Sociopath!Fraser? NOT!
by Kellie Matthews

I have SO much trouble with the idea of Fraser As Monster. This has been troubling me for a very long time, and it's something I've given a lot of thought to. I'm reacting to a long tradition of fanfic authors who apparently see Fraser as Monumentally Fucked Up to the point where it's hard to believe he'd even be *functional* in society, and Ray as Doormat Ray.

I just can't see ANY canonical basis for such views.  Now, admittedly we play with canon by the very act of slashing the characters, however I think it's one thing to take that very small step (because I think that PG did intend in seasons 3/4, quite deliberately,
for the characters to act in a manner that encouraged the wearing of slash-colored glasses), and quite another to distort the characters into unrecognizability. I do not see Ray as such a complete and utter doormat that he would *allow* Fraser (were he ever to stray so far out of his canonical character to become physically abusive) to physically (or for that matter emotionally) abuse him.  Ray has *never* canonically shown himself to be so incapable of taking care of himself. If anyone can think of an example, I would like to hear it.  And, no, the *one* instance where he says "I suck" in
response to a *specific situation* may not be offered as evidence.  Nor, I think, can the events of Eclipse be used as backup, because even when he's down and a feeling like a 'con job' Ray never once is shown as being incapable of standing up for himself.

As for Fraser as abusive and nearly psychotic, again... where is the backup for that characterization?  Yes, he can be angry (The Pilot, Bird in the Hand) and get a little dark (Odds), as can we all, but he's historically shown as able to handle that side of himself (and as for Victoria's Secret, I'd be surprised if there is anyone on this list who's never made that *one* choice they wish they could undo).  Even when tempted nearly past bearing, he nevertheless resists the temptation to hurt people who hurt him (Bird in the Hand or Call of the Wild anyone?). Why on earth would he take to hurting people who *love* him?

I really don't expect everyone to see the characters the way I do, but in what *universe* can anyone even catch a glimpse of the possibility that Fraser could treat someone he loves that way?  I'm pretty certain he would have died for Victoria.  He might have even killed for her.  To the extent that he's destructive, Fraser's destructiveness appears to me to be inner and self- rather than outer and other-directed.)  He would not hurt Ray.
This is a man who went back into a sinking ship for Ray Kowalski (and don't tell me "well Ray was only there because of him";  if Fraser were truly maladjusted, he could and probably would have chosen to leave Ray there). The man sat next to Ray in the crypt in Eclipse and said, "It's all right, he'll show up" when he *knew* that Welsh and the rest of the damn district was waiting for Ray to show up.  Mr. Courtesy opened a car door into an essential stranger for no other reason than the fact that the guy ... annoyed Ray.  Ray Kowalski clearly matters to Benton Fraser. Fraser's NOT going to take to beating the man.

I've heard the argument that "Fraser wasn't as NICE in seasons 3/4" before from quite a few people, including the friend who first got me interested in DS fandom.  Perhaps he wasn't, but he was a heck of a lot more HUMAN. The Fraser we saw in seasons 1 & 2 was almost an automaton.  He was the Mountie Myth, and if you think that was the real Fraser then you *missed* something along the way.  He's a human being.  Not a myth.  He's NOT nice all the time, but neither is he abusive.  He knows the difference between
right and wrong, and moral and immoral, and he does not cross that boundary with ease. I don't care how screwed up one can posit that he is ... he's not antisocial or sociopathic. (And I've known someone who was truly sociopathic, so I think I'm on pretty safe ground here.)

Yes, Fraser's got Issues, but he's basically psychologically healthy.  And I think F's reaction to his mother's death, Victoria, and RV, would be to freeze himself INSIDE, not direct that hurt outwards towards innocents. He is, basically a good person. Good people *aren't* destructive.  They don't knowingly and willingly hurt the other people they love and allegedly care for, and it *does* matter if one assumes that Fraser is, essentially, a
good and decent man. No one can act as consistently as he does, as kindly as he does, with people to whom he has *nothing* to prove, and be *that* fucked up. (I know that's a tautology- the fact that he's not fucked up is proof that he's not fucked up -) but I think we are entitled, even obligated, to take ALL 68 hours of canon into account when assessing his psychological makeup.

And another point:  Why, exactly, do people seem to assume Fraser *should* have reacted to Kowalski the same way he reacts to Vecchio?  I think that that is enormously unfair.  No actual person would be expected to react to different people in the exact same way; why is there a different standard, apparently, for Ben?  RK and RV are two entirely different people, despite the undercover gig, and I'd be hard-pressed to find *anyone* on this earth, who deals with any two other people in exactly the same way. People aren't interchangeable like snowmobile parts.  We all react and interact with each other differently.  How I interact with Audra *isn't* going to be exactly the same way I interact with my boss, or with my mother, etc. Why should Fraser be any different?  {And, and, *and*, again, Fraser *isn't* always nice to everyone-- given the fact that Fraser gets
incredibly exasperated with his father and Dief -- and I dare *anyone* to tell me with a straight face that he doesn't love them -- the very fact that he isn't always "nice" to Kowalski (and hello, Ray gives as good as he gets!)  is indicative that he really cares for Ray deeply}

