No, we’re not saying anthropomorphize your weapon. But here’s the thing, the best way to prove to your reader that your character knows what they’re doing isn’t what they do in the middle of a fight. It’s the behavior they exhibit outside of it, especially during their downtime.
Every weapon is unique and I don’t simply mean that in the way that a bastard sword and a broadsword are two completely different weapons. They may look almost the same, but when you look at them closely, you’ll notice many differences between them that are key to how they were used in combat. So make sure you know which weapon your character is using, calling it a sword or a gun is not good enough, know which one it is, what it was and is still used for, and how it works.
Now, it’s even more important to mention that even weapons that are direct off the factory line like handguns and rifles are all individually unique. No gun, even of the same make and model, is exactly the same as another. Each has their own individual tics and flaws in their construction for how well they work and what needs to be done to care for them.
Handguns specifically are more subject to wear and tear because of their internal mechanisms and more personal customization. For example, the Walther P99 comes with three different grips designed for the shooter’s hand to be configured out of the box. If you add a tactical flashlight to the weapon, then you change its balance and recoil. This means the weapon will look and feel different from weapons of a similar make.
Any character who has had their weapon for a long period of time will know the ins and outs of it. They’ll have to. For a character that fights their weapon is their lifeblood, it’s their most precious possession, in some cases it’s essentially their best friend. Now, a character that doesn’t properly care for their weapon and ignores basic safety is a danger to themselves and those around them. But in fiction, that can definitely be a distinctive character trait to that character. This is why it’s so important for authors to get to know the weapons they plan on using, simply because then they’ll know what makes a good practitioner and what doesn’t so they can adjust the character’s behavior according to what they need for their story.
No matter what the weapon is, a character who is a warrior or who fights will be defined by how well they care for that weapon and their gear.
Here are some ways a weapon can indicate a character’s state to the reader without any dialogue being necessary:
In the beginning of the story, Joe’s sword is pristine and in perfect condition, we constantly see him cleaning it and sharpening it after each battle as the novel progresses, Joe’s traveling companion Jason begins to notice small signs of wear in Joe based on the blood left on the hilt and that the annoying amount of time Joe spends cleaning his weapon is getting shorter and the blade is getting duller. The more battles there are and the worse it gets until Jason finally steps in to confront Joe about his behavior. This can lead to a moment of crisis for Joe that allows us to see into a character who wouldn’t normally converse about these emotions. The state of the weapon can also be used to show the reader, who may like Joe, that he’s not doing well and encourage emotional investment in his character because it’s obvious he’s having a difficult time.
In the hands of an aware author, this can be a way to humanize characters that are usually unlikeable without ever having to go inside their heads. You also can’t just take a character’s personal weapon from them and give them another with the expectation they’ll be interchangeable. Even a practitioner who is skilled with multiple different arts will have difficulty period adjusting a weapon they aren’t used to using. This is because every weapon is an individual and just like their wielder, should be a considered a character in their own right.
Ask yourself some important questions dealing with your weapon and your setting:
Is the weapon your character uses common in the setting they are living in?
If not and even if it is, where and who did they get it from?
How much effort will they have to put in to care for their weapon? If it’s a rare weapon or one that has fallen out of use, they may have to have some skills in basic chemistry to construct the gunpowder or the oils they’ll need.
Why do they use this weapon instead of another? Were they trained in its use or are they self-taught? If they did learn from someone, then who was it and who taught their teacher?
If it’s a projectile weapon is the ammunition for it readily available or will they have to manufacture it themselves? If you’re using a more exotic weapon like a matchlock or a flintlock pistol, this will be extremely difficult even if your character has the chemical understanding to manufacture the gunpowder because getting flint in the proper configuration will be a pain if it’s not readily available in the setting. Flint will wear down over time.
How durable is the weapon? Will it require a lot of special care? If your character is using a katana, it’s best to keep in mind that there is a significant difference between blades forged in Japan today and older blades made using the natural iron deposits found in Japan. The older katanas are very rare because though they didn’t see a lot of use, they weren’t very durable. If it’s a different sort of bladed weapon, they’ll need something like a whetstone to be able to keep the weapon sharp and hammer out the inevitable dents the weapon will receive if there’s no blacksmith readily available. (You won’t be able to do this with any katana that pre-dates WWII. You may be able to hone one though, research as needed).
Is this a weapon that another trained practitioner or even local law enforcement will recognize? If yes, will carrying it get them into trouble with the local authorities? If not, why not? It’s important to remember that even today in states like California, the bow and crossbow are regulated weapons that require a permit to be purchased and owned legally. If your character is living under a restrictive regime, the number of weapons they will have access to and be able to effectively hide will be limited. So pick one that makes sense for the world they live in, not just their profession and their skill set.
