Writing Prompt A Henchman ordered to do a bad deed, their choices thereafter.

[Razzle-Dazzle]

The henchman is been ordered to do a job, be it rough up some youngster, to bully someone daily, or do some arson and thieve.

What if the henchman is not an idiot? What if they think the boss the orders are stupid? What if they had a conscience? What choices would they make so they won't lose their job? Do this henchmen have a line that they won't cross? Where is the line?

 

[NotaNuffian]

The henchman is been ordered to do a job, be it rough up some youngster, to bully someone daily, or do some arson and thieve.

What if the henchman is not an idiot? What if they think the boss the orders are stupid? What if they had a conscience? What choices would they make so they won't lose their job? Do this henchmen have a line that they won't cross? Where is the line?

Answering your question in the most logical method which is to assume myself into the role.


Is the boss stupid/ lack awareness/ capable to be fooled with ease?
If yes then I might pretend to do the deed so as to get my goody heart at ease.

Fyi, conscience and being a mook does not really go hand in hand, often times you need to check why a mook's a mook, most of the time it is job aligns with personality or being poor aka not having a choice. If it is a former then the conscience portion may be neglected, but if it is the latter, then the mook needs to weigh the importance of being a good person and welfare of his family.

They might just blinding follow the order and blame everything on their master, which is often the case. Or they might just try and pull the wool over their boss' eyes and cut corners.

Again, henchmen are handy men, they are the contractors not the planners, their job scope might include last minute pullaway, but the last call is still on their boss, unless they are willing to lose their job/ lives disobeying.

 

[Assurbanipal_II]

Reminds me of the Milgram experiment.

"The Milgram experiment(s) on obedience to authority figures was a series of social psychology experiments conducted by Yale University psychologist Stanley Milgram. They measured the willingness of study participants, men from a diverse range of occupations with varying levels of education, to obey an authority figure who instructed them to perform acts conflicting with their personal conscience. Participants were led to believe that they were assisting an unrelated experiment, in which they had to administer electric shocks to a "learner." These fake electric shocks gradually increased to levels that would have been fatal had they been real.[2]

The experiment found, unexpectedly, that a very high proportion of subjects would fully obey the instructions, albeit reluctantly. Milgram first described his research in a 1963 article in the Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology[1] and later discussed his findings in greater depth in his 1974 book, Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View.[3]

The experiments began in July 1961, in the basement of Linsly-Chittenden Hall at Yale University,[4] three months after the start of the trial of German Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem. Milgram devised his psychological study to explain the psychology of genocide and answer the popular contemporary question: "Could it be that Eichmann and his million accomplices in the Holocaust were just following orders? Could we call them all accomplices?"[5] The experiment was repeated many times around the globe, with fairly consistent results.[6]"

 

[Razzle-Dazzle]

conscience and being a mook does not really go hand in hand

I think that is what fascinated me about the subject matter, I mean sure, most mook might just be parasitic sadist etc etc. But of the outlier... "good" might be a bit of a stretch, at lease henchman with a circumstance... or wants to be a painter...

The Idea that a person wants to change, the question of how and when that happens, what event would let someone realise that they don't have to be just who they are... I think is partly why I wrote this prompt.

 

[Assurbanipal_II]

I think that is what fascinated me about the subject matter, I mean sure, most mook might just be parasitic sadist etc etc. But of the outlier... "good" might be a bit of a stretch, at lease henchman with a circumstance... or wants to be a painter...

The Idea that a person wants to change, the question of how and when that happens, what event would let someone realise that they don't have to be just who they are... I think is partly why I wrote this prompt.

You are seeing all this form the wrong perspective, henchman and mook is already as subjective evaluation made from an outside perspective that denotes a certain party as inherently evil. For the "good" side that is obviously the case.

History shows that reality is much complicated and that humans are tribal creatures that prefer a black and white morality.

When US forces invaded Iraq, Bush said they were doing God's work and liberating the country. If you ask some Iraqis, however, you will get a very different interpretation of the same events and the Bush administration and their evil "henchmen".

 

[Johgral]

I think a henchman has the role of a Buffon they need to surprise their boss and do even worse, have idea even more exaggerate so they are interesting and worth keeping near you (and fall in a vicious circle of I can do even worse than you think)

He is in a position of inferiority so all his life turn around his boss he is like his secret lover who is being retained, kept, feed, lodged and so need the money and attention of his master and need to satisfy them the best they can.

The only line they won't cross is the reason why they entered in service of their boss and even then it depend.