I don't believe that Fraser uses the Mountie Mask as pathologically as other people seem to think he does. The mask is protection for *him* more than anything else. People seeing what they want to see. All intelligent people make use of that human tendency to one degree or another. It's a defense mechanism, and yeah, he can slip it on like a glove, but I really don't think that it masks this gaping pit of self-loathing and despair. If F hated himself that much he would take steps to deal with it. The man is not stupid or indecisive. He's extremely intelligent; he was undoubtedly a gifted child. He lost both mother and father, for all intents and purposes, at a young age; he did not however grow up in an abusive or hostile family environment.  He was home-schooled at least part of his life (SvS); but he seemed to get on well enough with other children - another indication of psychological health - to have Innusiq (ICHBaD) and Mark (TBL) as friends, not to mention Delmar (CotW). There were probably some negative encounters with other children, either because of his looks, intelligence, oddities, or all of the above, that cut at his self esteem a little; his father, however, was an unyielding moral compass, I think,
even if he was absentee.

His father understood his intelligence and I suspect one of his constant refrains was , "We are *not* other people." Bob said much the same thing to young Benton Fraser in the aftermath of the gold mine/boomerang fiasco. I suspect that he was, without doubt not only one of the brightest new officers in his class, he was one of the brightest ever.  We know, from ATQH, that he graduated 1st in his class, so he came into the Depot with
expectations of his own, as well as others, of performing excellently. For whatever reason -- and I suspect it has more to do with actual personality type than anything else -- he was something of a loner.  I think he had friends, but his natural inclination to recklessness made it difficult, I think, to partner him with anyone.  He worked alone, but exceedingly well, which no doubt bred some of the jealousy we see in the Pilot, that kind of jealousy that makes you assign the attributes of 'weirdness' to someone because thinking their weird gives you some comfort in being normal.  And he truly was, by nature and by breeding, perfect for his vocation as a Mountie in the NWT. That doesn't, in itself, argue any degree of psychological maladjustment.

I suspect however that his peer relationships were the most lacking. In the Pilot he seems to get on well with the older Mounties, for the most part; and it's one reason to explain his fascination with RV. But, at his age, not having a large number of peers as friends isn't something that's likely to lead to maladjustment.  By that point, if he's not maladjusted,
he's not gonna be.  He was/is an anachronism, the last of a breed. He's not worried about his career, checking boxes; he'll accept exile to Chicago as the necessary consequence of his actions in tracking down the killers of his father.  It's why he really does have to go back to Canada in the end to be happy.  Chicago is one of those life experiences he'll always love and value but his heart and his nature are in the Territories.

The Pilot seems to suggest that his abilities aren't in question and that his superiors, at least, know that even if his methods are somewhat unorthodox, he gets the job done within something that resembles the lines. Story so far: one intelligent, bookish, loner who had a few friends and a supportive if undemonstrative family. One intelligent, dedicated Mountie, even fresh out of the Depot (cf VS); certainly accepted by his
superiors and peers as effective in his job and if he's slightly eccentric - well, you know, who the hell wouldn't be, as Bob Fraser's son and in the NWT where eccentricity is not only accepted, it's actually valued.  You know, to be alone a lot - to enjoy, not just endure those wide open spaces - one has to *like* oneself.  Also, these days a good many police forces have a battery of psychological tests one must pass in order to become an officer... it would be difficult to conceal sociopathology to that extent.

In the third season episode I like to call Brothers in Arms (aka ICHBaD) we get what I think is the most effective example of this-- a caring affectionate Fraser, RAY being snarky and smart ass to FRASER. And an extremely intelligent, intuitive man who was instantly and empathetically drawn to F and *liked* him and trusted him - with good reason - more than his own brother. Nor did F trample all over Bruce and make Bruce do what Fraser thought he should do. He gave Bruce the facts and assigned him the dignity to assume that Bruce could draw his own conclusions and make his own decisions.

So, so far, we have none of the classic indicia of a sociopath, unless one counts his wanting to hunt that caribou at age 11 as equivalent to that whole torturing animals thing that they do.  That's a real stretch though. It's established that it's a coming of age rite for him, in his own mind, in keeping with native traditions that he's observed but not been included in, so I don't think I can buy that argument.  There is also the fact that he has strong, positive ties to a native community that tends to keep to itself and to which, ordinarily, Mounties as symbol of oppression would be anathema.

Okay, I've rambled on waaaay too long, but yeah, so in the RK seasons Fraser let himself be more human.  That speaks to me of being LESS fucked up, not more.  He stops censoring himself because he trusts Ray K not to take advantage of that lack of censorship.  He can be honest, and funny, and snarky, just like the rest of us poor souls.  I understand the compulsion to write something when it gets into your head.  I've been there.  (More often than I like to think about.)  All I'm asking is that please, if you feel compelled to write Sociopathic!Fraser and Doormat!Ray, label the work an AU, because that's really what it is.


Return to Meg's Due South Page.