“But I don’t want to get addicted.”
That was my response to Karen when she announced that she had discovered a new television program to which she wanted me to become addicted with her as she perused the new season offerings of CBS this afternoon. Because I’m not an avid television watcher, I pushed back on the idea, even though I recognize that most of the few programs to which I have developed a loyalty have come to me by Karen’s recommendation. For the most part (Glee notwithstanding), my wife has good taste.
The program that she submitted for my consideration (the second in two days) is called Person of Interest, and it is sort of a re-imagining of Minority Report. The difference is that, in Minority Report, the future crimes were predicted by mutants with pre-cognitive abilities. In Person of Interest, the predicting is accomplished in anonymity by a surveillance algorithm, leaving those with the information to do something about it. The person who invents the program comes into possession of the anonymous data, and hires a former CIA operative to handle the less savory aspects of solving the situation. He doesn’t shy away from violence, and metes out what justice he deems necessary to prevent the innocent from being harmed.
I don’t identify addic…er, I mean, loyal following…to any program after one episode. This one, however, has potential. Watch it and let me know what you think.
What strikes about both this program and Minority Report is the method used to prevent what is recognized as tragic…that is, the loss of human life. Both premises deserve credit for recognizing that human life is immeasurably valuable and must be preserved. However, the error that I see in both is the approach taken to preserving human life: violent justice. In fact, the violent justice that is justified as a means to protect the innocent ultimately necessitates that it must itself take life, and I’m reminded of the adage that my parents used to tell me that “two wrongs don’t make a right.” This smacks of a very Western, very American, method of using justice: that the enforcers of what is right and good do their enforcing by means of overwhelming force. Essentially, “might makes right” begins to be the accepted thought process.
Now, certainly, both Person of Interest and Minority Report are addressing larger themes as well, not the least of which are determinism over free will and the corruption resulting from power. I would guess that the nature of justice is likely far down the list of themes that leap out from these screenplays. I was just left thinking about this specifically today, though, after watching the pilot episode. I’m wondering about the better way to preserve the value of life…how do we do that as a culture? Our justice system emphasizes punishment, not grace. In fact, second chances in Western culture are rare events in any form, and I think we need to focus more on forgiveness and giving more grace as a culture. I also think, though, that a conscious decision must be made to recognize human life…every human life…as something inherently invaluable, and not a commodity that can be taken away at will for some transgression. We view life as so expendable. We view anger and retaliation as acceptable forms of response to a person or group that has done wrong. The prevalence of “Wild West” violence on our streets, the willingness of our country to leap into war, are indicators of this.
I’m not naive enough to think that we can achieve a utopia of crime-free existence, and violent offenders will always be a sad reality. I just can’t help but think that cultural mores drive more individuals into the mindset of violent offenses than we might see otherwise. I also think that valuing a person for more than what they can produce or contribute would produce less un-addressed frustration that boils over into violence.
I also know that I’m opening a quagmire of debate by saying this. I think, though, that one of the things that these screenplays show us (perhaps inadvertently) is that justice does not have to be a response composed of overwhelming force. I think that there are gentler, and more effective, methods of protecting the innocent, not the least of which is a paradigm shift in which we see the life of the innocent as worth more than the possessions of which one might rob them, or the object of revenge for whatever wrong that they may have done without knowing. Perhaps a recognition that none of us are innocent, and that we would all like some form of second chance, would go a long way here, as well. Something, ultimately, that is best accomplished with hearts and minds, not fists.
Discovering that is worth being addicted to a new program. These writers are saying something important, and I think that we should listen.
Photo Attribution: Dan4th
