|
8063. uzmakk - 3/11/2006 3:24:00 PM I expressed my dismay when an oscar was awarded for some aspect of the movie, Monster. (Theron, best actress?)
I recall having a discussion with Connor at the time in which I referenced the proverb "To understand is to forgive" and G.K. Chesterton's characterization of this type of thinking as "the devil's sentimentality". A recent argument brought this quote and characterization to mind again and I post an excerpt from Forbidden Knowledge, Shattuck, simply as a point of possible interest --
More Kevism Debunked, or At Least Questioned
Over $100,000 worth of damage is done to a local athletic field. What should the punishment be? Kev doesn't know, but it should be mild because the vandals' brains were not completely developed. There is scientific evidence.
College students burn several churches down south as a joke. They then burn other churches to throw the police off the track. Should the punishment be harsh? Not too harsh; the psychology of youthful group behavior necessarily mitigates the severity of the punishment.
There is a proverb "To understand is to forgive." G.K. Chesterton called this attitude 'the devil's sentimentality.' Under carefully controlled conditions, as in listening to the 'sincere' and seductive narrative voice of The Stranger, our empathy for another person can be stretched very far. We can venture too close and lose our perspective on humanity. Once we understand another life by entering it, by seeing it from inside, we may both pardon and forgive a criminal action. We may not even recognize it as criminal. We are all guilty in some way. How can we ever judge anyone else, punish anyone else?
That line of thinking leads to an unacceptable dilemma. Either justice is impossible and escapes us, or justice, if we do attempt to establish it, is inhuman. The action of Billy Budd confronts and blocks such slack thinking. Captain Vere in his fanatic resolve to maintain strict discipline aboard ship remains fully human, and tragic.* Etc., etc.
_______________
*During the past twenty years, the most probing commentaries on Billy Budd have been written by legal scholars.....
--Forbidden Knowledge
Roger Shattuck
"We are all guilty in some way. " This is what allows Kevin to assign ultimate blame to the citizens when people in government commit crimes. Kev has great faith that his conception of a bureaucracy is the reality, that the little flow lines on his mental chart exist in reality. The ultimate blame is weak and watery when Cheney assigns it to himself or when Kev assigns it to "the people".
What came to my mind upon hearing the church burners' characterization of their actions as a joke was M+M's characterization of some of his lyrics as a joke. In both cases I think we can say we can say we are dealing with a perverse sense of humor, a pathetic rationalization or a lie. But perhaps I'm just not hip.
8064. arkymalarky - 3/11/2006 6:34:55 PM So you're running a cafe. What's on the menu?
And Eminem's lyrics are no joke, even to him, but they're relevant and even if they aren't, supporters of First Amendment principles can't be relativists and be depended on to defend those principles very well. It's not very productive to be an all-or-nothingist, either: either everyone is responsible or no one is--either actions and speech are evil or neither is. Destruction of people or property isn't comparable to spoken perversity in any sense, humorous or not, whether it's Eminem vs college students or a Danish cartoonist vs Islamic fundamentalists.
Would that it were all so simple. Then, of course, there would be nothing to discuss. And we'd all be dead or in prison--those of us who weren't murderers or wardens. 8065. uzmakk - 3/12/2006 2:36:03 PM Hearty soups in the winter. Salads, both green and grain, in the summer.
And Eminem's lyrics are no joke, even to him,...
Quite so. I believe he was being interviewed, his argument was falling apart, so his lyrics or a specific lyric, became a joke. He lied, and it was a big lie, because it had to do with the validity of his "philosophy". It should be no surprize that MnM doesn't think very well. Nor, did the students who burnt the churches. No doubt talk and the commission of a crime are two very different things. But the thinking, the sensibilites, that led to the crime are interesting. A joke.(?) A good sense of humor may be more important than we think.
8066. arkymalarky - 3/12/2006 5:39:36 PM I'm a fan of Eminem. Or was, until he got it out of his system. At least part of his philosophy is/was that society creates its own monsters then hypocritically acts shocked when they make the news. 8067. arkymalarky - 3/12/2006 5:43:27 PM Sounds like a great menu. Wish we had something like that here. It's been tried, but not well. People would serve great food, but didn't run the business end well--or they'd have a great idea and awful food. 8068. alistairConnor - 3/13/2006 11:33:38 PM Once we understand another life by entering it, by seeing it from inside, we may both pardon and forgive a criminal action.
Is this your greatest fear, Uz? That if you understand the devil, you will become like him?
You lack confidence in yourself, perhaps? 8069. alistairConnor - 3/13/2006 11:34:46 PM Don't read Dostoïevsky.
You might forgive terrorists.