Here are some ideas for how to include weapon cleaning scenes in a narrative:
You don’t need to take time out to specially point out that your character is doing this or make a big deal out of it. Besides, that would be strange for them since for most warriors these tics in behavior come naturally and are a package part of their training.
You can have them cleaning and caring for their weapon while they are in the middle of a conversation with another character if they are a center of that scene.
You can show them cleaning their weapon in the background of a tense conversation that they may be watching but doesn’t involve them. It will only take a few lines to show what they are doing through other characters basic observation skills.
Sometimes, it’s important to show non-combat characters feeling threatened by the fact that they have the weapon out and annoyed by the fact that this character isn’t paying attention to them even though they are.
Depending on a character’s martial style, they may have an annoying habit of being up and mobile. They’ll pace, they’ll stretch, even just during normal conversation. Character A stretching can be very distracting for Character B if they are sexually attracted to them. It’s important to remember that stretching can be done in complete innocence or with the intention of arousal, depending on who the characters are and what their personality is.
Weapons are an easy source of tension because for many people who don’t fight (and even some who do) they are threatening. One of your characters may not even realize that the fact they have their rifle out and in pieces on the table with a loaded handgun right next to it might be perceived as a threat by another character. Or, the fact that they are cleaning their weapon could be a threat, such as sharpening their sword with a whetstone. It could be a way to indicate annoyance. So, think about where they lay out their weapon, what direction it’s facing, where they choose to look, and how fast they are going. A character’s body posture can communicate a lot without them ever having to say anything or it could suggest to the reader (and the other character if they’re good at reading body language) that they mean the opposite of what they are saying.
The time it takes for a character to get their weapon ready or put away can be a hindrance, especially if it’s a weapon like the bow where such action is necessary to maintain the battle-readiness of the weapon. This action can be used to cause narrative tension between those who just want to get on with it while the first character needs to make sure their weapon is prepared right.
Here’s an example of a good use of an exotic weapon in fiction and how it affects the character:
Marcus in Babylon 5 is an excellent example of how to make use of an exotic weapon in a narrative without it being either ostentatious or aggravating. In the show, Marcus carries an Mimbari fighting pike, which is an alien weapon carried by the race Humanity was at war with ten years before the series starts. It’s a rare weapon even among the Mimbari, used only by high ranking members of their warrior caste. In the weapon’s natural state it has the advantage of not looking like one. But even in combat, it’s a weapon that most people won’t recognize. The problem for him, though, is that veterans of the war will (and do in the show) recognize it as a Mimbari weapon and they react, often according to old prejudices. The weapon also puts him at odds with members of the Mimbari warrior caste when he encounters them because it’s offensive for him to be using one of their traditional weapons. It also means he was extensively trained in what his own people consider to be an alien fighting style and a fighting style used by the enemy. The people who see the weapon for what it is are left uncertain of where his loyalties lie and whether or not he can be trusted.
The pike serves as a method of showing to the audience how Marcus is a balance between the two races while also being isolated by it and pushed to the outside edge of both communities. It’s an excellent demonstration of what a weapon can mean for a character beyond them just carrying around a unique shiny that makes them special.
Every aspect included in your story must be there for a reason. This includes a character’s weapon.
MBC Guerrilla Video Volume 1: Concepts (by StaySafeMedia)
So, I’m posting another Michael Janich video. This one is about basic concepts that have to do with self-defense and his own personal style that bases itself in knife fighting.
I’m a big fan of self-defense training for everyone, but on a craft level for writers especially. The difference is that many martial artists will focus their training on how to do a technique and not the focus of what it’s for until after the student has developed a decent base. This is fine, even good, for martial artists because it’s a necessary step. But it can make researching MAs rather obtuse when trying to divine how it works without the necessary years of training. Practice for real world situations often won’t happen until the upper belt ranks and sometimes, not until black belt. For example, I didn’t start working knife disarms until I started training for my second degree black belt test at 15.
Compare to self-defense, where training focuses on techniques that can be picked up easily and puts a primer on user understanding. The focus is not just on how to do a technique, but what it is and what it does, how it can be used practically and with different variations. This is the sort of information a writer needs to be able to write about fight scenes well.
Also, studying up on body mechanics and basic physiology never hurts.
I’ll be posting an article of my own later today. If you have any questions either regarding writing or self-defense, our askbox is always open.
