So, I did major (and some minor) characters. Quick summary (for my sake, mostly): The King, The Prince, The Queen, The Love Interest, The Uncle, The Advisor, The Best Friends. K.
Number two was "major events of the story", and number three was minor events or events that happen outside the story. Ok, I had these separate, but I'm going to go ahead and do my (more) detailed plot analysis all at once instead of in two parts.
a) The Prince is born and raised.
TLK
b) The Uncle kills The King.
TLK
c) The Prince runs away/goes insane and The Uncle marries The Queen.
TLK
d) The Prince sees the ghost of The King.
TLK and H
e) The Prince waffles about what to do.
TLK and H
f) The Prince orders a play mimicking the action prior to the events of the story to get a reaction out of The Uncle.
H
g) The Prince kills The Advisor accidentally.
H
h) The Prince is exiled.
H
i) The Love Interest goes mad with grief over the death of The Advisor (her father) and commits suicide.
H
j) The Prince returns.
H
k) The Prince learns of The Love Interest's death and attacks Laertes, proclaiming his love for the dead Love Interest. (Laertes is The Love Interest's brother and son of The Advisor).
H
l) The Uncle orchestrates a duel between Laertes and The Prince. During the duel, The Queen drinks from a poisoned cup and dies.
H
m) Laertes cuts The Prince with a poisoned sword tip, mortally wounding The Prince. Laertes is also cut with the poisoned blade and dies.
H
n) The Prince kills The Uncle.
TLK and H
o) The Prince dies.
H
p) The Prince and the Love Interest live happily ever after, ruling wisely and well over a restored kingdom.
TLK
Of a-o, only 3 of the 16 events occur during the action of both works. Three more occur during the action of TLK and before the action of H. So that's approximately six of sixteen important plot points that occur in both works. There's a pivotal character in H (Laertes) who does not have an equivalent in TLK. So far, they look remarkably different.
Maybe a good next step will be to find other works with King/Uncle/Queen/Prince dynamic going on, since that seems to be the strongest similarity.
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Is "The Lion King" a retelling of "Hamlet"? part 3
Let's break this down again. Basic summaries/plots? Different in several crucial ways. But let's look at 1) important characters; 2) major events of the story; 3) minor events or events that happen outside of the main story.
1)
a) The King. Mufasa and Hamlet, Sr. Both are wise rulers of a peaceful country. (I can go through and cite this I suppose, but for right now I won't) Both appear as ghosts to their son, The Prince. Mufasa lives during the action of TLK. Hamlet, Sr. lives prior to the action of H. Interestingly, Mufasa is the presumed father of Nalla, The Love Interest. Both Mufasa and Hamlet, Sr. die.
b) The Prince. Simba and Hamlet. Both are the child and heir of The King. Simba is driven "insane" by grief, giving up his responsibilities as rightful heir to Pride Rock and escaping to the jungle across the desert. Hamlet is driven "insane" by something (possibly grief, possibly rage, possibly as a ruse), wandering about the castle and making his mother, The Queen, and the current king, The Uncle, and Ophelia, the Love Interest, very anxious. Hamlet dies, Simba does not.
c) The Uncle. Scar and Claudius. Both are the brother of The King and The Uncle of The Prince. I assume that both "marry" The Queen (in the case of TLK it is a bit unclear, but that is how lion prides usually work). Both kill The King. Both deny this action and place the blame elsewhere. Both Scar and Claudius die.
d) The Queen. Sarabi and Gertrude. Both are the wife of The King and then The Uncle, both are the mother of The Prince. Sarabi is a grudging "wife" and Gertrude is a willing (or at least supportive) one. But both "marry" the murderer of their former husband. Gertrude dies, Sarabi does not.
e) The Love Interest. Nalla and Ophelia. Nalla is probably The Prince's half sister. Ophelia is probably no relation to The Prince. Nalla is The Prince's best friend in childhood and brings him out of his "insane" grief to eventually return to enact revenge on The Uncle. Ophelia commits suicide after prolonged mistreatment by The Prince. Ophelia dies, Nalla does not.