Or become one. 8070. anomie - 3/14/2006 12:08:41 AM Once you understand the devil, you become less like yourself and more like him - no? Not sure confidence is a factor. 8071. uzmakk - 3/14/2006 3:49:22 PM It is a question of sympathy for the murderer not one of becoming him. My greatest fear? Hardly. Yes, I am a snivelling coward and lack self-confidence, but that has nothing to do with the argument.
re: Dostoievsky
Very much to the point. Likewise, Arky's fandom of MNM. I have no argument with the pov that society is imperfect. Down with Bush! Down with Bush! Down with Bush!
I have heard a book called MegaCity(?) mentioned on NPR. The thrust of the book: if this is the shape of the future, and it appears to be, God help us.Surely some Motie or other has read it? There will be a great deal of reason to commit crime and there will be a great deal of it. It will be very understandable, what will we/they/the state do? Captain Vere in his fanatic resolve to maintain strict discipline aboard ship remains fully human, and tragic.* Etc., etc.
8072. uzmakk - 3/14/2006 3:51:44 PM My second sentence was to be, Of course the argument can be extended. Perhaps I should have left it in. 8073. alistairConnor - 3/14/2006 9:12:37 PM Uz, I think you have a conception of justice which is radically different from mine : though they may well converge with respect to outcomes, they derive from different roots.
Culturally, (DANGER : GROSS STEREOTYPING AHEAD), Americans are wedded to the idea of popular justice : offenses are determined by what the community (or its dominant, right-thinking element) deems offensive; those who offend will be punished according to the desiderata of the right-thinkers. This is organically tied up with the fact that you elect your judges.
I take a more detached view of what justice is. I do not wish for my animal pulsions, or some socio-religious rationalization of them, to be visited on offenders. I wish such matters to be handled dispassionately by professionals, who are accountable only very indirectly to public opinion (or to a government). The aim, after all, is to preserve society from disorders, and protect individuals from both wrongdoers and injustice.
In this framework, society is not endangered if I choose to try to understand, or empathise with, or even forgive a criminal. To abandon this capacity would be to diminish my humanity. However odious the crime, the criminal is a human being, and respectable as such. 8074. uzmakk - 3/14/2006 11:59:20 PM What an excellent post, Connor. I am off to a brainstorming session with the County Commissioners regarding tourism. We are going to put our primitive minds together and see what we come up with.
Actually, I am attending as a mere citizen and this is billed as a brainstorming session, but more than likely just window dressing in the name of democracy. Naturally I will bring up the quarry. In a valley as promising as mine is for tourism why would we want a quarry? 8075. Ms. No - 3/15/2006 12:11:48 AM AC,
Where do your judges and laws come from if not the people?
I understand and even agree with the view that our laws should not be determined by the current fashion or public faddishness, but at the same time there is nothing truly "outside" to draw from. We can go to great lengths to be calm, reasonable, rational beings and still we cannot help but reflect the views of our times. It's how we end up with slavery under such a brilliant document as the US Constitution.
Any fans here of Brecht's Three Penny Opera? 8076. wonkers2 - 3/15/2006 12:15:39 AM Yes. Great show. I've seen it a couple of times and have a tape of Lotte Lenya singing Brecht and Weill. 8077. anomie - 3/15/2006 12:23:51 AM "The aim, after all, is to preserve society from disorders, and protect individuals from both wrongdoers and injustice."
Your last word covers a lot AC. If we go inside the criminal mind and find the crime was a reaction to the injustice of society, or necessary to survival (physical, mental or emotional), we may bend toward forgiveness. I'm sure you know this generally, but even the most evil acts might be explained away by such factors, real or imagined. Nevertheless, punishment or isolation must be inflicted, even though it may not be perfect justice. It is as you say preservation.
8078. anomie - 3/15/2006 12:26:22 AM MsNo, would you recommend it?
Anyone endured any of the Beckett on Film series? 8079. alistairConnor - 3/15/2006 12:39:56 AM Yes No, but there is a difference between democracy and mob rule.
What about that Moussaoui case? I admire that judge, she's a real professional. 8080. wonkers2 - 3/15/2006 12:48:29 AM Threepenny Opera is one of the all time great shows. Another is "The Fantastics." Last I heard it was the longest running show in history in NYC. 8081. wonkers2 - 3/15/2006 12:49:05 AM (Excuse me for butting in, Ali." 8082. Ms. No - 3/15/2006 1:10:45 AM Anomie,
Most definitely, but I think some of the message depends on which version you see. There are several translations out and to my knowledge the one truest to the original is not licensed for production in the U.S. The story isn't greatly altered, I don't believe, but the language is softened sometimes a LOT.
The reason I bring it up during this particular discussion is because one of Brecht's main goals was to distance the audience from the characters of the play so that rather than empathizing and getting caught up in sentimental emotions they might look more rationally at the action and engage in self-reflection be it personal or more usually cultural and political.
Brecht attempted this with many of his plays, particularly his "teaching plays", but I think it's most easily seen with Three Penny because in the end the audience is called upon to vote between characters and this sentimentality or faddishness in justice that we've been talking about really comes to light.
|
