Post History
I think the problem is that for somebody that doesn't care, Banshee gets awfully worked up about not caring, and this emphasizes an evil side, not a neutral side. I think you are trying too hard to...
Answer
#4: Attribution notice removed
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/43149 License name: CC BY-SA 3.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
#3: Attribution notice added
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/43149 License name: CC BY-SA 3.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
#2: Initial revision
I think the problem is that for somebody that doesn't care, Banshee gets awfully worked up about not caring, and this emphasizes an evil side, not a neutral side. I think you are trying too hard to TELL us she is neutral, instead of just showing her being neutral. I'd edit the following exchanges: After " to free the people of these corrupt corporate executives" you have: > Banshee\_Harvest: Save your preaching for someone who actually cares. I was in this solely for the thrills. I’m uploading the files now #2\_files\_attached I think that is too much TELL. I'd show she doesn't care: > Banshee\_Harvest: Whatever. I'm uploading the files now ... After, "What’s so bad about the TLF?" you have > Banshee\_Harvest: I don’t like the rumors about you guys. You’re not afraid to hurt people to get what you want. And I don’t want to end up on that side of the fence. The ends don’t always justify the means. Too much exposition, you've said the same thing four times. I'd change it: > Banshee\_Harvest: You hurt people. I don't hurt people. See the difference? After "we do what we have to do ... for the good of the many, am I right?" You have: > Banshee\_Harvest: Don’t try to push your fascist beliefs on me, I’ve heard about what you’ve guys done. "Fascist beliefs" is too much, and after G00fy expresses a philosophy, she can summarize her own philosophy: > Banshee\_Harvest: No, you're wrong, because you don't HAVE to do anything. The many are way more powerful than me! They can take care of themselves, and I will take care of myself. I think for a neutral, this is a fine position. It is a fact that the 99% far outnumber the 1% of oppressors ruling the world, and they usually far outnumber the armies and police of the oppressors. It is only their own refusal to take up the risk of revolt and casualties that keeps them oppressed. In other words, they are not going to risk their lives to help themselves and their fellow oppressed, and if they are not willing, why should she take any risk on their behalf? She can still be interested in a cause (like helping journalists with information). She can still feel sympathy for the oppressed, the trafficked girls, the people robbed of their pensions. She may still decide to do something about it when she's bored and the risk isn't great. I also think its fine if her public or professional face is set to only care if there is money in it for her. But privately, I would write such a character as occasionally seeing something on the news or the Internet, and casually engaging in a bit of easy hacking to deliver a little Karma to a jerk, just because she likes hacking, and likes the satisfaction of balancing the equation now and then. She may think its funny. A crack in her shield will make it easier for you to break the wall of feigned indifference (which you have already suggested exists if she has in fact said on several occasions that she is looking for a cause.)