f) The Advisor. Zazu and Pollonius. Pollonius is the father of The Love Interest. Pollonius dies, Zazu does not.
g) The Best Friends. Timon and Pumbaa, and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. Timon and Pumbaa have nothing to do with the action at and around Pride Rock. They are given no importance in the heirarchy there. Also, The Prince relies on them heavily and trusts them a great deal. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern have a bit of clout at court, are charged with a task directly by The Uncle, and seem to have little to none of The Prince's trust. Timon and Pumbaa live, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern die.
CONCLUSION: Three fairly close matches, though one is an "off-screen" character in H while an "on-screen" character in TLK. That's about half of the story (The Prince's life with The King) that happens in TLK that does NOT happen during the action of H. To me, that is already a stretch for a retelling. But it's far from conclusive, so let's keep looking.
The death tally is telling. Of the 8 characters the I drew parallels between, all 8 of them die in H and only 2 of them die in TLK. The deaths are a crucial part of H, giving a weight and gravity to the play that it would otherwise lack. It would be a very different work with fewer deaths. H can be read as a telling of the downfall of Denmark's (The Kingdom's) monarchy through the deaths and evils cascading from fratricide. The Kingdom in TLK suffers a temporary downfall during the rule of The Uncle but is restored to its former glory by the return of The Prince. The Prince in TLK is a savior, not an instrument of death and destruction.
H is not so much about justice as it is about revenge. TLK is not so much about revenge as it is about justice: each character gets what they deserve.
Ok, I got into themes a little there. I'll stop for now (time to get to German class) but I'll continue if I feel like there's anything more to say. Tell me your thoughts!
1)
a) The King. Mufasa and Hamlet, Sr. Both are wise rulers of a peaceful country. (I can go through and cite this I suppose, but for right now I won't) Both appear as ghosts to their son, The Prince. Mufasa lives during the action of TLK. Hamlet, Sr. lives prior to the action of H. Interestingly, Mufasa is the presumed father of Nalla, The Love Interest. Both Mufasa and Hamlet, Sr. die.
b) The Prince. Simba and Hamlet. Both are the child and heir of The King. Simba is driven "insane" by grief, giving up his responsibilities as rightful heir to Pride Rock and escaping to the jungle across the desert. Hamlet is driven "insane" by something (possibly grief, possibly rage, possibly as a ruse), wandering about the castle and making his mother, The Queen, and the current king, The Uncle, and Ophelia, the Love Interest, very anxious. Hamlet dies, Simba does not.
c) The Uncle. Scar and Claudius. Both are the brother of The King and The Uncle of The Prince. I assume that both "marry" The Queen (in the case of TLK it is a bit unclear, but that is how lion prides usually work). Both kill The King. Both deny this action and place the blame elsewhere. Both Scar and Claudius die.
d) The Queen. Sarabi and Gertrude. Both are the wife of The King and then The Uncle, both are the mother of The Prince. Sarabi is a grudging "wife" and Gertrude is a willing (or at least supportive) one. But both "marry" the murderer of their former husband. Gertrude dies, Sarabi does not.
e) The Love Interest. Nalla and Ophelia. Nalla is probably The Prince's half sister. Ophelia is probably no relation to The Prince. Nalla is The Prince's best friend in childhood and brings him out of his "insane" grief to eventually return to enact revenge on The Uncle. Ophelia commits suicide after prolonged mistreatment by The Prince. Ophelia dies, Nalla does not.
f) The Advisor. Zazu and Pollonius. Pollonius is the father of The Love Interest. Pollonius dies, Zazu does not.
g) The Best Friends. Timon and Pumbaa, and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. Timon and Pumbaa have nothing to do with the action at and around Pride Rock. They are given no importance in the heirarchy there. Also, The Prince relies on them heavily and trusts them a great deal. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern have a bit of clout at court, are charged with a task directly by The Uncle, and seem to have little to none of The Prince's trust. Timon and Pumbaa live, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern die.
