Context
The Shreveport Times had an article on Nancy Grace in the Living section this morning. I had never heard of this woman before, possibly because the only television news I watch is the Daily Show and that not regularly. The gist of the article is that the suicide of her prime suspect has not lessened Ms. Grace’s zeal for pursuing the case of a missing child.
Commentary
The article in question does not appear on the Times website, so if you want to read it for yourself, you'll have to do it the old-fashioned way.
I had a number of initial reactions to this article. The one that stuck with me was this: why is a prosecutor working for CNN instead of the courts? I think the answer emerges in Ms. Grace’s statement quoted in the fourth paragraph: “I remain dedicated to the ongoing fight for crime victims everywhere.” It’s possible that she got frustrated when she found out that in the United States, prosecutors are not supposed to be advocates for crime victims. That’s because in this country, we treat crime as an offense against society, not an individual person.
Think about it. A criminal trial is titled The State of Whatever vs. Whomever. It is often the case that district attorneys disregard the opinion of the crime victim when deciding whether or not to prosecute a case. Victims have no intrinsic right to be heard in a criminal trial, but if either side thinks their testimony will be useful, they can be compelled to appear against their will.
The paragraph above may lead you to think I’m opposed to the American judicial system. Quite the contrary, I’m its biggest fan, because I subscribe to the premise above: crime is an offense against society. Obviously rape damages a woman or man, but it also damages the threads that hold us together.
Nancy Grace and I are probably in complete agreement on the previous point, but the American judicial system says that persecuting people without due process also damages society. That’s why we have an adversarial criminal justice system. The prosecutor’s job is to speak for the “we have to punish criminals” societal interest and the defense attorney presents the interest in considering exonerating evidence and mitigating circumstances. Both of them are, therefore, “officers of the court.” Society, as represented by a jury, ideally decides which interest is more compelling in this particular case.
Nancy Grace circumvents this system. She’s an advocate for victims, so her job is to slam the people she considers to be perpetrators. OK, it’s only television, not an actual judicial proceeding, but am I the only one who thinks that suicide indicates there might be more than one victim here? Does our society have any interest we might possibly want to consider before unleashing a Nancy Grace on the world and calling it “entertainment?”
What did you see today?
9/20/2006
I saw a mistake I had made
Context
I was going to rant today about a page on the American Library Association website. When I went to pull a quote from the page, I realized that I had read it wrong and it was not rantworthy.
Commentary
Nope, I’m not going to tell you what the page was or what mistake I made, because it’s embarrassing. What I am going to say is that this blog has taught me something about my reactions. I’ll be going along, putting together a self-righteous crusade against something I’ve seen or heard, only to realize that what I thought I saw wasn’t really there.
Publishing my thoughts, whether anyone reads them or not, forces me to examine their underpinnings and take more careful steps instead of jumping to conclusions. I wonder what would happen if I treated all of my responses to stimuli as if they might be on public display?
What did you really see today?
I was going to rant today about a page on the American Library Association website. When I went to pull a quote from the page, I realized that I had read it wrong and it was not rantworthy.
Commentary
Nope, I’m not going to tell you what the page was or what mistake I made, because it’s embarrassing. What I am going to say is that this blog has taught me something about my reactions. I’ll be going along, putting together a self-righteous crusade against something I’ve seen or heard, only to realize that what I thought I saw wasn’t really there.
Publishing my thoughts, whether anyone reads them or not, forces me to examine their underpinnings and take more careful steps instead of jumping to conclusions. I wonder what would happen if I treated all of my responses to stimuli as if they might be on public display?
What did you really see today?
9/13/2006
I saw a flyer I was not interested in
Context
Towards the end of my lunch hour today, a man approached me and tried to hand me a flyer. I asked what it was, and he said it would help me figure out if I was going to heaven after I die. I said, "interesting," and walked on without taking the flyer.
Commentary
One of my favorite characters from the Sylvia comic strip, is The Woman who Does Everything More Beautifully than You. I think she's supposed to be a send-up of Martha Stewart, but she actually reminds me a lot of myself. Those of you who have seen my home or my artwork are excused to go explode with laughter.
Now then, what I mean is that when I set out to do things, I'm very detail oriented. I used to work at the Oakland SPCA, which has now been incorporated into the East Bay SPCA. Cleaning kennels used to take me hours longer than everyone else, because I did every step exactly the way I was told, covered every surface with disinfectant, dried thoroughly, and never, ever took shortcuts. I really believe that there’s no point in doing something if you’re not going to do it right. I don’t think I have an obsessive-compulsive disorder, because I don’t feel compelled to do things this way; I just like it.
It can lead to problems, though. Have you heard of the “tyranny of the urgent?” I’m more dominated by the “tyranny of the plan,” as in, I am taking these steps now; don’t try to interrupt me with something else. Which brings me to the gentleman with the flyer. I was on my lunch hour. I had no urgent duties keeping me from engaging with him and building a relationship. But here’s what went through my head: “I’ve bought this sympathy card; I need to write a message in it and look up my co-workers address so I can mail it to her; talking with this guy would be a waste of my very well-planned-out time.” Which was silly. I missed a one-time-opportunity to show love to my brother in Christ in order to accomplish a task I could have done at any number of other times.
What did you see today?
Towards the end of my lunch hour today, a man approached me and tried to hand me a flyer. I asked what it was, and he said it would help me figure out if I was going to heaven after I die. I said, "interesting," and walked on without taking the flyer.
Commentary
One of my favorite characters from the Sylvia comic strip, is The Woman who Does Everything More Beautifully than You. I think she's supposed to be a send-up of Martha Stewart, but she actually reminds me a lot of myself. Those of you who have seen my home or my artwork are excused to go explode with laughter.
