The connections between Crime & Punishment, The Minority Report, the article, and the lyrics is pretty obvious; they are all about crime. Hence, my title.
The Minority Report discusses the system of precrime (which should sound pretty obvious). The police force has the authority to arrest criminals even before they commit the crime. Relying on information from vegetable state sources. They are considered "stupid and retarded", and also heavily deformed. Anderton, the head commissioner, finds him self in a dilemma. One of the cards read his name and say he is plotting to murder Leopold Kaplan. A retired military general. Anderton, not even knowing who this man was, panics and tries to leave. Kaplans men get a hold of him and he then is met with him. He says that he is going to turn him in, for his own safety. But he then later finds out that Kaplan is behind the whole plot, framing him in an attempt to regain Army control. The minority report reads that Anderton had changed his mind, therefore Kaplan was in no real danger, but Anderton ends up killing him anyway to make sure the precrime system isn't discredited. I definitely can see a connection between this and Crime & Punishment. It seems as if everything we do based off of society's perspective. I mean, seriously? Locking up people who are innocent, but MIGHT commit a crime in the future? I find that rather unfair. I don't know if it's just me but I'm okay with the system we have now. I just don't feel as if information like that is liable from three vegetables.
The lyrics for "I don't like Monday's" kinda sorta disturb me in a way? A 16 year old girl going on a shooting spree? For what reason? She's probably kinda nuts. And I'm guessing she doesn't like Monday's? Or this occurred on a Monday? Who knows. It kinda confuses me but I guess in a way there is a connection. Raskolnikov didn't like the old lady, so he killed her. Oh joy. Another story of a psycho.
Now the article, I can make the best connection out of. It talks of criminals and how their brain varies in different to those who don't commit crimes. Studies are done to show that people with antisocial personality disorder have a higher risk of committing crimes, considering that they don't have a feeling for what's right and what's wrong, although they do know the two apart. Should you really charge someone who commits the crime if they have no sense of guilt or remorse for it? I don't think it's fair, in a sense. If they don't feel emotion for it, how can it be a crime to them? What are ethics to judge a persons sense of right and wrong? Sure, society places great dismay on psychopaths but like the article states; did they really choose to be born that way? I see a connection in this and Crime & Punishment by the fact that Raskolnikov is afraid of being judged by society for his actions but he is already judging himself. He of course feels guilt and emotion for what he has done, clearly not being a psychopath. So then why did he do it? I don't know. Maybe he was fated to kill her. Just maybe.
The criminals mind is one heck of an interesting place and all 3 of these sources seem to somehow fit and be in tune with one another. Some are fated and some are just crazy. Either way though, a crime is still a crime, no matter who's ethics you're looking at.
No comments:
Post a Comment