CONCLUSION: Three fairly close matches, though one is an "off-screen" character in H while an "on-screen" character in TLK. That's about half of the story (The Prince's life with The King) that happens in TLK that does NOT happen during the action of H. To me, that is already a stretch for a retelling. But it's far from conclusive, so let's keep looking.
The death tally is telling. Of the 8 characters the I drew parallels between, all 8 of them die in H and only 2 of them die in TLK. The deaths are a crucial part of H, giving a weight and gravity to the play that it would otherwise lack. It would be a very different work with fewer deaths. H can be read as a telling of the downfall of Denmark's (The Kingdom's) monarchy through the deaths and evils cascading from fratricide. The Kingdom in TLK suffers a temporary downfall during the rule of The Uncle but is restored to its former glory by the return of The Prince. The Prince in TLK is a savior, not an instrument of death and destruction.
H is not so much about justice as it is about revenge. TLK is not so much about revenge as it is about justice: each character gets what they deserve.
Ok, I got into themes a little there. I'll stop for now (time to get to German class) but I'll continue if I feel like there's anything more to say. Tell me your thoughts!
Is "The Lion King" a retelling of "Hamlet"? part 2
I've got retelling pretty settled. Steve brought up an interesting point about whether a movie can ever be a retelling of something in a different medium. Basically, for the sake of my argument here, it definitely can be.
So, I'm going to do a super quick comparison of "Hamlet" and "The Lion King" just like I did for my other three examples. Then I'll go into more detail.
Disney's "The Lion King" (via IMDb) "Tricked into thinking he killed his father, a guilt ridden lion cub flees into exile and abandons his identity as the future King."
Shakespeare's "Hamlet" (via Wikipedia) " The play, set in the Kingdom of Denmark recounts how Prince Hamlet exacts revenge on his uncle Claudius for murdering the old King Hamlet (Claudius's brother and Prince Hamlet's father) and then succeeding to the throne and marrying Gertrude (the King Hamlet's widow and mother of Prince Hamlet)."
NB: "The Lion King" will be abbreviated "TLK" and "Hamlet" will be abbreviated "H".
Ok, right off I'm thinking not really similar at all.Some obvious differences:
1) TLK says the "prince" figure thinks he killed his father, the "king" character. Not something that ever happens in H.
2) Setting is different, but that's not really a big deal.
3) TLK only spends a small portion of it's plot on the "revenge" portion of the story; really, that's ALL of H.
4) The "prince" character in H doesn't really spend any time fleeing, except maybe the part where his "uncle" sends him away and then the "prince" comes right back. But you could see that as a parallel, maybe?
5) Not much is made of the "queen's" marriage to the "uncle" in TLK. It's kind of central to H's plot and the "prince's" predicament in H.
Next up: not sure. Some ideas about anything that strikes you as a similarity? As a difference?
So, I'm going to do a super quick comparison of "Hamlet" and "The Lion King" just like I did for my other three examples. Then I'll go into more detail.
Disney's "The Lion King" (via IMDb) "Tricked into thinking he killed his father, a guilt ridden lion cub flees into exile and abandons his identity as the future King."
Shakespeare's "Hamlet" (via Wikipedia) " The play, set in the Kingdom of Denmark recounts how Prince Hamlet exacts revenge on his uncle Claudius for murdering the old King Hamlet (Claudius's brother and Prince Hamlet's father) and then succeeding to the throne and marrying Gertrude (the King Hamlet's widow and mother of Prince Hamlet)."
NB: "The Lion King" will be abbreviated "TLK" and "Hamlet" will be abbreviated "H".
Ok, right off I'm thinking not really similar at all.Some obvious differences:
1) TLK says the "prince" figure thinks he killed his father, the "king" character. Not something that ever happens in H.
2) Setting is different, but that's not really a big deal.
3) TLK only spends a small portion of it's plot on the "revenge" portion of the story; really, that's ALL of H.
