@dmoonfire this is a compelling story. I am most intrigued by how you used the quote, violence begets violence. It doesn’t matter who starts it, only that once begun, it will never end. In fact, that quote was what called me to read your piece, and I am glad I did. You illustrated how one act of violence causes a cycle of violence because many operate under the belief that violence must be met with violence in return. I have often wondered though, what if violence was met with kindness? Much like cold water added to hot changes the water into something other than hot, could the opposite energy of violence change the cycle into something new as well? Thank you for the opportunity to ponder this idea 🌱
From my experience, there is a greater chance that things with deescalate or at least not get worse if you answer violence with kindness. The same with just not responding at all. However, that takes a lot of willpower to be able to stand up and say "you attacked me, so I'm not going lash out".
Responding with violence will almost always get the same response back because as it becomes that cycle of reaction/action, it gets harder and harder to break out it. It feeds on itself so when it was possible to say "I'm sorry for calling your mother an idiot" is easier than "I'm sorry I stabbed you."
I'm a pacifist (for the most part), so I've been through that struggle not to lash out. There are times when I've wanted to do it, but I knew it could never get better. A good time was when a kid and I were having a fight in school. He ended up slamming my head into a locker, so I reported him. He was suspected, but then he started to threaten to run me over with his car. So... how do you respond to that and not make it worse? Well, I ignored it. But it was obvious he (and his friends, so he had peer pressure to go beyond his own) was willing to go one step farther which meant I couldn't be sure it would be just a threat the next time.
People who are angry wants that response. It may be a feeling of power, it maybe a desire, or it may be to avoid their own feelings. In this case, I set it up in the story before this one, Losing it Brick By Brick where you find out why Gertude and Ralnak gotten into that situation. However, Ralnak wants her to lash back because he wants to be angry. It doesn't matter if he was the one who killed his own parents, his guilt and anger needs her to be at fault. So when she doesn't give it to him, he escalates.
But, related to my own pacifism, threatening family is one of those things that I don't accept. Neither does her in this case. So she did the minimum required to stop him with the tools/abilities she had, and then moved on. I should have put in the scene where she hates herself for doing it and throws up, but I figured she is practical enough to just dismiss it and move on. Not to gloat or cheer herself, not to celebrate winning, but to just... move on.
Thank you.
Your commitment to a true portrayal of the character you have developed is admirable. My partner and I have often lamented that "lazy writing" caused a character in a book or movie to act in a way that was, well, out of character. I enjoy a book where the reader can infer a character's motivation for an action by analyzing their actions before. It takes the type of willpower you rightly say is needed to act in kindness in the face of violence, to stick true to the people you are creating on paper. I relate to Gertude's ability as a mother to "just...move on." Thank you for such a thought-provoking reply 🌱