Prompt 6:
Justice/Crime and Punishment: In almost all of the texts we have read, some conception of justice—especially when it comes to punishment comes into play. Yet justice is never an easy concept to pin down. For instance, in the Odyssey, the suitors violate the codified guest-host relationship, yet, for some readers, Odysseus’ response—mass slaughter—seems in excess of what might be considered “just.” Think about other systems that are violated in the text we’ve read— divine laws in Antigone and the Inferno; the laws of the city in Antigone; the inscrutable rules by which demons operate in The Thousand and One Nights. Certain texts, like Antigone, offer multiple, competing conceptions of justice. Others, like the Inferno, offer vivid portraits of justice enacted on the souls of sinners—with very little outright theorization of the “laws” behind these punishments. Write an argumentative paper analyzing the “fit” between crime and punishment in the systems of justice articulated (or implied) in two or more different texts we have read this semester.
Intro: Laws are distinctions between right and wrong solidified by the authority governing a society. They are meant to guide people toward the behavior deemed best for creating and maintaining peace. In order to ensure that they are taken seriously, penalties are devised for people who act in opposition to the standards set by the body in power. Of course, every offense does not receive the same sanction. Rather, crimes are assessed, ranked and assigned corresponding punishments based on their decided severity. As such, it can be argued that any given system of law reflects its central figure’s priorities, and emulates a particular interpretation of morality. Law and authority should remain impartial so as to promote equity, but when it is effectively based on a personality, bias is inherently embedded. Crimes and their punishments become less about the good of the public, and more related to offense against the figure most openly active in command. In Dante’s Inferno, and Sophocles’ Antigone, the actions which are considered to be criminal, and the severity of corresponding punishments, evince the presence of egotistical taint in each narrative’s system of law and authority.
Inferno:
God is the figure of authority who determines what is a crime, how bad it is, and how the offender will be punished. He is supposed to be an almighty figure, and so acts such as suicide and soothsaying are sinful because they remove from His self-incited power.
- God is understood to be the father of everything in Christianity. He dictates birth and death, and has incredible influence over our fate. When someone commits suicide they are, effectively, stealing the power over their own life away from God. For someone like Pier della Vigna encountered in the 7th circle, who was unhappy toward the end of his life due to accusation from the court around him, suicide appeared to be a way to end his suffering. Law is supposed to help keep the people happy, and for Vigna death seemed like a better option. Nonetheless, he is punished for essentially deciding to try and form happiness on his own terms. (Canto XIII)
- Christianity, and religion in general, rely heavily on having faith in that which does not have scientific proof. One soothsayer Dante and Virgil encounter is Michael Scot, accused of knowing every kind of magical fraudulence, but the footnotes describe him as a scientist, philosopher, and astrologist. There are all conventions which challenge divinity, but do not have immediately adverse effects on a society. He is condemned to the 4th bolgia not for harming a neighbor, rather for raising a threat to loyalty toward God’s control. (Canto XX)
Antigone:
While the gods in Greek mythology were widely accepted as divine and absolute, there were earthly figures of authority. Kreon, as king, does have to govern the people in a more direct manner than the gods do. However, instead of staying in his lane as a glorified manager, he allows his ego to taint the law.
- In declaring that Polyneikes may not be buried he replaces divine law with his own interpretation of morality regarding loyalty to the state. Then, in refusing to pardon Antigone, despite the public’s disapproval of his action (voiced by Haimon around line 765), he admittedly is looking out for his own reputation before setting the proper example of understanding and neutral justice the society deserves. (line 1212)
Conclusion:
God’s ego is based on his determinate power, any acts which relinquish him of control are then deemed sinful and worthy of 7th level of inferno punishment despite their minute afffet on society. Glutton and avarice which actually do directly take away from others, for example, are found several levels up (3&4)
Kreon’s ego is based on his reputation, being perceived as a strong, stern, but basically chauvinist leader. Having to admit he is wrong to the public is inconceivable to him until it is far too late, though it is what his subjects wanted from him. Showing compassion would have set an example as an honest man, instead his actions set precedent for stubbornness at the expense of others.
I think you have great evidence from the Inferno to back up your claim. I know this is a general outline, but in your essay, you should probably go more in depth about how the crime fits the punishment and if the severity of the punishment is just. Same goes for Antigone, but overall, this is a very good start. I like the slight correlation of divine power in both of the texts you chose, you might want to consider discussing that in your essay as well.
Hi Viv,
Your central claim–about the way an individual ruler can distort supposedly impartial and impersonal laws–is a really strong one. It is well articulated in the introduction: …”Any given system of law reflects its central figure’s priorities, and emulates a particular interpretation of morality. Law and authority should remain impartial so as to promote equity, but when it is effectively based on a personality, bias is inherently embedded. Crimes and their punishments become less about the good of the public, and more related to offense against the figure most openly active in command.” (One note: Watch out for pronouns–“it” in the second sentence quoted here should read “they,” since it refers back to both law and authority.)
One thing you’re going to need to gather evidence on, in both texts, is that distorting element–the personality, subjective desires, will, and biases of the central ruling figure. This will be easier with Antigone, in which characters critique Creon, and Creon himself comments on his own status (he seems to think he embodies the law, and is not separate from it). It will be more difficult in the Inferno, where God’s rationale for punishments, and even the laws that govern damnation and salvation, remain largely implied. Here, you have chosen examples of those who have challenged divine authority AS authority, which seems like an interesting starting point. But you may need further examples (and perhaps some analysis of Dante’s reactions, and Virgil’s reaction to Dante’s reactions) to create a less selective, more complex portrait of how God’s law works here. (It may not in fact work the same way in every case). My point isn’t to say you’re wrong–you’re not!–but to urge you not to dismiss Dante’s God as a tyrant out of hand. This isn’t quite how *Dante* presents the divine, so in order to make a case for an overly personal, vindictive divinity, you’ll need to dig deep, and read against the grain a little.
On a much smaller scale–work to avoid the passive voice (“is understood” or “can be seen as”). The active voice leads to bolder claims and more straightforward statements. There’s an element of tentativeness in some of the phrasing which seems rhetorical, not functional–that is, as a reader, I’m not convinced you need to couch your points in this slightly hesitant phrasing.
I’m excited to see what happens here. It’s a great topic, and a fascinating comparison.
Best,
Prof Kolb