4) The "prince" character in H doesn't really spend any time fleeing, except maybe the part where his "uncle" sends him away and then the "prince" comes right back. But you could see that as a parallel, maybe?
5) Not much is made of the "queen's" marriage to the "uncle" in TLK. It's kind of central to H's plot and the "prince's" predicament in H.
Next up: not sure. Some ideas about anything that strikes you as a similarity? As a difference?
Is "The Lion King" (Disney) a retelling of "Hamlet" (Shakespeare)? part 1.
I'm going to go ahead and ruin the suspense: no.
Now for a "proof" of sorts. This is totally a rough draft, and I'm going to be figuring it out as I go. So take "No" as my hypothesis and see where I end up!
1) What is a "retelling" in literary-speak? I'll go to google:define for an answer.... "Tell (a story) again or differently." More specifically "(Retelling) A detailed oral or written recitation of a text, including setting, major and minor events, characters, and plot." And another interpretation of the word "retell": "(retelling) restating, after reading, what happened in a story, or the main ideas in a nonfiction text. Retellings are often used to measure a student’s level of text comprehension and interpretation."
Ok. We've narrowed this down a bit. I'm going to use the more specific definitions I found, picking out some key words to focus on: setting, major and minor events, characters, and plot. Plot seems especially important in this one, so I'm going to assume that a summary of an origianal text and a summary of the text's retelling should be similar or identical.
Let's poke at this with a few minimally contentious examples.
a) The Little Mermaid (Hans Christian Anderson vs Disney)
Hans Christian Anderson (via Wikipedia's initial summary) "... about a young mermaid willing to give up her life in the sea and her identity as a mermaid to gain a human soul and the love of a human prince."
Disney (via IMDb) "A mermaid princess makes a faustian bargain with an unscrupulous seahag in order to meet a human prince on land."
CONCLUSION: Ok, so the religious/soul bit changed, and the ending is different (in the fairytale she turns to foam but gets a soul, in the Disney version she gives up her family and gets the prince). But overall, lots in common. A decent retelling.
b) Beauty and the Beast (French folktale vs Disney)
French folktale: Really, the Disney version is remarkably similar. Important elements: Exchange of one hostage (the father) for another (Belle); after enduring long imprisonment, Belle begs to leave, is given a time frame in which to return, fails to do so, discovers that in her absence the Beast is near death, rushes back to him, and turns him back into a human through a profession of her love.
Disney (via IMDb) "Belle, whose father is imprisoned by the Beast, offers herself instead and discovers her captor to be an enchanted prince."
CONCLUSION: Lots of added characters (Gaston, the servants in the castle), but really these are incredibly similar. Definitely a retelling.
c) Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (book vs movie)
Does this one really need to be gone over? Suffice to say that the Boy Who Lived is sent to a wizarding school, meets his two best friends, his headmaster/mentor, his nemesis.... you know. The whole nine yards. All the same in both.
CONCLUSION: Only a retelling in that the mediums are different and the movie is severely condensed in comparison to the book.
I'm stopping here and waiting for a little feedback.
Now for a "proof" of sorts. This is totally a rough draft, and I'm going to be figuring it out as I go. So take "No" as my hypothesis and see where I end up!
1) What is a "retelling" in literary-speak? I'll go to google:define for an answer.... "Tell (a story) again or differently." More specifically "(Retelling) A detailed oral or written recitation of a text, including setting, major and minor events, characters, and plot." And another interpretation of the word "retell": "(retelling) restating, after reading, what happened in a story, or the main ideas in a nonfiction text. Retellings are often used to measure a student’s level of text comprehension and interpretation."
Ok. We've narrowed this down a bit. I'm going to use the more specific definitions I found, picking out some key words to focus on: setting, major and minor events, characters, and plot. Plot seems especially important in this one, so I'm going to assume that a summary of an origianal text and a summary of the text's retelling should be similar or identical.
