James Patterson Conflict

2103 Words9 Pages

Are you really a slave if you sign up freely? In James Patterson 's detective novel Cross the Line, this question and many others are raised about human nature as well as intrapersonal conflicts in the characters. This question is one of a few in the book that is still a topic of debate to this day; as well as it helps get the reader thinking about their response to the situation. The more shocking conflicts deal with what the main villain is thinking and his motive for orchestrating the whole plot as well as the conflict that the question at the start relates to. Through these conflicts and many more faced by the main character, Patterson uses them to develop Alex Cross as a character, to add complexity to the plot and also to get the reader …show more content…

Right after agreeing with Bree’s argument about prostitution and sexually slavery Bob then goes on to state “ You ask me, whoever these shooters are they’re doing the world a favour getting the defects out of the gene pool “ ( Patterson 193 ). This particular conflict has been debated for many years in the real world and it has to do with the fate of criminals who produce drives and kill others. At one point, most countries had a form of capital punishment for violent criminals but now since it is viewed as inhumane only a few of countries do to this day. This comment sets up another conflict in Alex’s head for whether he agrees with it or not. At first he thinks “ I don’t care if you believe in Jesus, God, Allah. . . The crew of thugs had been begging for a violent death like that: shot down, no mercy “(Patterson 193) meaning that in one sense Alex agrees with Taylor that they had it coming. Then almost immediately after Alex contradicts himself by thinking “ In my book and the blind eyes of justice, the fact that a man had it coming doesn’t make killing him right “ (Patterson 194). This shows Alex’s true opinion in that he believes that killing a man who was clueless doesn’t make it right. It also shows he thinks everyone is innocent until proven guilty just like most cops are caught not and that he believes only courts can issue punishment not some group of vigilante