What: Abduction Narratives Part Three Good V Evil

Any good story must have conflict of some sort driving the characters and plot forward, no matter how vague or subtle.  In the abduction genre knowing who is good and who is evil is essential and usually fairly straightforward since almost always, the victim represents "good".  Who is really "bad", may not be revealed until the end, of course, but the boundaries are always clarified by the ending.

Clearly Anne is, in essence, a "good" character and Graham is certainly a "bad" character.  Her choices seem innocent and harmless enough, and his seem calculating and deadly, so on a fundamental level there is a good v. evil conflict.

But do "good" girls get high and make out with a stranger on his boat?  Yeah, sure, occasionally.

Conversely, do "bad" guys ever really develop empathy?  Ur, probably not since lacking empathy is a shared sociopathic trait of abductors in general -- I would hazard to guess -- but maybe if that character connected with someone, then lost her . . .

In any case undoubtedly Graham values himself over all others -- yet he's lost his mojo.  That doesn't make him "good" or likable.  But is he evil?

Then there is the Russian.

Is Death good or evil?

The Indian?  He thinks it's a celebration.

Keeping humans captive is nasty business and unfortunately has not been totally eliminated in the world.  Evil?  I don't know -- that begins to make judgements, instead of distinctions.  God fearing Christians kept Africans as property for centuries in this country with no moral conflict.  Abduction and slavery of people is "bad", but what if we shift away from Good and Evil?  Does that make slavery acceptable?  Are all things relative at that point?  Absolutely, not.

The "good" and "bad" categories in Holiday are merely feathered soft on the edges -- this is no relativist equivocation.  I'm not saying Anne is not a victim here.  What I am asking is, can we tell an abduction narrative without judging that the act is Evil?  A victim narrative not defined by the victimization.  Is that possible and still not condone the act as anything but harmful?