Sunday, September 13, 2009
Blog Post No. 4: The Kieslowski Film (Due 9/17)
In the Kieslowski film we watched in class on "Thou Shall Not Kill" the young lawyer began his first trial with confidence in the legal system. However, after developing a "relationship" with his defendent and then losing the trial, he wound up loathing his profession. Do you believe the young lawyer was "too sensitive" for his profession (as claimed by judge), "merciful," or simply frustrated at the recognition of the limits of law in dealing with the human condition?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The lawyer was frustrated by the tension between the law and the human condition. Many of us are in professions which present us with this dichotomy on a day to day basis. To the extent where we have the option to tow the line or in our personal way transform our thinking and interactions, many choose to tow the line for it gives us the ability to survive at times at the expense of the "other" we must tend to or deal with.
ReplyDeleteQuestion 4 (Ken and Carla)
ReplyDeleteOne of the questions that perhaps can arise from this film is should the punishment fit the crime? Violence was seen from the start of the film. From thugs beating up a boy in an alley, to Lazar tossing a rock onto on coming cars, to his heinous act of robbery and murder of a taxi driver. The young lawyer who never tried a case before was faced with a great challenge – Capital Punishment, which according to article 44 and paragraph 2 was to be administered by the authorities to all who committed such crimes as murder. Anyone who could not accept this act of punishment “should look for another profession.” Within this society there is no act of mercy, nor the thought of “the other” which Levinas’ further describes as “God is merciful, “Be merciful like Him”
Yet another view captured in this film is focuses on the lawyer. As discussed by Carla the findings of the lawyer being too sensitive for his profession is questionable. However, there is the belief that he went to trial expecting to win, expecting to change the law because he believed that he could make a difference. His disappointment is to be expected since no one wants to lose and especially after developing a bond with ones client.
Assigned to the case of the young man who was attorney, he could not help the young man. Rather he has shown himself confused and frustrated. Death sentence for the young man by hanging is seems to be just and fair but at the same point of time, this story reveals that all life must be respected and that no one deserves to be killed. The death sentence itself, which is not only condemned the young man to die, but it expose to loss of civil rights in perpetuity.
ReplyDeleteTitus Kim
The lawyer comes to understand that the law was never there to save people but to kill them. Because those who abide the law do it in fear of the death sentence; whereas those who do not fear the consequences of death are outside the law, where they are killed. The lawyer realizes the irrationality of the law system.
ReplyDeleteAdulterous Group
I think all three are true of the young attorney. His humanity led to feelings of mercy for this young man, leading ultimatly to his frustration and anger with the law's inability to adjudicate authentic justice that is not based on retribution or humankinds shadow side. I remember so vividly that during the execution, the dark side of humanity came out in the officers who aggresivly took him to the execution chamber and the feverish cranking of the pully by the crazed man who would hang the man. It did not seem there was a hint of mercy or humanity in the events throughout the film. Juxtapose that theme with the attorney's inner conflict of understanding human limitation of our law and a true understanding of justice and mercy. I think he may have been in the process of a first order change in his thinking and perception about law--suddenly the law became ambiguous and not so final in its harsh reality
ReplyDeleteQ ( Quentin & Danielle)
ReplyDeleteThe movie Thou Shall Not Kill raises a few concerns for us. First, was justice really served for the victim’s family ? Second, did the killer have adequate representation from such an inexperience lawyer? The Young lawyer was not experienced to handle a murder case. The young lawyer should have started off with a few bankruptcy cases, then work his way up to a murder case after a year or so. There is simply too many people in profession’s today that are in it for the accolades or for a conversation acknowledgement. All professions have stress and emotional strains.
After all said and done watching this movie I can simply say providing the cultural we are living in today, are there any Good Samaritan’s left in the world today or protégé of Charles Manson waiting to attack their next victim. Pastor’s and missionaries have a lot of ground to cover to align God’s people back in place.
1st the young lawyer do not appear to loath his profession or the legal system, I think he lost his sense of innocence and naivety to how the system is applied to human beings. As long as there is the letter of law without human contact it killth but as soon as the human element is integrated into the system the law takes on a whole new element, the letter has to open up its eyes to the other, once this is done the lawyer (letter) begins to question his own idealist notions of the fairness of the law. Will he give up his first love the law, I doubt, will it forever change his perception of the written law and the human element. Well that remain to be seen he could either pursue his carrier forever mindful that there is a human story behind every case or he will detach himself from the human element of the case.
ReplyDeleteThe Coveting Group (Valerie and Kendra)
I think that the young lawyer was not too sensitive for his profession. However, I think that he was moved by the accused man’s personal history. Once the lawyer was able to identify with the young man not as an “other” but as someone who had experienced hurt and violence himself. The young lawyer started to question if the law should truly be “one size fits all.” The lawyer’s definition of justice began to change and have a different meaning for him, once he saw the “rule of law” applied and served in a real situation with real consequences.
ReplyDeleteI believe the young lawyer in the film was simply merciful because he had the opportunity to see the life of his client and began to feel the pain that man felt. It is amazing what a view of another person's reality can lead you to want to do for that person. He felt like his client did not deserve the end which he was about to face because he was a man hurt by his past.
ReplyDelete