Link to Book: In Cold Blood
Between 1950-1960, 780 convicts were executed by the US government (Wilson). During this time period, capital punishment was a hotly contested, controversial topic among the American populous. In 1959 when the Clutter family was murdered by Dick Hickock and Perry Smith, the prosecution sought the death penalty. Novelist Truman Capote recounts the murder and ensuing trial in his book, In Cold Blood. While his description of these murders is matter-of-fact, his representation of Dick and Perry in their thoughts and actions is, contrastingly, deep and complex. The development of Perry's character is adversely affected by family issues and abuse which influenced his beliefs in what was right and wrong. However, Dick, for the most part, lived what might be considered a “normal life” until a freak accident changed his trajectory. Throughout his book, Capote chronicles the problems that these people endured and questions their sanity in an attempt to explain what may have propelled them to commit these murders. The portrayal of the perpetrators and description of events that Capote inserts into certain scenes point to his intention of showing that Perry and Dick were misguided individuals, and, holistically, the criminal justice system and its institution of the death penalty was the true problem. Truman Capote conveys his opposition to the death penalty through the description of the events in the courtroom, Dick’s anecdote and perspective, and the record of the events and emotions among the characters surrounding the execution of Dick and Perry.
One main way Capote builds his argument is through a discussion of what happened in the court and trial of Perry and Dick. For example, the author introduces Dr. W. Mitchell Jones, a young doctor that specializes in criminal psychology and worked with the criminally insane in Europe and the United States, who testifies on behalf of examining Perry and Dick:
‘Doctor, I would like to ask you if you know my client, Richard Eugene Hickock?’ ‘I do.’ ‘Have you had occasion to examine him professionally?’ ‘Yes’… ‘Based upon your examination, do you have an opinion as to whether or not Richard Eugene Hickock knew right from wrong at the time of the commission of the crime?’ ‘You may answer the question yes or no, Doctor. Limit your answer to yes or no.’... ‘Yes’...‘I think that within the usual definitions Mr. Hickock did know right from wrong.’ But of course, the response was a letdown for Hickock’s attorney, who hopelessly asked, ‘Can you qualify that answer?’ It was hopeless because though Dr. Jones agreed to elaborate, the prosecution was entitled to object—and did, citing the fact that Kansas law allowed nothing more than a yes or no reply to the pertinent question. (Capote 442-443)
Here, the author not only validates the doctor’s ability to correctly read Perry and Dick’s sanity but also alludes to the fact that he was silenced by “Kansas law” to state his reasoning. Capote intentionally uses this scene to further point out the bias and issues within the laws around acknowledging mental issues among convicts. Furthermore, the author elaborates on this silence and in fact interviews that same doctor to see what he may have said to qualify his statement: “‘He shows fairly typical characteristics of what would psychiatrically be called a severe character disorder. It is important that steps be taken to rule out the possibility of organic brain damage, since, if present, it might have substantially influenced his behavior during the past several years and at the time of the crime’” (445). The author not only discusses the events in the courtroom but specifically selects the details of what the doctor may have said if given the chance, portraying the far deeper problem of the justice system and its malevolent practices apart from the murders at face value. Furthermore, the author cites a study, “Murder Without Apparent Motive—A Study in Personality Disorganization,” to further support his argument on whether it was right to sentence Perry and Dick to death. Essentially, the study discusses how the justice system separates criminals into the categories of “sane” and “insane” and from there, the punishment is carried out. On the other hand, a problem arises when different witnesses and experts contradict one another in their verdicts, which may lead to ambiguity on the criminal’s responsibility for committing the crime. The study notes, however, that they believe the main common predisposition to commit acts of violence is from previous “traumatic experiences,” which both Perry and Dick have gone through in their lives. The author uses this study to not only expose the inconsistencies within the justice system’s process in this case but also uses it to suggest that the many criminals who were sentenced to death, potentially, may have not been in the correct state of mind; rather, they should have been provided help and guidance. Furthermore, Capote uses Dick’s anecdote in jail to portray the death sentence as inhumane and deeply disturbing.
