself with them before you write a story who's plot revolves around this very theme.
I don't see how you could interpret this advice as irrelevant or unhelpful.

 

I am not a writer and I have no interest in writing about this theme. And yes, it was my mistake using the phrase "mental disorder". English is not my main language and what I meant was a different thing, which I do not know how to tell in English.