Discuss the ways in which the two writers create heroes and villains. How do the Authors manipulate our responses?

Fraser Mason

10 Bridge

28/05/01

The two books that I will be analysing are ‘The Invisible Man’ by Herbert George Wells and ‘The Murderer’ by Ray Bradbury. Both writers concerned with write within the science-fiction genre.

‘The Invisible Man’, though the title gives the surprise in the book away, is the story of a young scientist named Griffin who pursues the knowledge to create invisibility for himself. Set in the 19th Century, the book follows him chasing after his books that had been stolen.

‘The Murderer’ is a story set in the future, though it was written in the 1960’s. It focuses on a Mr Albert Brock who becomes frustrated by mans reliability on the machine. Acting on this frustration, he decides to end the ‘lives’ of these machines and dubs himself the ‘Murderer’. His actions lead him into a mental institution where the story is set from the beginning and he is telling the psychiatrist his problems.

Wells and Bradbury had relatively different backgrounds. Bradbury had no actual scientific influences in his life (other than science-fiction books) so this suggests that he is a ‘second-hand’ science-fiction (sci-fi) writer. Wells however, was a first-hand sci-fi writer as he studied sciences at a number of schools and universities and even taught at some. When he retired from his career as a scientist, Wells began to write short stories. This was the start of his authoring career.

Although most pieces of fiction have stated heroes and villains, the lead characters in ‘The Murderer’ and ‘The Invisible Man’ are ambiguous in that whether they are heroes are villains is decided upon by the reader.

This is a preview of the whole essay

Although most pieces of fiction have stated heroes and villains, the lead characters in ‘The Murderer’ and ‘The Invisible Man’ are ambiguous in that whether they are heroes are villains is decided upon by the reader.

In ‘The Invisible Man’ Griffin, the lead character, commits a number of atrocities (killing the police sergeant, tying up the shop owner and robbing him) that strongly suggest that he is a villain. Thought the bad points weigh out the good when discussing Griffin if the reader stands back and appreciates Griffin’s plight, they feel sorry for him as he is very unlucky and nothing seems to go right for him. The largest change of feeling about Griffin comes at the close of the story when he is savagely beaten and killed by the navvies (to the disagreement of Dr. Kemp). When Griffin becomes visible again and is bruised and broken, even the characters in the book feel sorry for him. Griffin was, after all, one of the greatest scientific minds the world had produced.

Throughout the progress of ‘The Invisible Man’ the personal profile of Griffin shows that he is a very stubborn person and also very paranoid. We can view his paranoia in the story when he talks of his time in London, developing his theory of Invisibility. The only reason he is in London is so he can hide away in his apartment and work, to the annoyance of his neighbours. Griffin does not pay his landlord for the rent of his apartment and in this time creates invisibility for himself. After teasing the Jewish residents of the apartment building he sets it on fire, another factor adding to the villainous character Wells may be portraying.

We are told of Brock’s life in the past tense in a conversation with him and his psychiatrist. The crimes he had committed follow a general theme, destruction of machines. We are told that he is sick of all the technology in the world and man’s dependence on it. The villainous character Bradbury is trying to create can only be shown as Brock ‘killing’ the machines, killing being illegal.

Unlike most pieces of fiction, both stories do not have clear-cut heroes and villains. The reader can judge the main characters in both books, Griffin and Brock, hero or villain. They both act in ways that suggest points for both sides of the argument.

In ‘The Invisible Man’, Griffin, although committing atrocities can be seen to be chasing after books in an event to benefit science. Trying to benefit science can be seen as a good point for him.

Brock, although breaking machines, can be seen as a hero by different people. People who use a lot of technology like young people would think Brock a villain because they like machines. Older people would like to think Brock a hero as they have been used to no technology so they are happy that he is getting rid of it.

The other main character in ‘The Invisible Man’ is Dr. Kemp. Kemp knew Griffin when they were at school together studying science. Kemp is amazed and befriends Griffin but soon regrets it as he sees Griffin as the monster he is. Griffin then has a vengeance to kill him, as he is rather sour. Kemp stops Griffins reign of Terror on the world when he persuades him into the town when Griffin is chasing him. The Navvies in the town get a hold of him and beat him to death. Kemp did not want this to happen, as he is the only person in the book that appreciated Griffin for his scientific prowess.

There are no other real characters in ‘The Murderer’ that could be a hero or villain type character. The other character mentioned is his uncle that possibly started his techno phobia. His uncle used to believe that telephones were merely voices without bodies.

The main way in which both authors manipulate our hero/villain views on the characters is by 1) the preferences of the reader and 2) the actions of the character in the book. Throughout the book our views are fluctuated by the actions. When Griffin commits a murder, for instance, we feel hatred towards him but when he is killed we cannot help ourselves from feeling sad. The actions Brock takes are harder to define because, really, we can’t help but laugh at his actions. The undertone of ‘The Murderer’ though, is the real cause for the readers influence.

I think that the largest way that the author influences our thoughts is by influencing their characters’ actions to influence the readers’ conception of the character.