Let's poke at this with a few minimally contentious examples.
a) The Little Mermaid (Hans Christian Anderson vs Disney)
Hans Christian Anderson (via Wikipedia's initial summary) "... about a young mermaid willing to give up her life in the sea and her identity as a mermaid to gain a human soul and the love of a human prince."
Disney (via IMDb) "A mermaid princess makes a faustian bargain with an unscrupulous seahag in order to meet a human prince on land."
CONCLUSION: Ok, so the religious/soul bit changed, and the ending is different (in the fairytale she turns to foam but gets a soul, in the Disney version she gives up her family and gets the prince). But overall, lots in common. A decent retelling.
b) Beauty and the Beast (French folktale vs Disney)
French folktale: Really, the Disney version is remarkably similar. Important elements: Exchange of one hostage (the father) for another (Belle); after enduring long imprisonment, Belle begs to leave, is given a time frame in which to return, fails to do so, discovers that in her absence the Beast is near death, rushes back to him, and turns him back into a human through a profession of her love.
Disney (via IMDb) "Belle, whose father is imprisoned by the Beast, offers herself instead and discovers her captor to be an enchanted prince."
CONCLUSION: Lots of added characters (Gaston, the servants in the castle), but really these are incredibly similar. Definitely a retelling.
c) Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (book vs movie)
Does this one really need to be gone over? Suffice to say that the Boy Who Lived is sent to a wizarding school, meets his two best friends, his headmaster/mentor, his nemesis.... you know. The whole nine yards. All the same in both.
CONCLUSION: Only a retelling in that the mediums are different and the movie is severely condensed in comparison to the book.
I'm stopping here and waiting for a little feedback.
Friday, August 26, 2011
Painting Class, Fall Semester
Also, I got a new piercing! It's the bottom one on the rim of my ear... like. The cartilage part.
But here's some sketches from my sketch book.
But here's some sketches from my sketch book.
Saturday, August 13, 2011
More card stuff
I've been pegging away at cards, but some programming/organizational issues got me distracted from like... actually MAKING cards. So I'm getting back to that.
In case anyone was wondering.
In case anyone was wondering.
Monday, August 8, 2011
Education Plans
'11-'12, at JCCC.
Fall 2011: Calc I, Art, English (Intro to Lit Theory), German I
Spring 2012: Calc II, English (old Brit lit?), German II, Physics I?
Summer 2012: Whatever I can take! Physics II, German III, Linear Algebra...?
'12-'13, at... KU? Hopefully. NOT in the school of engineering.
Fall 2012: Physics II or Linear Algebra (whichever I didn't already take), Chem I, English (new Brit lit?), German IV
Spring 2013: English (Shakespeare), Intro Comp Sci, Chem II, Statics and Dynamics
Summer 2013: Econ I, AutoCAD
PROBLEM: I need 9 humanities credits somewhere in here! Or. maybe? I don't know. I already have some credits in something, but I don't know how many/which ones will count.
'13-'14, at KU? In a School of Engineering, definitely.
Fall 2013: this is all planned out for transfer students at KU into Enviro Eng. 17 credits.
Spring 2014: also all planned out for transfer student at KU. 17 credits.
Summer 2014: two or three free classes. English? Maybe 9 credits.
'14-'15, same as previous year.
Fall 2014: all planned out already for transfer students into KU's Enviro Eng dept. One elective, maybe English? Unless they need to be in engineering. 17 credits.
Spring 2015: All planned out. Two electives, maybe both English? Unless they need to be in engineering. 18 credits.
Summer 2015: I'd like to be DONE, but maybe a few more credits to fill out English?
Without summer 2015, I'd have 30 English credits IF the electives aren't req'd to be engineering. If they are, then I'd need summer 2015. Of course, I'm a little squished when it comes to timing... I doubt all of the classes I need are offered over the summer. So. Not sure what to do there.
So that's my attempt to double major in English and Enviro Engineering! Whee!
EDIT: Approx credit per semester of above outline; approx cost per semester
'11-'12. JCCC.