This is the last anon, and thanks so much for your answer! I left a couple things out that I shouldn’t have – for one, the world is a dystopia, and the soldiers actually enlist around 12, and start their training after pushing a lot of different things to accelerate growth. So even though he’s only 24, he’s actually been involved in the military for half of his life, which I’m assuming is enough time for a specialty? I don’t know what that specialty is yet, but thanks so much for your help!
This is going to be a sensitive topic for a lot of people and as such, we requested for the sake of our followers and all of you out there who’d like to avoid this very traumatic topic that we could put it in a regular post so we could have the “read more” option, beyond just the ability to list it with trigger warnings for child abuse, abuse, and child soldiers. This will be a disturbing topic to go through and we are by no means experts on the subject, we’ll answer this question as best we can and give some help to those of you out there looking to write dystopias dealing with kids. In this post, we’ll be some basic developmental psychology, the technical limitations of messing with human biology in regards to creating human weapons, child soldiers, and with some helpful suggestions for what a writer can do instead, if this topic proves to be a bit too much to handle.
Child soldiers, while very dramatic, are one theme that can go off the rails very quickly. It’s important to remember when dealing with dystopia that the limitations of human nature, psychology, and the world today are very important to the novel’s dramatic elements. A dystopia isn’t a potentially bad future with a totalitarian government. It’s a society characterized by human misery, disease, and overcrowding and living within that society with no hope of escape. Dystopias are not, despite what the current climate may lead us to believe, happy stories.
Some good Dystopias to turn to for reference are: A Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, A Handmaid’s Tale by Margaret Atwood, Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury, 1984 by George Orwell, Native Son by Richard Wright (A rare non sci-fi version), and The White Tiger by Aravind Adiga (slightly lighter than the rest on the list).
Warning: These are all ridiculously depressing books, so prepare accordingly.
The rest is under the cut. It’s pretty long.
Take it away, Starke!
Well… this was not what I wanted to write when yesterday started.
So, I’m going to start with a few caveats: I’m not doing a lot of research on this one, it’s going to be mostly off the top of my head, from memory. The reason is; the phenomena of child soldiers can be really fucking depressing to look at in any depth. Again, it’s important to remind everyone that I’m not an expert on the subject. So, research on your own will still be required (like it usually is). I took a few classes in college that required I learn more than I’d like on the subject, most of which dealt with politics in third world countries, and I’ve tried not to think about it too much since.
Finally, once again, I’m not a psychologist, developmental or otherwise, I’ve had some psych classes, but I’m a political analyst by education, which means I’ve had to learn more about this than I’d like, but I’m by no means an expert.
Let’s start with the easy stuff, the sci-fi setting and working with growth acceleration. We’ll start with talking about some basic economics surrounding growth acceleration, how this technology gets funded and some reasons why real scientists today are studying it. Then, we’ll get into some basic world building questions and discuss some of the weaknesses of this particular technology, before moving on.
Growth acceleration as it exists today is based around the idea of creating meat more rapidly by introducing hormones into livestock at earlier ages, so that they grow faster and thus be slaughtered more quickly. Growth acceleration is studied and tested for two very basic but different reasons:
1) The Capitalist Reason: by reducing the amount of time it takes for an animal to mature into adulthood, means that there will be more meat available to sell and more money ranchers and slaughterhouses can make. Before it sounds like I’m being unfair, let me remind you that both farming and ranching are both incredibly difficult jobs. Much of what they make relies on the climate of the markets they sell to (whether or not people want to eat meat and the amount of meat they are eating), weather (to provide grass and grain for the cows), and disease. Growth acceleration is a way for them to make up the difference and feed their families when they’ve been left to the vagaries of fate. It’s an idea that sounds appealing to most of them. So, this is one way this sort of research gets funded.
2) The Altruist Reason: Meat is expensive to produce, it’s expensive to ship (it’s expensive to flash freeze and by the time it ships overseas it’s usually rotting), and most of the major buyers and sellers are limited to first world countries such as those in Europe and America. This cuts the vast majority of meat being bought and sold out from those starving in Third World countries. Growth acceleration through hormone treatments would be a way, once spread widely, to substantially cheapen meat on the global market and to allow smaller farmers who only have a capacity to maintain a limited stock to produce more meat to make more money, and feed more people in the places where meat is too expensive and the locals too poor for meat to be a regular part of their diet. Feeding people is generally a pretty good, understandable goal.
