Mark B wrote, in referring to a quote I pulled from Benjamin
Schutz's Embrace the Wolf (by the way, anything of his is
good reading for Washington month):
"I think the trouble with using this quote in isolation is is
it doesn't quite apply. We have been talking about the
situation of the protagonists' sidekick doing the dirty work.
In the book Saunders is his client's husband who he was
supposed to find and bring home, not a sidekick who may do
his dirty work. I think there is a clear difference in
responsibility in stopping someone you are supposed to
protect from doing a morally wrong deeed as opposed to
letting someone who should be your equal do it."
You're absolutely correct about the difference in overall
implications. It just seemed to me that the quote summed up
the issue we had been talking about.
SPOILER ALERT
And the way it plays out is not that different from how it
does with the sidekicks. Haggerty tries to convince Saunders
not to kill his kids' killer, saying he will go to prison.
However, at the time, Haggerty is
(conveniently?) physically incapable of stopping Saunders.
So, as in the sidekick examples, the killer is killed.
And Haggerty is the only witness. He decides to remain
silent, lets Saunders get away with it. Haggerty does,
however, consider the moral consequences of this silence and
realizes he is a bit lessened by his decision. It may be a
quick decision for him, but it is not an easy one.
Plus, in later books, he is rewarded with plenty of publicity
and work after his role in tracking down the serial killer
comes out.
Mark
-- # To unsubscribe from the regular list, say "unsubscribe rara-avis" to # majordomo@icomm.ca. This will not work for the digest version. # The web pages for the list are at http://www.miskatonic.org/rara-avis/ .
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 19 Nov 2001 EST