Fall 2011: 16 credits; $3,024
Spring 2012: 18 credits; $3,402
Summer 2012: 6 credits? 9?; $1,134 or $1,701
'12-'13. KU.
Fall 2012: 18 credits; ($279*18)+($45*0)+($858/2) = $5,451
Spring 2013: 16 credits; ($279*16)+($45*3)+($858/2) = $5,028
Summer 2013: 6 credits? 9?; $???
'13-'14, KU, School of Engineering.
Fall 2013: 17 credits; ($279*17)+($45*17)+($858/2) = $5,937
Spring 2014: 17 credits; ($279*17)+($45*17)+($858/2) = $5,937
Summer 2014: Maybe 9 credits; $???
'14-'15, same as previous year.
Fall 2014: 17 credits; ($279*17)+($45*14)+($858/2) = $5,802
Spring 2015: 18 credits; ($279*18)+($45*12)+($858/2) = $5,991
Summer 2015: less than 9 credits; $???
Total cost: 3024+3402+1701+5451+5028+5937+5937+5802+5991= $42,273+(3 summers)
Total output: Environmental Engineering degree, English degree, 4 semesters of German
Fall 2011: Calc I, Art, English (Intro to Lit Theory), German I
Spring 2012: Calc II, English (old Brit lit?), German II, Physics I?
Summer 2012: Whatever I can take! Physics II, German III, Linear Algebra...?
'12-'13, at... KU? Hopefully. NOT in the school of engineering.
Fall 2012: Physics II or Linear Algebra (whichever I didn't already take), Chem I, English (new Brit lit?), German IV
Spring 2013: English (Shakespeare), Intro Comp Sci, Chem II, Statics and Dynamics
Summer 2013: Econ I, AutoCAD
PROBLEM: I need 9 humanities credits somewhere in here! Or. maybe? I don't know. I already have some credits in something, but I don't know how many/which ones will count.
'13-'14, at KU? In a School of Engineering, definitely.
Fall 2013: this is all planned out for transfer students at KU into Enviro Eng. 17 credits.
Spring 2014: also all planned out for transfer student at KU. 17 credits.
Summer 2014: two or three free classes. English? Maybe 9 credits.
'14-'15, same as previous year.
Fall 2014: all planned out already for transfer students into KU's Enviro Eng dept. One elective, maybe English? Unless they need to be in engineering. 17 credits.
Spring 2015: All planned out. Two electives, maybe both English? Unless they need to be in engineering. 18 credits.
Summer 2015: I'd like to be DONE, but maybe a few more credits to fill out English?
Without summer 2015, I'd have 30 English credits IF the electives aren't req'd to be engineering. If they are, then I'd need summer 2015. Of course, I'm a little squished when it comes to timing... I doubt all of the classes I need are offered over the summer. So. Not sure what to do there.
So that's my attempt to double major in English and Enviro Engineering! Whee!
EDIT: Approx credit per semester of above outline; approx cost per semester
'11-'12. JCCC.
Fall 2011: 16 credits; $3,024
Spring 2012: 18 credits; $3,402
Summer 2012: 6 credits? 9?; $1,134 or $1,701
'12-'13. KU.
Fall 2012: 18 credits; ($279*18)+($45*0)+($858/2) = $5,451
Spring 2013: 16 credits; ($279*16)+($45*3)+($858/2) = $5,028
Summer 2013: 6 credits? 9?; $???
'13-'14, KU, School of Engineering.
Fall 2013: 17 credits; ($279*17)+($45*17)+($858/2) = $5,937
Spring 2014: 17 credits; ($279*17)+($45*17)+($858/2) = $5,937
Summer 2014: Maybe 9 credits; $???
'14-'15, same as previous year.
Fall 2014: 17 credits; ($279*17)+($45*14)+($858/2) = $5,802
Spring 2015: 18 credits; ($279*18)+($45*12)+($858/2) = $5,991
Summer 2015: less than 9 credits; $???