To have a conscience against his boss would be like trying to win an invisible battle of who is superior between him and the master in his subconscious, like trying to walk faster than a stranger in the street expect it would be dangerous here because if he get catch not doing it then he will be punished and the master would take revenge on him for being deceived and the reason the henchman had to suck up to his boss would become even worse than before (be it family, personal confort, money, fame etc)

And because the ass above talked about psychologic study, I want to show I too know things. There is a study about how people receive authority and exerce it. By putting lambda people in a jail with other lambda people as gardien with certain rule the need to put but letting them largely free to how they do it and there is a red light that if it shine then mean the end of the study (the light would be the boss) and see how people adapt do etc and unsurprisingly it end badly here isn't the movie I saw but seem largely similar.
The Standford prison experiment movie.

 

[Assurbanipal_II]

I think a henchman has the role of a Buffon they need to surprise their boss and do even worse, have idea even more exaggerate so they are interesting and worth keeping near you (and fall in a vicious circle of I can do even worse than you think)

He is in a position of inferiority so all his life turn around his boss he is like his secret lover who is being retained, kept, feed, lodged and so need the money and attention of his master and need to satisfy them the best they can.

The only line they won't cross is the reason why they entered in service of their boss and even then it depend.

To have a conscience against his boss would be like trying to win an invisible battle of who is superior between him and the master in his subconscious, like trying to walk faster than a stranger in the street expect it would be dangerous here because if he get catch not doing it then he will be punished and the master would take revenge on him for being deceived and the reason the henchman had to suck up to his boss would become even worse than before (be it family, personal confort, money, fame etc)

And because the ass above talked about psychologic study, I want to show I too know things. There is a study about how people receive authority and exerce it. By putting lambda people in a jail with other lambda people as gardien with certain rule the need to put but letting them largely free to how they do it and there is a red light that if it shine then mean the end of the study (the light would be the boss) and see how people adapt do etc and unsurprisingly it end badly here isn't the movie I saw but seem largely similar.
The Standford prison experiment movie.

And because the ass above talked about psychologic study ... Is this a nice way to address people?

 

[Razzle-Dazzle]

You are seeing all this form the wrong perspective

Exactly, you are right, I think because the story is told from the perspective of the "henchmen" and as you say "already as subjective evaluation made from an outside perspective that denotes a certain party as inherently evil" because " humans are tribal creatures that prefer a black and white morality". However, "history shows that reality is much more complicated"

I think... what I thought was interesting.... was the gap of expecting the henchmen to be the one-dimensional creatures and the actuality of the nature of living breathing entities.

I suppose if I replace "henchmen" with other cardboard cut out stock character type, i.e High school student body president. I wonder if the same fascination can be garnered...

Is that how "Gap Moe" works? Discovering there is more depth to a person one has an inherent bias of?

 

[Razzle-Dazzle]

lambda people

what are Lambda people?


Edit: I know people have been using the terms Alpha and beta (I am not totally out of touch!) is Lambda the 11th of that ranking system?

 

[Assurbanipal_II]

Exactly, you are right, I think because the story is told from the perspective of the "henchmen" and as you say "already as subjective evaluation made from an outside perspective that denotes a certain party as inherently evil" because " humans are tribal creatures that prefer a black and white morality". However, "history shows that reality is much more complicated"

I think... what I thought was interesting.... was the gap of expecting the henchmen to be the one-dimensional creatures and the actuality of the nature of living breathing entities.

I suppose if I replace "henchmen" with other cardboard cut out stock character type, i.e High school student body president. I wonder if the same fascination can be garnered...

Is that how "Gap Moe" works? Discovering there is more depth to a person one has an inherent bias of?

Who knows, but many readers say my gap moe is strong and I make them sympathise even with the other side.

 

[Johgral]

Lambda only mean any or mundane.......but it work only in French, thought it was kind of universal my bad.

Is this a nice way to address people?

Sorry it was more to take someone with me when jumping from the cliff as a memento, like when someone quote a celebrity to give an argument an air of profoundness. Well sorry in short.

 

[Assurbanipal_II]

Lambda only mean any or mundane.......but it work only in French, thought it was kind of universal my bad.


Sorry it was more to take someone with me when jumping from the cliff as a memento, like when someone quote a celebrity to give an argument an air of profoundness. Well sorry in short.

*just even more confused* *scratching head*

 

[BenJepheneT]

Reminds me of the Milgram experiment.

"The Milgram experiment(s) on obedience to authority figures was a series of social psychology experiments conducted by Yale University psychologist Stanley Milgram. They measured the willingness of study participants, men from a diverse range of occupations with varying levels of education, to obey an authority figure who instructed them to perform acts conflicting with their personal conscience. Participants were led to believe that they were assisting an unrelated experiment, in which they had to administer electric shocks to a "learner." These fake electric shocks gradually increased to levels that would have been fatal had they been real.[2]

The experiment found, unexpectedly, that a very high proportion of subjects would fully obey the instructions, albeit reluctantly. Milgram first described his research in a 1963 article in the Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology[1] and later discussed his findings in greater depth in his 1974 book, Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View.[3]

The experiments began in July 1961, in the basement of Linsly-Chittenden Hall at Yale University,[4] three months after the start of the trial of German Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem. Milgram devised his psychological study to explain the psychology of genocide and answer the popular contemporary question: "Could it be that Eichmann and his million accomplices in the Holocaust were just following orders? Could we call them all accomplices?"[5] The experiment was repeated many times around the globe, with fairly consistent results.[6]"

This man included the fucking references and hyperlinks holy shit lmao

 

[Assurbanipal_II]

This man included the fucking references and hyperlinks holy shit lmao

Why bother writing when I copy from wikipedia?

