Mayhem!

I'd say do it, but make sure it ties into someone's character development, whether the berserker or the victim (if he survives). A character in my vampire novel loses both his eyes to the villain, and about half of his character arc involves coming to terms with the trauma. (The other half is potentially falling for the hero. XD) The villain in question is quite insane, and deals out punishment according to a specialized deck of cards, adapted from a drinking game developed by the vampires he rules over. The options include various types of dismemberment cards, one death card, and one mercy card.

 

Another day, another dismemberment. :smile: It's all good.

 

If you have to ask, it's not.

 

I've no problems with it.

 

The only problem I'd have with the scene is if made violence into a caricature. Outside of that, you're good with me.

 

I have no problem with the act as long as it's for a character or plot point and not just to be needlessly graphic.
but one question [and not one you can really Google without ending up on a list somewhere...] can someone actually rip an arm off with their bare hands?
I've done some wild butchery and even removing a deer's leg was hard work with a knife.

 

No caricatures here, I think. You're making it an extreme moment, as if most of your murders aren't quite so drastic (or if the killer mutilates people it might not be shown on the page). Caricatures start more when the carnage looks too easy and has no consequences, such as the movies that take a moment to linger whichever body part each thug loses when the MC slashes him out of the way.

A point. Then again, car-lifting levels of adrenaline...

Still, since it's your first scene, you may want to stick to that blade. Even after seeing her friend in peril, ripping off an arm barehanded is one savage first impression to make on the reader before the first curtain drops. (Though it might be interesting to do it if she spent the next five chapters working through "My God, did I really have that in me?")

 

I just mean that some people depict violence in a way that's so over the top, ridiculous, etc. that it loses the core idea of 'violence.' It can make it acceptable, or comedic, or what have you.

 

As a person, an innocent bystanding reader, I would have this to say about reading a dismembermant first thing in a book; "Blaaagh!"

Secondly, as a fellow writer, I would say it depends on the story and just how fast you want to throw your readers in. And into what. If the story is about a young lady suffering an identity crisis or something, then the dismemberment is a stretch. If that's the first thing some one reads they'll be expecting blood and guts and flying appendages.

So look ahead in the story. Are you planning for blood and gore and violence? Is your character going to become more psychotic through the story? If not then the young lady relieving this person of their limb could be a turning point. Just a suggestion.

 

I wouldn't say that. I know enough about Raimi and Tarantino to know that they are not trying to make light of or profit from violence.

The film equivalent of what I'm talking about is probably Cannibal Holocaust.

 

Well, here's where I view Tarantino - he has a very clear line between what he considers cinematic violence and real violence, and he takes his violence just to the point where it's horrifying (Reservoir Dogs) or clearly unbelievable (Kill Bill). Raimi is making a horror film, so I give him more leeway.

No, you don't want to know Cannibal Holocaust.

My problem comes when you have a story that is not violent or has no real need of violence, and violence is just used as a short hand for problem solving. I don't know what is happening with the story of the topic, so I just wanted to broadly express my concerns.

 

Well the first thing to consider is does it fit with your story? If you're trying to convey a point to the reader or to illustrate something important to the character or plot, is this the best way to portray it? If yes, then why not?

Secondly, yes you have a gruesome scene in mind. With that, do it justice and make it gruesome. After all, it IS gruesome, someone is depriving another of limbs and life. I Personally believe that if writers censor their work through fear of being overly gruesome, overly sexual etc they are doing themselves and the reader a great disservice.

 

Not too gruesome. Unless the beginning of the chapter pulls us into the character, really caring and rooting, then the minute the reader gets halfway through the spray of blood as the arms tore from the joint with a pop, then the book will be slammed shut. I've actually done that to a book.