Total cost: 3024+3402+1701+5451+5028+5937+5937+5802+5991= $42,273+(3 summers)
Total output: Environmental Engineering degree, English degree, 4 semesters of German
Saturday, August 6, 2011
Quick fake review of "Second Bill of Rights: FDR's Unfinished Revolution and Why We Need it More than Ever"
So. Talking/discussing this book (well, the introduction) with C. Here's some of the comments that came out of it:
There's a difference between "rights" and "privileges", which I guess is important - but much more important to me is the difference between what a healthy, positive society does/enacts/spends money and effort on versus what it chooses to leave alone or up to individuals. But there's an even more interesting distinction, which keeps becoming more and more apparent to me as I talk things over with C. It's this: laws declaring "must not!" versus laws declaring "must!" Another way to look at this, that I really like but haven't finished thinking through yet, is a passive law (one that requires little to no action to enact) versus an active law. An example would be a law against murder (a "must not" or "passive" law) versus a law commanding citizens to pay taxes (a "must!" or "active" law).
The Bill of Rights has an interesting mix of "active" and "passive" language in it. Or maybe I'll stick with the "must" and "must not" phrasing of C. Examples: Freedom of speech, religion, unreasonable search and seizure, right to bear arms (which I don't like, but it's an example nonetheless) are all Must Not rights/freedoms. Right to a job, to earn enough for food/clothing/recreation, of all farmers to raise crops and sell them at a price allowing for a pleasant living, for every business to operate in an environment free of unfair competition and domination from monopolies, of every family to a decent home, to adequate medical care and to achieve and enjoy good health, to adequate protection in old age from nasty events, to a good education are all Musts. (The "musts" all come from FDR's second bill of rights).
I support "must" laws in many cases, but not as rights! They are privileges granted by a sane and healthy society to encourage future sanity and health of its members. "Must nots" I also support, also not really as rights though. I think they are foundations of a strong society and if people want to live in a pleasant environment they are required. But that doesn't make them rights, it just makes them incredibly sensible and pragmatic.
Is eating food a "right" of being alive? No, people starve all the time. But it's unpleasant, and leads to death, and is generally to be avoided at all costs. So a good family (or on a larger scale, a society) provides its members with access to food.
There's a difference between "rights" and "privileges", which I guess is important - but much more important to me is the difference between what a healthy, positive society does/enacts/spends money and effort on versus what it chooses to leave alone or up to individuals. But there's an even more interesting distinction, which keeps becoming more and more apparent to me as I talk things over with C. It's this: laws declaring "must not!" versus laws declaring "must!" Another way to look at this, that I really like but haven't finished thinking through yet, is a passive law (one that requires little to no action to enact) versus an active law. An example would be a law against murder (a "must not" or "passive" law) versus a law commanding citizens to pay taxes (a "must!" or "active" law).
The Bill of Rights has an interesting mix of "active" and "passive" language in it. Or maybe I'll stick with the "must" and "must not" phrasing of C. Examples: Freedom of speech, religion, unreasonable search and seizure, right to bear arms (which I don't like, but it's an example nonetheless) are all Must Not rights/freedoms. Right to a job, to earn enough for food/clothing/recreation, of all farmers to raise crops and sell them at a price allowing for a pleasant living, for every business to operate in an environment free of unfair competition and domination from monopolies, of every family to a decent home, to adequate medical care and to achieve and enjoy good health, to adequate protection in old age from nasty events, to a good education are all Musts. (The "musts" all come from FDR's second bill of rights).
I support "must" laws in many cases, but not as rights! They are privileges granted by a sane and healthy society to encourage future sanity and health of its members. "Must nots" I also support, also not really as rights though. I think they are foundations of a strong society and if people want to live in a pleasant environment they are required. But that doesn't make them rights, it just makes them incredibly sensible and pragmatic.
Is eating food a "right" of being alive? No, people starve all the time. But it's unpleasant, and leads to death, and is generally to be avoided at all costs. So a good family (or on a larger scale, a society) provides its members with access to food.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)