 

[Razzle-Dazzle]

Lambda only mean any or mundane

Interesting, I did not know that.... but less interesting than what google / urban dictionary told me

Lambdas
A group of men, usually of Asian descent, with abnormally large penii, found grouped together at your local Asian-American gatherings, picking up all the women and making other men envious of their penii.

Which I found hilarious. The obvious questions being: Why? How is this a thing? And why is penis size a factor in a version of the Standford prison experiment?

So many questions.... But well thats over now....

 

[SailusGebel]

It depends on whose henchman it is. How long he was a henchman. And most importantly if there was an indoctrination. After all, those around us influence our characters. And what if the said henchman was serving long ago while listening to the propaganda? His conscience would erode as the times go. Also, people tend to deliberately or unconsciously ignore bad memories. Any kind of power sooner or later would erode your personality. If you know or feel that you won't be punished, you would start doing worse things. The feeling of impunity is very dangerous.
And what if he was a sociopath? They think completely differently from the "normal" people. They don't feel pangs of conscience at all.
You can't be a "good" thug or gangster. The more organized band will have some code of honor but it isn't anything special. It's more like a rule for themselves, and when they fight between each other rather than being good. And if you are going into a more organized gang there will probably be no way back.
What will he do if he isn't an idiot? He would act like one if needed because you can't go against your boss's words. It doesn't matter if it's an underworld or an office work.
What if he thinks the orders are stupid? Same problem as the above one. If you think it's stupid you can't do anything. You can quit your work and find a better place where your boss won't be a moron. However, can you do it in the underworld? Don't think so.
What if they had a conscience? Well if he is a smart guy he would try and do the task the way it won't hurt anyone. Or at least try and minimize the damage. That's of course if he isn't watched by his direct superiors or companions.
Do these henchmen have a line that they won't cross? Where is the line? The answer is how long he is serving and where. I don't want to include politics, but not so long ago in one post-soviet union country, an actual special forces that used to catch terrorists were beating peaceful people and even killed some of them. Why? Because they had an order.
Henchmen don't have a line, because they are either fighting for their survival, that way they would do anything no matter how bad they think it is. Or they deliberately chose this path, that way I don't think they have any conscience left.

 

[picklecake]

If we are trying for a realistic perspective, the henchman is trying to advance his own interests or the interests of the group. If we are making this henchman the protagonist, it would make sense to have him prove himself to the group so that he can advance to a more influential position in the gang/organization.

One way would be demonstrating loyalty by an excessive show of force or aggression. This causes problems for the organization, but at the same time is hard to criticize. Another way would be a clever workaround to given orders to give a better than expected result, but not necessarily with violence. The second way allows the protagonist henchman to build respect within his organization without compromising his morals and/or allows him to distinguish himself from the leader. This sets the henchman up for a potential confrontation with the leader as he constantly usurps authority.

I've never been a fan of the wavering subordinate narrative. It usually presents the henchman as an everyman, who is caught up in some evil machination that they had little control over. The reality though is that a normal person in the same situation would likely remain loyal/obedient unless insurmountable odds are stacked against the organization. It would take an unusual person or someone who has an ulterior motive to betray the group. You would expect a normal person to not want to betray the people that he may have known for years over some moral qualm.

 

[melomarl]

The henchman is been ordered to do a job, be it rough up some youngster, to bully someone daily, or do some arson and thieve.

What if the henchman is not an idiot? What if they think the boss the orders are stupid? What if they had a conscience? What choices would they make so they won't lose their job? Do this henchmen have a line that they won't cross? Where is the line?

For some reason, I thought of Sebas from Overlord

 

[K5Rakitan]

I'd take a page out of Snow White and have them present false evidence that they had completed the task.

 

[Deleted member 29081]

The henchman is been ordered to do a job, be it rough up some youngster, to bully someone daily, or do some arson and thieve.

What if the henchman is not an idiot? What if they think the boss the orders are stupid? What if they had a conscience? What choices would they make so they won't lose their job? Do this henchmen have a line that they won't cross? Where is the line?

The henchman will accept his fate to be someone's villain, and, along with it, his fate to meet retribution. Without him, there is no adversity. By engaging in villainy, he gives the heroes a reason to exist. Without him, life lacks meaning. He must suffer by making others suffer.