Truman Capote's In Cold Blood is critically acclaimed as a masterful portrait of American crime and is known for introducing the concept of the "nonfiction novel." Many criticisms can be leveled at such a crossroads between real events and narration. For example, many saw the book as a polemic against capital punishment. It's easy to argue that this isn't the case, because surely Capote's objective descriptive style and lack of opinionated commentary do not exemplify what the Merriam-Webster dictionary defines as "a strong... attack against someone else's opinions." However, to ignore the text's negative connotation towards capital punishment would only be skimming the surface of a book that certainly presents some form of indictment against capital punishment, whether one can be called a “controversy” or not. By the end of the book, the reader is guided to feel no sense of joy or success at the hanging of two criminals, but rather a form of the opposite. Perhaps he doesn't go so far as to invoke sadness or pain, but after getting to know Clutter's killers as characters and following their lives - from childhood to death row - the reader develops a sense of closeness with them, allowing Capote to craft a subtle argument against capital punishment that is perhaps far more convincing than any direct criticism. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay One of Capote's primary tools in developing this argument is to detail the personality, actions, and lives of Clutter's killers: Dick Hickock and Perry Fabbro. Especially regarding Smith, with whom Capote himself became very close, the reader develops an attachment to these characters as one would in a novel, even if not intended to be particularly sympathetic. From the beginning of the story, we are introduced to Perry's dreams of success (for most of the book, Capote uses their names) and obsessions with the world's lost treasures that he must find. Perry's almost childlike personality contrasts with Dick's more practical mindset and sets the stage for deepening the relationship between the two criminals as characters. Simply the length and detail of the story of their time spent together alone evokes a certain closeness for the reader, just as any character-centric story does. In terms of developing sympathy on the part of the reader, while Dick's affection for his family should be noted, particularly interesting are the details of Perry Smith's life. A "'childhood marked by brutality'" (296), abuse by orphanage nuns who "'held me under [cold water] until I turned blue'" (132), and an Army sergeant who wanted him “rolling over,” (134) a “lack of concern on the part of both parents,” (296) and other details give Perry the sense that the world is working against him, allowing the reader to relate, or at least sympathize . This feeling continues once the trial is over, with the murder perfectly understood in the eyes of the law, yet Perry – and indeed, the reader – are still faced with confusion over what led Perry to kill four people who “did not they have never hurt me. ..like people have done all my life.'” (302) Perry is often described as wondering whether he was trying to prove himself to Dick or vent some anger at figures in his life, including his sister , who on one occasion had wished "'he had been in that house.'" (143) When everyone around him is depicted as coming to morequickly by Perry, the reader is left wondering whether these conclusions should be enough to justify the man's death. This sentiment is strongly highlighted in Capote's depiction of the trial of the murderers, which now shifts to a more specific and direct critique of a legal system that results in capital punishment. In many ways the trial was made to seem biased and although, again, it does not directly condemn anything, Capote writes and includes information in a way that guides the reader to think a certain way. Evidence is presented that some members of the jury, all from the vicinity of the murder site, had opinions about capital punishment or the Clutters. The reader is provided with the statements of the psychological analysts, but they were not allowed to be heard in court due to the "M'Naghten Rule", which the state of Kansas abides by, which allows "nothing more than a yes answer or not" to the question of the killer's mental state, which Capote describes as a “color-blind formula to any gradation between black and white” (294). The reader is informed that such gradations existed based on Dr. Jones' analysis, included in the text. In Hickock's case, Jones emphasizes the importance of the presence of "'organic brain damage'" being studied more closely, due to his "'severe head trauma'", and that in any case Hickock showed signs of "' serious character disorder" '” (295). In Smith's case this is even more evident; Jones states that "'Perry Smith shows clear signs of mental illness'" but once again calls for "a more thorough evaluation" (298). The fact that this further analysis did not occur and was not even allowed to be mentioned in court strongly suggests to the reader the inability of this trial to determine the life or death of these men. Further opinions from other characters reinforce this view: from a jury member who characterizes the trial as "triggering, brutal" and the execution as "'even quite cold-blooded'" to a reverend who states that "'capital punishment it is not an answer: it does not give the sinner enough time to come to God" (306). One particularly credible opinion - that of a certain Dr. Satten, a respected authority on psychiatry - identified the murder as a "motiveless" killing. apparent,” relating to “‘personality disorganization'” (299) and understood that Smith was “‘deep within a schizophrenic darkness’” (302) as he killed Mr. Clutter. This once again demonstrates the additional attention Capote thought this case should have received, considering he had put these two men to death, and led the reader to agree. Finally, Capote gets close to the subject of the controversy itself and spends the next section of the book creating the feeling that capital punishment is very arbitrary, but still results in the same brutal end to a human life. He discusses the inconsistent bureaucracy behind the death penalty, as well as its variations from state to state, including Kansas, where "'juries hand it out like they're giving candy to children'" (322). One point he focuses on is the length of time prisoners spend on death row, the variation of which, he believes, “depends little on luck and much on the amount of litigation” (330). For example, he compares a Texas robber killed a month after his conviction with a pair of Louisiana rapists serving 12 years. Capote also raises the point that while all the other members of Kansas State Penitentiary's death row were murderers, Hickock technically "'never touched a hair on a human head.'" Again, none of this is a direct criticism, but through such detail Capote is able.