Now then, what I mean is that when I set out to do things, I'm very detail oriented. I used to work at the Oakland SPCA, which has now been incorporated into the East Bay SPCA. Cleaning kennels used to take me hours longer than everyone else, because I did every step exactly the way I was told, covered every surface with disinfectant, dried thoroughly, and never, ever took shortcuts. I really believe that there’s no point in doing something if you’re not going to do it right. I don’t think I have an obsessive-compulsive disorder, because I don’t feel compelled to do things this way; I just like it.
It can lead to problems, though. Have you heard of the “tyranny of the urgent?” I’m more dominated by the “tyranny of the plan,” as in, I am taking these steps now; don’t try to interrupt me with something else. Which brings me to the gentleman with the flyer. I was on my lunch hour. I had no urgent duties keeping me from engaging with him and building a relationship. But here’s what went through my head: “I’ve bought this sympathy card; I need to write a message in it and look up my co-workers address so I can mail it to her; talking with this guy would be a waste of my very well-planned-out time.” Which was silly. I missed a one-time-opportunity to show love to my brother in Christ in order to accomplish a task I could have done at any number of other times.
What did you see today?
9/03/2006
I heard a Jackson Browne song
Context
I heard the Jackson Browne song “Doctor, My Eyes” on the radio today. These are the lyrics:
Doctor, my eyes have seen the years
And the slow parade of tears
Without crying.
Now I want to understand.
‘Cause I have done all that I could
To see the evil and the good
Without hiding.
You must help me if you can!
Doctor, my eyes!
Tell me what is wrong.
Was I unwise
To leave them open for so long?
‘Cause I have wandered through this world.
As each moment has unfurled
I’ve been waiting
To awaken from these dreams.
People go just where they will.
I never noticed them until
I got this feeling
That it’s later than it seems.
Doctor, my eyes!
Tell me what you see.
I hear their cries.
Just say if it’s too late for me.
Doctor, my eyes
Cannot see the sky.
Is this the price
For having learned how not to cry?
Copyright Jackson Browne, 1971. Used by permission.
If you've never heard the song, you can find an mp3 on this webpage.
Commentary
I like Jackson Browne in general, but this is by far my favorite of his songs. At the beginning this guy narrates his attempt to be an unbiased observer of everything and, in the first chorus, expresses his concern that he’s injured himself by seeing too much. Later, the listener realizes that the protagonist may be looking at everything, but not really seeing a great deal of it (how is possible to be this great observer, but “never notice” the people?). And finally, one gets the impression that the injury was not caused by being an observer, but by trying to stay “unbiased” while actual hurt is going on in the world.
This is not only another one of these “I heard” instead of “I saw” entries, but the first one in over a month! I don’t think about this blog every day, but when it has come to mind lately, I’ve thought, “I haven’t really seen anything.” I could be tempted to wonder if I’m suffering from the same eye condition Jackson Browne describes. Have I been trying so hard to stay unbiased that I’m no longer able to see anything? Or worse, has God decided that there’s no sense in showing me anything if I won’t do anything about it?
The temptation is there, but in the end I know a couple of things:
1) Every day is a gift and an opportunity to serve the Lord. Maybe this is a time of more resting than seeing.
2) God is stubborn. If He wants me to see stuff, He’s going to keep showing it to me until I respond correctly. To paraphrase “Alice’s Restaurant,” another favorite song, “He’s not proud. Or tired.”
What did you see today?
I heard the Jackson Browne song “Doctor, My Eyes” on the radio today. These are the lyrics:
Doctor, my eyes have seen the years
And the slow parade of tears
Without crying.
Now I want to understand.
‘Cause I have done all that I could
To see the evil and the good
Without hiding.
You must help me if you can!
Doctor, my eyes!
Tell me what is wrong.
Was I unwise
To leave them open for so long?
‘Cause I have wandered through this world.
As each moment has unfurled
I’ve been waiting
To awaken from these dreams.
People go just where they will.
I never noticed them until
I got this feeling
That it’s later than it seems.
Doctor, my eyes!
Tell me what you see.
I hear their cries.
Just say if it’s too late for me.
Doctor, my eyes
Cannot see the sky.
Is this the price
For having learned how not to cry?
Copyright Jackson Browne, 1971. Used by permission.
If you've never heard the song, you can find an mp3 on this webpage.
Commentary
I like Jackson Browne in general, but this is by far my favorite of his songs. At the beginning this guy narrates his attempt to be an unbiased observer of everything and, in the first chorus, expresses his concern that he’s injured himself by seeing too much. Later, the listener realizes that the protagonist may be looking at everything, but not really seeing a great deal of it (how is possible to be this great observer, but “never notice” the people?). And finally, one gets the impression that the injury was not caused by being an observer, but by trying to stay “unbiased” while actual hurt is going on in the world.
This is not only another one of these “I heard” instead of “I saw” entries, but the first one in over a month! I don’t think about this blog every day, but when it has come to mind lately, I’ve thought, “I haven’t really seen anything.” I could be tempted to wonder if I’m suffering from the same eye condition Jackson Browne describes. Have I been trying so hard to stay unbiased that I’m no longer able to see anything? Or worse, has God decided that there’s no sense in showing me anything if I won’t do anything about it?
The temptation is there, but in the end I know a couple of things:
1) Every day is a gift and an opportunity to serve the Lord. Maybe this is a time of more resting than seeing.
2) God is stubborn. If He wants me to see stuff, He’s going to keep showing it to me until I respond correctly. To paraphrase “Alice’s Restaurant,” another favorite song, “He’s not proud. Or tired.”
What did you see today?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)