The conundrum posed by Turner with this exposition of “mugs” and “kissers” invokes any number of pointed questions about how people perceive, judge and categorize one another.  Chief among the many implications of the everyday process of analyzing and assessing friends, family members, and strangers which Good Man Bad Man begs to consider is the phenomenon of the self-preservation instinct in human nature.  Throughout every level of human affairs, from the domestic household unit to the interactions of nations, one group or segment of society perceives itself to be threatened by another.  This perception, whether valid or unfounded, leads to a distinction between “insiders” and “outsiders”, “our crowd’ vs. “that mob”, the “right sorts” vs. “interlopers”, “us” vs. “them”.  Turner’s essay also touches on the matter of elitism and exclusivity – the “members only” mentality dividing social classes, and establishing rankings and castes.  Yet another idea addressed by Good Man Bad Man is the matter of “herd instinct” – how individuals craving to “fit in” and identify with a group will embrace a certain social subset and conform to its “look”.  

Within this curious context, Good Man Bad Man astutely explores the notion of “distinguishing characteristics” as a subset of the perennial mentality of adversarial tribalism afflicting the human race.  Although all humanity shares common ancestry and primal origins, Turner prods his viewers to ponder the moral relativism of social interactions which reflect perceptions or portrayals as “good” or “bad” because of the sense of foreignness or unfamiliarity one individual or group experiences in relation to another.  By holding up a mirror to society, Turner invites us to question the roots of our attractions and aversions, and our impulse to marginalize and ostracize others on the basis of reflexive labels and stereotypes.  Ultimately, Good Man Bad Man inquires into the nature of “virtue” and “vice” and the definition of identity itself.  - Rick Gilbert