Building on his view, Capote uses Dick’s anecdotes and perspective to attack this issue from a different angle, one from the prisoner himself. For example, the author sets the scene of one of Dick’s fellow inmates who was momentarily being sent to death: “‘Andy was looking at the gallows—you could sense he was. His arms were tied in front of him...They led him on inside, and I wondered he could see to climb the steps. It was real quiet, just nothing but this dog barking way off...Then we heard it, the sound, and Jimmy Latham said, ‘What was that?’; and I told him what it was—the trap door’” ( 499). The author includes certain details, such as the dog barking in the distance, and uses syntax, such as the hyphen to build the suspense of where Andy was going to be sent (“--the trap door.”), to intensify the scene’s eerieness. In effect, the author portrays the unsettling nature of death row by describing the disturbing details of Andy’s murder, hinting at his views and beliefs on the legality of capital punishment. Capote continues by describing the murder and its effect on the doctor: “‘Old Andy, he danced a long time. Every few minutes the doctor came to the door... I wouldn’t say he was enjoying his work—kept gasping, like he was gasping for breath, and he was crying, too...I guess the reason he stepped outside was so the others wouldn’t see he was crying’”(499). Here, the author intentionally appeals to the audience’s empathy with descriptions of the feelings around Andy and his death. The doctor described is simply a portrayal of Capote’s own feelings about the disregard for human life regarding death sentences and prompts readers to feel the same way. In addition to his references to Dick’s anecdote in jail, Capote analyzes the feeling and emotions around the execution of the two to further shed light on the problems with death row.
Another part of the book Capote uses to further his message is in the moments of the execution of Dick and Perry. For instance, when describing the aftermath of the hanging of Dick, Capote utilizes a conversation between a guard and a reporter: “‘They don't feel nothing. Drop, snap, and that's it. They don't feel nothing.’ ‘Are you sure? I was standing right close. I could hear him gasping for breath.’ ‘Uh-huh, but he don't feel nothing. Wouldn't be humane if he did.’ ‘Well. And I suppose they feed them a lot of pills. Sedatives.’ ‘Hell, no. Against the rules’ ( 511-512)(Watson). In this excerpt, Capote points out not only the denial of many prison guards regarding the cruelty of capital punishment but also how inhumane the process as a whole was. The author intentionally uses this conversation to show that it is unlikely that Dick didn’t feel anything before dying and points out how the people who killed prisoners didn’t even drug them beforehand to at least attempt to relieve some of the pain. Furthermore, the author further highlights the inhumane aspect of this process by appealing to the audience’s emotions: “Dewey shut his eyes; he kept them shut until he heard the thud-snap that announces a rope-broken neck...He remembered his first meeting with Perry in the interrogation room...the dwarfish boy-man seated in the metal chair, his small booted feet not quite brushing the floor. And when Dewey now opened his eyes, that is what he saw: the same childish feet, tilted, dangling” (513). In this quote, the author purposely compares the person that Dewey saw and the one he sees now to portray Perry’s innocence and his simple need for help, invoking an emotional reaction in the reader, one filled with sympathy for Perry and hatred for a ruthless and merciless system. Such reactions from the reader would most likely be common because of the devices and details Capote handpicks to use in the novel.
Throughout In Cold Blood, it is clear that Capote uses important scenes to further his views of the justice system and the death penalty. From the doctor’s unheard testimony and the studies that support it to selecting certain details in Dick’s anecdote, Capote utilizes this murder to point to a larger issue that was present in the justice system. Therefore, in In Cold Blood, Truman Capote conveys his opposition to the death penalty through the use of the events in the courtroom, Dick’s anecdote and perspective, and emotions among the people near the execution of Dick and Perry. The profound impact of this book has led many to believe that there were certain cases where the convict was sentenced to death, but instead, should have received a fair trial before losing their life, one that considered their mental capacity, sanity, and previous experiences.
Works Cited:
Capote, Truman. In Cold Blood. Vintage Books, 1965.
Watson, Adam. “CAPOTE'S BIAS: In Cold Blood AS AN ANTI-DEATH PENALTY ARGUMENT.” Capote, home.insightbb.com/~adamwatson/showcase/capote.html.
Wilson, Chris. “Executions: See Every Execution in US History in One Chart.” Time, Time, 25 Apr. 2017, time.com/82375/every-execution-in-u-s-history-in-a-single-chart/.
Comments