Sounds pretty reasonable (Michi Note: if you’re not a vegan), for the most part right? Remember, when setting up a sci-fi society, it’s important to look at things like economics, politics, and sociology, so that it is clear for the reader where the tech came from. Sci-fi is often (though it doesn’t need to be) Earth future. So, there has to be a clear line for how we got from here (using growth acceleration on livestock and crops) to there (using it to artificially accelerate the growth of children into adult-sized soldiers). You’re also going to have to be able to answer some basic questions for your reader, such as why are they using children when they could be using adults? If they have the tech to artificially age soldiers, then why aren’t they just using clones? We’ll deal with this below. Whose children are they using in this endeavor? People generally take issue with their children being taken from them, though there are some easy ways to get around this such as using slaves, the socially disenfranchised, the fiscally indebted, and orphans. There are other more basic questions also like how did this happen and who is in charge? Remember, you can’t just say how it happened. You have to present it in a manner that is easy for the reader to grasp and see when looking at the world around them.
Secondly, there are some serious problems with growth acceleration and the indications of what that could mean for using it on people. First: the skeletal system has a tendency to rapidly harden instead of growing to adult size. This wouldn’t be as large a problem for an adult force, but since you’re talking about 12 year olds, this has some very serious implications for how useful your society’s combat forces will be overall.
Now, this flaw can be overcome with extensive surgery, but this is expensive. More than that, soldiers need to be relatively cheap and easy to mass produce. An expensive solution is just that and every government, (Michi Note: even corrupt ones!) must weigh their decisions based on overall effectiveness at producing the desired result versus whether or not it’s economically viable. No government is going to get very far by running out of money in the middle of a war and even if they put the majority of the budget towards military expenditures there’s a lot more important things than soldiers to spend money on. Ordinance, new technologies, etc, are all considerations. If you take a look at modern American military spending, you’ll notice that the vast amount of their resources are put towards R&D projects, developing new and better ordinance, and even some of the weird stuff that comes out of D.A.R.P.A. pulls down more money than what goes towards taking care of America’s current standing forces and retired soldiers. So, here’s the question: why spend money on creating better soldiers when you can take normal humans and just give them better weapons?
Find a realistic answer to that question and you may have the basis for your book.
The second consideration on growth acceleration is that it’s designed around causing musculature to overdevelop, (Michi Note: More meat from fewer cows) meaning you’d end up with people who look like bodybuilders and they’d end up with some fairly substantial heart issues. For a modern combat force, this isn’t really desirable. You want your soldiers strong enough to carry their gear, and be able to operate it, but you don’t want musclemen, because muscles are freaking heavy.
Extra muscle means extra weight your vehicles have to account for and designed around supporting, you’ll need more downtime for your troops to keep their muscles from atrophying during the extended periods of required travel, they’ll need more food, and (to an extent) too much muscle means less mobility in the field.
The growth hormones we use have the side effect of increasing aggressiveness, at least in males. This is good if the society in question is looking to create suicide bombers, but over-aggressive responses are undesirable in a disciplined military force. You don’t want your soldiers beating up each other in the barracks before they get on the battlefield, too much testosterone and you end up dealing with too many soldiers in the Medical Tent who could be serving on the battlefield. Remember, the reason soldiers are created in the most basic and cruel sense is to spend them against the enemy. If they’re ignoring orders and attacking each other then why bother using them in the first place? Their usefulness to the society must outweigh their detriment, even if the intention is just for them to die on the battlefield.
The third consideration involves cell replication: because the process is massively accelerating cell replication, you’re going to end up looking at a much higher risk of mutations, including cancer. Basically, we’re talking about “replication errors”, whenever a strand of DNA copies itself, it will create a strand to verify that the copy is accurate. Obviously, even in nature this isn’t 100%, if you speed up the process, more errors will occur.
The only reason this isn’t an issue with modern growth hormone technology, is because we’re not really accelerating the replication process. It’s the difference between saying “don’t stop”, and “go faster”.
Finally, and I could be wrong here, but you can’t really artificially stimulate the brain to develop into adulthood. Even if you can get the brain and body to adult size, some fairly simple concepts like risk vs. reward, critical thinking, and threat assessment are simply not going to be there. And because of the accelerated growth, those traits probably never will be. (Michi Note: Those are essential traits to have in any soldier other than a shock trooper.)
Now, here’s some of the good news. Depending on your setting, you can pretty easily wave off the skeletal/muscular issues, and, with the way the technology has evolved for use on the farmyard, we’ll probably actually have those dealt with before your story’s set.
