Analysis Of The Psychology Of Evil By T. C. Boyle

924 Words 4 Pages
T.C Boyle is a great author, and there is no doubt about it. The way he portrays his view on society in the book tortilla curtain has enlightened many people in the classroom including myself on issues that portray both sides, although clearly biased with the authors liberal views. In the TED talk titled The Psychology of Evil Dr. Philip Zambardo discusses the “slippery-slope” that essentially leads absolutely normal human beings to become in a sense psychotic, obsessive, and dangerous to society. Many people today presume that humans are naturally good, but as presented in the following arguments, unfortunately it is not always the case. Some might also suggest that it is a combination of individual weakness and societal influence, and that …show more content…
What differs people is whether they acknowledge their hate is merely irrational, or whether they enter the mentality of us vs. them. This is applicable to not only the book, but also to real life, where clear divide is shown between individuals political affiliation and hate displayed between the sides involved. Delaney is a great example to this, specifically speaking of the aftermath of him hitting Candido: “Delaney felt his guilt turn into anger, to outrage.” (Boyle 11). The author provides the reader with an insight to what might happen as the story progresses. To Delaney turning his guilt to anger, to violence. This is not an uncommon thing in the dated political scheme. In fact, many people realize they are in the wrong, but in order to not show weakness, resort to violence against others. It does not matter who people blame: whether it is “white privilege”, the patriarchy, or illegal immigration - they fail to see the truth, in order to back up their sense of moral superiority and subjective …show more content…
This has the effect of alleviating how much one is responsible for his actions. The same argument can be attempted to be made in Delaney's case, just like they are used in society. These arguments have a tremendous damage, because by telling individuals it is not their fault they are murderers, but it is their environment’s fault, it essentially justifies the killing, or empowers the individual to not take action to better himself. It feeds people the lie that they are the victims of the system, and the people buy it. This argument, can be debunked, but specifically in Delaney’s case, the reader is aware of Delaney’s self awareness trait. Delaney even takes action when he feels injustice: “That’s racist, Jack, and you know it.” (Boyle 101). Delaney believes with his subjective opinion that Jack’s statement is wrong, and even attempts to inform Jack that he is “wrong”. This displays Delaney’s awareness of his environment’s actions, while ignoring his individual actions and wrongdoings, like when Delaney hits Candido with his car, essentially treats him in an inhumane manner by giving him 20$, while he plays on his moral superiority by calling Jack a racist. He calls everyone a racist, but ignores his own wrongdoings. This further eliminates the personal responsibility Delaney feels towards the events that happen in his life, as he leads himself down the “slippery slope of

Related Documents