When discussing ‘murky morals’, I think one has to clarify what qualities that phrase is actually signifying. In my analysis, it will refer to behaviour presented by the characters of Süskind’s ‘Perfume’ that is dishonest, questionable or morally dubious, and I will be exploring the text through a comparison of, debatably, the protagonist and the antagonist of the novel, Jean-Baptiste Grenouille and Antoine Richis respectively. Both characters, at least to some extent, see others as means to achieve their own goals, but have a vital difference of conscience; Richis is capable of empathy, whereas Grenouille is not.
Süskind portrays Grenouille as exploitative throughout the novel, to the extent of the character’s extended metaphor actually being a parasite. Upon his decision to study the art of perfuming under Giuseppe Baldini, Süskind writes that “the tick has scented blood”, likening Grenouille to an insect that feeds off of the blood of others to sustain itself. The verb “scented”, while also tying into Süskind’s continued semantic field of olfaction, is in the past tense, implying that Grenouille has actively sought out a perfumer to pray on the skills of for his own benefit, and, additionally, that now he has found suitable prey, nothing can stop him from commencing with his plan. The noun “blood” connotes: pain and death, perhaps hinting at the moral extremity of the actions he later commits; as well as the notion of his plan, the metaphorical “blood” he senses, being essential to his being. Without any way forward to achieve his goal, Grenouille would die, as if the blood had been drained from his veins. This presentation of his character infers a sense of animalism, and a primal nature that is driving him to commit any morally dubious act that he needs to further his own ends and, thus, to survive. Therefore, it can be concluded that Grenouille views the other characters of the novel as means to achieve his own ends so strongly, more so than any other character, that his ability to have murky morals becomes questionable; if Grenouille is truly an animal motivated purely by survival instinct, his actions cannot be morally wrong, or even murky, as morality is intrinsically linked with intent, and even his most ‘evil’ actions are committed with purely transactional intentions.
However, a character that is expected to be moral due to his nature as a father, is Antoine Richis. Although, despite his presumed empathetic ability, the character is presented as another who sees those close to him as means to achieve his own ends when his relationship with Baron de Bouyon is described, a man “with whom Richis had already concluded a contract concerning the future marriage of their children”. The noun “contract” connotes business, and a lack of emotion, as well as painting his daughter as property that, not only does Richis possess entirely, but that he can use as a bargaining tool for societal gain. However, Richis is not only morally dubious enough to reduce his own daughter to inanimate leverage in his own pursuit of power, but he envisions his own daughter as property so extremely that it supersedes their familial connection, recalling an occasion when he “choked on this dreadful lust” that he felt for his own daughter. The noun “lust” implies that her body, Richis’ bargaining tool, was so far removed from being an actual human ,with her own thoughts, feelings, and family, that he was able to sexually desire it. But, the adjective “dreadful” signifies that he was able to reflect on this experience, and appreciate its truly immoral, vile nature, reminding the reader that he is capable of morality, and consciously chooses to ignore it until after the fact, which is perhaps more evil than being unaware of morality entirely.
I would conclude that, while both men clearly see the other characters of the novel as means to achieve their own ends, Richis is the only character that I have analysed capable of possessing “murky morals”. Moreover, I would suggest that because of this, the ability to possess any kind of morality, Richis could be perceived as more villainous than Grenouille, a man of instinct, as the former cannot be held morally accountable for his misdeeds.