The bad news is that the neurological issues are harder to overlook. First off, because the primary application for the technology right now isn’t humans. Since, the development revolves around spurring growth to create more meat on the bones of cows with the intention of them not surviving long after, there’s little attention being paid to the neural problems that come with acceleration and there’s little interest in dealing with it because, frankly, it’s not a concern.
Secondly, the brain is unlike every other organ in your body.
Still with me?
This is where we get into the idea of genetics. One of the basics of genetics is that your DNA produces the basic template for your body. The same is not completely true for your brain. You can blame your DNA for it’s warm butter consistency, it’s color, and the basic structure, but the content, and even the way it works are apparently very customizable.
This is where we get into the importance of developmental psychology.
Here’s what some research on nature vs. nurture has left us with: the brain is incredibly good at picking up new skills, new information, and new ways of processing data. These traits are especially strong in childhood. In this field, we’ve begun to find that a lot of those old boys vs. girls debates have more grounding in how these children were socialized in early childhood. Many behaviors we express are not inborn and natural, but gained as we develop, there are even some studies that state that there’s very significant neural architecture acquired by the child as they age. Some stuff about us is hardcoded into our DNA, but a lot of what’s been chalked up as predetermined by nature, actually isn’t.
This is why studying developmental psychology, even without the child soldier context, is extremely important to look at. I strongly advise you study up on at least some of the research that’s come out of developmental psychology in the last 10 years. Honestly, there’s some really fascinating stuff to be had there for any writer, with a lot of implications for writing any type of character you want. It’ll also help you sidestep some common stereotypes.
Okay, now that we’ve dealt with growth acceleration, let’s look at some alternate options for sci-fi before we get to the child soldier aspects.
Let’s start with neural control chips. I’m not sure on a timescale of how soon something like this will be possible, but it has some really scary implications for your characters, if it can simply override the soldier’s brain. (If you want to keep some of the child soldier themes, while getting rid of the actual child soldiers, this could still be a good option for you to work with.)
Second is direct neural encoding. That is to say, using drugs, technology, whatever, you actually imprint a lot of information into your soldier. Depending on the technology, this could give you a way around the development issue, and it doesn’t have quite as much the control chips. I would strongly caution you against pushing it into actual mind control serum, as that wouldn’t really fix the basic problems, and it would leave your soldiers much more vulnerable to manipulation by enemies. Even basic intelligence could yield methods of disrupting any force using mind controlled troops. An intelligent and aware soldier can distinguish falsified orders a lot more effectively than a brainwashed one.
Okay, take a step back and let your brain think about the last stuff. Good, now, let’s get into the child soldier discussion.
The honest truth is that child soldiers don’t make for good combatants and they’re not supposed to. They make for convenient shock troops. But the point of a shock trooper is that they are expected to die in combat, not that they are expected to fight. A shock trooper is not given any real training and they are considered to be completely expendable by the force that’s using them. So, why would someone want to use child soldiers? Well, unfortunately, the assholes that use them have recognized that giving children guns comes with some convenient perks. The major advantages to child soldiers are these: adult combatants have a harder time killing them, thus giving them more opportunity to kill the enemy before dying themselves; they’re cheap to obtain in most warzones with a convenient unprotected supply already in place, and securing their loyalty is much easier than with adult combatants, who are better able to critically think and process information in the world around them.
The indoctrination process with child soldiers is one that’s designed to shift their loyalties from their parents to the warlord who is using them. Unlike adults, they’re not going to have conflicting loyalties based in ideology or nationalism, so if a warlord can remove their parents, the child has nowhere else to go and no one else to turn to for guidance but the warlord and other, already indoctrinated children.
In Africa, the warlord’s lieutenants will force the child, at gunpoint, to kill their parents. If the child refuses, they’ll be executed with their parents and another child will be selected. The child will be renamed something suitably aggressive sounding (most of these names are drawn from comic books or other media, so things like Psychokilla and Superboy are common). They’ll be placed in a community with other child soldiers and before battle they’ll be dosed with something called BamBam, (a mixture of cocaine and gunpowder) which they’re told makes them immune to bullets, immune to harm, and or immortal.
Then, they’re sent out to die. When they do, they’re replaced with new conscripts, and the cycle begins again.
A few do survive into adulthood. But those who make it are left, understandably, with serious psychological issues. Severe PTSD is practically automatic, they commonly have issues with human empathy that’s probably best described as psychopathic and have a general inability to interact with other human beings as, well, human beings, rather than something to be shot and killed. This isn’t beyond the range of psychological therapy, but without it, survivors are a real mess.
Survivors wouldn’t be able to train other characters, really, at all. Their own training would have covered using their weapon, and nothing else. They don’t receive training in leadership, or command, those are handled by less expendable adults. They couldn’t receive training on a lot of more advanced hardware (artillery, aircraft (helicopters or other VETOLs especially, but fixed wings are also out), any naval craft larger than a launch or (maybe) a soft bottom PT boat).
We’ve seen a rise in recent years of the use of child soldiers in South America, they’ve been used in southeast Asia, and (arguably) in some places, young gang members in the United States may actually qualify. The methods aren’t always as extreme as in some African nations, but the long term damage is.
It’s important to remember that current international law regards child soldiers as a form of slavery, because of the coercive control over the children. There have been many, mostly unsuccessful efforts to curb the practice by various international NGOs (non-governmental organizations) in the last 30 to 40 years.
Child Soldiers, as adult characters, aren’t really suited to war stories. I’m sorry. If you want to handle the material in a serious way, this is probably an element that should be jettisoned. If you want to write about a child soldier dealing with their experiences, you can certainly do that, and you could develop something very interesting and compelling, even within the scenario you presented. But the focus would need to be on the internal emotional state of the character.
If you’re setting needs to use child soldiers, there needs to be a pretty solid reason.
As I’ve said earlier, children do not make good soldiers, and they aren’t really more readily available than adults. They do make more fanatical soldiers, but if that’s all you want, then I’d actually suggest looking at the concept of youth programs such as the Hitler Youth (Michi Note: Destined to Witness: Growing Up Black in Nazi Germany by Hans J. Massaquoi is an intense and interesting biography to read for anyone interested in fascism and how it takes root in a culture’s psyche) that seek to indoctrinate their members with an ideology. There needs to be a credible and tangible reason why parents would accept their children being taken away from them and sent to war. Remember, in the real world, this is done by killing them, but African warlords aren’t looking to maintain a stable government. Any credible government, totalitarian or otherwise, would need to do something, to keep resentment from boiling over into outright rebellion. (Michi Note: This would also happen very quickly, that sort of government would probably be overthrown within the first few years.)
I’ll go into the politics of revolutions in more detail at some point, if I remember, but for now: the government you’re presenting has to have a real concrete reason it’s taking the children and this reason must be convincing to the parents. The government cannot credibly intimidate the parents into this, because that would lead to insurrections and all smart politicians know that they need belief just as much as they need fear. These reasons don’t need to actually be true, but they must be believable enough for the civilian population to turn over their most precious asset: the continuation of their society. (Michi Note: You’ve also got a problem with how this society self-replicates, if most of the kids are going to war.)
Now, what you want isn’t actually impossible, even if it feels like that right now, especially since you seemed more focused on the war story itself, with your protagonist as a functional leader. So, I’m going to make a couple suggestions on how you can do that and tie those themes back into the ones that come with child soldiers, while at the same time avoiding the problems and baggage that need come with them if you’re playing it straight.
The first is clones.
Star Wars: Episode II, of all things, can give you some pretty good ideas on this front. Clones that have been grown to adulthood in 8 years, with intensive training can get around the neural issues, and because their growth rate is accelerated by around 2 to 2.5 times rather than forcing them to go from 12 years to adult in the course of 8 weeks to 6 months, the risks associated with growth acceleration are a lot lower.
You still get to keep a couple things you probably want, clones could be trained in command. You still get the idea of characters with very limited life experience outside of warfare. You can keep the idea of someone’s life, and or childhood, being stolen. The idea that your character was raised as a disposable shock trooper, to live and die at the whim of a system they were excluded from. You can keep a lot of the slavery elements without actually getting into a direct discussion on slavery.
You also have the society creating a stable base to convince their population on the merits of going to war, without their people having to make sacrifices on their own. Clones aren’t just a convenient source of labor, for most people, they’d be a convenient moral hand wave. Sure, you’d have some members of your society who are (minimally) outspoken against it. It would even be to the government’s credit to allow some small dissension that allowed them to claim they were keeping free speech while simultaneously making a mockery out of those people to sway the general population to their side. Look at modern American society and some of the general attitudes against minorities, a vast majority of people will not care so long as their lives go on unaffected. This is the true terror of a dystopian novel. It is not that people were forced. It’s that they were willing. There really is some merit to “the trains running on time” philosophy. Remember, anon, people will accept a lot, so long as they are not inconvenienced by surrounding events. Sometimes, the cultural acceptability of atrocities is all about framing. (Michi Note: We leave it up to each author to decide whether or not indifference is the same as evil.)
The best part about clones is that you can still push the idea of your character as towering over the local population. This kind of cloning leaves the door open to various levels of genetic modification. I’d say, look at Warhammer 40k’s Space Marines, and Star Trek: Deep Space 9’s Jem’hadar for ideas you can incorporate into how to handle your troops. The Jem’hadar have the element of using drugs to keep characters in line, through simple addiction. 40k’s Marines play with the idea of massive cybernetic and biotech enhancement to the point where characters cease to be human at all.
If you can find it, White Wolf’s Exalted setting, particularly the two Dreams of the First Age books have a fair amount on the idea of genetically engineered slave races that could also provide some good fodder to play with.
If you want to scale back the sci-fi elements and keep the overall realism, then I’d suggest looking at the idea of indoctrinating kids with an ideology over actually putting them on the front line. Toss the growth acceleration technology and have children, who are conscripted from school at 12, spend the next four years being trained in warfare, before being sent out at 16 as actual combatants. There are plenty of societal incentives a government can provide (and even provides today) that will encourage parents to give up their children into the system. You’ll keep a lot of what you want and ditch some of the most egregious problems that come with using child soldiers in your story because you gave them the time they needed to grow up.
Finally, and I know this isn’t what you were looking for initially, but, Richard K. Morgan’s Altered Carbon deals with the idea of bodies being little more than clothes for people (the actual personality is simply uploaded into an implant in the body’s brain). The material has a couple ideas worth thinking about.
First, because soldiers are jumping between bodies fairly frequently, the bodies themselves are equipped with “reflex packages”, which take a lot of elements out of physical control, but also limit the amount of control someone has over their body in a fight.
Second, the concept of moving minds around between bodies is actually very interesting. This could be useful for you, if you’re setting has similar technology, but is engineering and altering the minds they’re uploading. Morgan already addresses the idea of duplicating minds, and bodies, using the technology, so you can poke around at that in more depth.
If you got this far, I’m impressed. I hope this information will be of some use to you and maybe even help get you started. There’s also the ask we posted earlier from KickassFanfic, who also provided some helpful reading material.
Again, if you need anything, our askbox is always open.
It’s important to remember that most of the conventional wisdom about force application we have in popular culture comes from observations made about various sport styles and exhibition fighting, such as in movies and staged fights at martial arts tournaments. The assumption becomes that those moves were chosen to be allowed because they are more effective, not less. The problem though with that assumption is that while goal of fighting is to win, it’s also to do so with relative safety and not kill the opponent. Injure, wound, and maim perhaps, but again not kill.
The same is true for both tournament demonstration and media in general. When it comes to evaluating whether a television show, a video on the internet, or what they see at a tournament demonstration will be useful for imagining and creating fight scenes, a creator is required to keep three things in mind:
1) The decision on what techniques to use is primarily governed by what will look good on screen or on the floor and not practicality.
2) The action is safe for the performer to demonstrate without injury to themselves under extremely controlled circumstances. In media, this works double for the actor, the stunt double, and their work with the stunt coordinator.
3) The goal is to create something convincing for the audience, not something that is actually reflective of reality.
It’s important to remember that in demonstration performances and movies that there’s a lot of work, sometimes days, weeks, and even months that goes into crafting those scenes, preparing the actors, and putting together the performance. The other important thing to remember is that because movies and demonstrations are primarily an illusion, they can get away with a great deal more than the human body actually can in their action sequences. These fights are designed around the audience being able to follow the action, but even the best of them are often horribly impractical by design. Many authors when they try to write fight scenes look to movies, comics, and video games for easily accessible action that they can translate into their stories and that’s fine. The only problem is that often, because they are unfamiliar with physical action they end up including the same flaws from the movies into their books.
In a movie, the fight scenes are actually long exhibition fights that have been cut together into a single sequence. This means that on film, even after the editing of the fight, you get unnatural pauses where the stuntmen/women are resetting their positions and essentially taking a breather before they move on to the next action sequence. The reason for this, of course, is that if you just forced the stuntmen to continuously run, they’d keel over from exhaustion about half-way through. If an author does not step back and examine the action from an external perspective, they run a real risk of including these same flaws into their novel. There are plenty of examples in already published works where this happens and they are easy to find, once you know what to look for.
Divergent for example, is a major offender. So is City of Bones, for obvious reasons. The combat in Marie Brennan’s Warrior is essentially a Turn Based RPG. YA in general has a great many authors chasing after Joss Whedon and thus invoking the Whedon/Comic Book problem where they stand around talking and then they fight, then they stop and talk, and then they fight, and then they circle, and then again, they fight. Tamora Pierce is one of the few authors in the YA genre I can point to that escapes this trap, but then she knows what she’s talking about and it shows.
I (Michi) will also cop to having the Whedon problem, I watched (and loved) a great many Whedon shows when I was younger and the internalization of a lot of his flaws as well as his successes is something I struggle regularly against even when I should know better.
Remember, all media feeds into each other and into the culture at large. When looking at media for reference, it’s important to not only look at the internal consistencies, plot, and characters but also the outside motivations of what, why, and reality’s constrictions. Written work reflects, not just into other novels, but also into movies, television, video games, and comic books. So, it’s important to evaluate the constraints of the media you’re working with and its flaws while transferring some of the actions and ideas into your work.
What will work well in a visually medium for action doesn’t weather well on the page, nor will it pass the scratch and sniff test when it passes before someone who knows what to look for when dealing with fighters and fighting. So, the goal is to work toward generating the emotions in your audience that we experience when watching a well put together action sequence through a different avenue than what the director and stunt choreographer created for the movie itself.
As always, there are exceptions to every rule and there are a great many movies and television shows that work excellently as reference material. These are just some basic things to think about when looking at media for reference and some of the dangers that are associated with taking stuff wholesale without examining it from all aspects.
On the subject of RPGs and writing, Starke and I are putting together a reference article dealing with the merits and flaws of Pencil and Paper RPGs when working with characters and fight sequences. So heads up Brennan fans, we’ll be talking more about Warrior in that article.
This was supposed to be the Open Hand Primer but I ended up getting sidetracked with a tangent, it’s coming soon, I promise.
As always, happy writing!
All around the world, martial arts from many different countries are a major cultural export. I say this because it’s important to remember that your characters race, ethnicity, and gender don’t necessarily need to reflect their style’s culture or country of origin. One of the greatest beauties of the MAs is that anyone can start at any age and find both meaning and value. I’ve seen twelve year olds earn their black belts side by side with eighty year old cancer survivors. While I trained in Taekwondo and the master instructor of my dojo was Asian, he was not Korean, instead he was Japanese-American. His master and the master co-founders of the entire organization were a Filipino-American man and an African-American man. The instructor who had the greatest effect on me was (or his family was) an immigrant from Ecuador.
A good martial artist can come from anywhere and while they can’t necessarily be just anyone (just those who put in the time and effort), there’s no need for an author to limit their imagination with a student of any traditional art because their race, gender, or ethnicity doesn’t fit with what media has prepared us for.
When it comes to martial arts specifically, it’s important to remember that the make-up of a school you might expect is not there in actuality. Many people are drawn to the martial arts from many different walks of life, and while there is certainly some very interesting mysticism and philosophical tenants grounded in some of the Eastern MAs, in a modern context the techniques and philosophies are more than able to transfer into backstories the author needs. All the author needs to do is be aware and sensitive of the culture and philosophy ingrained in the martial art they choose.
If you are working with a historical context, research as needed. Either way, you might be surprised.
Where the head goes, the body follows.
This is one of the most important tenants of self-defense and it’s why every combatant, male or female, should keep their hair either short or bound to their heads in a braid that is so skin tight the fingers cannot seize it. The fighter who does not risks having the back of their head grabbed in the middle of combat by providing a decent, easily accessible grip for their opponent. Regardless of what television will tell you, the ponytail is not good enough.
The hair is a much easier target than attempting a headlock or grabbing behind the neck. Once an opponent has their target in their grasp and control of their head, they can take them almost anywhere they wish.
Your hair may be dead, but beneath the skin it is very much alive. Wrap your fingers in your own hair and pull, you’ll find it to be fairly painful, then, imagine the pull from the hands of someone who doesn’t care about your feelings or maybe your hair was pulled by someone when you were younger. It can hurt a great deal and pain has a way of locking us up when we are unprepared or it or when we haven’t been properly trained to deal with it.
It’s important to remember, no matter what folks say about hair pulling, that it is a real, acceptable, and commonly used tactic, especially against women. It will also work against men with hair long enough for a good grip. Honor has very little place in real world combat, remember that an advantage taken is an advantage gained and the only true imperative is survival.
Hair pulling is very common in fights among groups, such as in clubs, mobs, etc as a means of taking someone down. The best advice for when someone takes you or your character by the hair or by the head is to go with them, not politely, but in the same general direction by ramming sideways, forwards, or backwards in the direction of their grip and to keep going until they fall or are driven into a wall or another individual. This will keep you from being injured or having your hair yanked out, it will also save on the pain because it releases tension.