In the Old Days
In today’s For Better or For Worse, Liz questions the legal system mainly on the basis of its slowness and how it relates to her, i.e. she has gone to the courthouse apparently 2 days in a row and not gotten to testify. She reminisces about the good old days, when everyone sat in the courtroom, and the trial was done in a matter of seconds---with little to no waiting. This, of course, was not how things were in the old days. But the legal system has changed a lot, and it is very different in United State and Canada, than it used to be.
I am a big fan of the musical composer Stephen Sondheim and particular his musical Sweeney Todd. It has long been my dream to one day play the title character in that show. But I digress. One of Stephen Sondheim’s more recent musicals was a short one-act musical called Assassins, which is not one of my favourites, even though the subject matter is pretty interesting. Basically it is a musical about all the assassins of the President of the United States, whether they were successful or not. If you tried to kill the President of the United States, then you would think that this would be a case which would come to trial quickly with a fairly decisive verdict. And up until the 1970s, it was. All the Presidential assassins were dead within a year of their assassination attempt prior to this point. After that, they are all still alive. John Hinkley, Jr., Sarah Jane Moore, Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme are all still alive and kicking. The fact that they are, is a testimony to the altered state of the United States legal system.
Apparently there are similar problems in Canada. It doesn’t take many internet searches on the Canadian legal system to find people trying to make changes to improve a backed-up court system. The problem Lynn Johnston has in this lesson, is that these thoughts are coming from Elizabeth Patterson, who can barely type on the computer with a cat in the room, much less understand the legal system. It seems like an odd choice.
The problem is that Lynn Johnston is trying to cook too many plots at the same time. A better choice for making that pronouncement would have been John or Elly Patterson, if they had chosen to accompany Liz to the courtroom. But if John or Elly are there, then you can’t have the "Liz spending time alone with Anthony" plotline. Well, actually, it would have a very different dynamic with John or Elly there, and frankly, it would have been a much better story. There are only so many times you can do the bit with Elizabeth or someone making some statement which can also be taken as a statement about the relationship between Liz and Anthony like today’s “All this waiting isn’t fair to us!” which also means it isn’t fair that Liz and Anthony have to wait to be together. If Elly or John had been there, then they could place a proper emphasis on the part of the Liz / Anthony relationship which Lynn Johnston infuriatingly seems to be ignoring. Elly could praise Anthony for rescuing Liz. John could bring up uncomfortable questions about Anthony’s relationship with Thérèse because of Francoise. Instead we get this nonsense about how things were better in the old days, from a person who wasn’t even alive in the old days.
Tomorrow’s strip: Remembrance Day celebration. Usual questions from me. Where are Elizabeth and John? Followed by a very different question. What war is April talking about? Canada is not in the Iraq War, so April could be talking about Canada’s involvement in Afghanistan, but that war was over in 2002. Maybe April means the generically stated, “War on Terrorism”. I am sad to report April, that is a particular war which is going to go on for awhile.
I am a big fan of the musical composer Stephen Sondheim and particular his musical Sweeney Todd. It has long been my dream to one day play the title character in that show. But I digress. One of Stephen Sondheim’s more recent musicals was a short one-act musical called Assassins, which is not one of my favourites, even though the subject matter is pretty interesting. Basically it is a musical about all the assassins of the President of the United States, whether they were successful or not. If you tried to kill the President of the United States, then you would think that this would be a case which would come to trial quickly with a fairly decisive verdict. And up until the 1970s, it was. All the Presidential assassins were dead within a year of their assassination attempt prior to this point. After that, they are all still alive. John Hinkley, Jr., Sarah Jane Moore, Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme are all still alive and kicking. The fact that they are, is a testimony to the altered state of the United States legal system.
Apparently there are similar problems in Canada. It doesn’t take many internet searches on the Canadian legal system to find people trying to make changes to improve a backed-up court system. The problem Lynn Johnston has in this lesson, is that these thoughts are coming from Elizabeth Patterson, who can barely type on the computer with a cat in the room, much less understand the legal system. It seems like an odd choice.
The problem is that Lynn Johnston is trying to cook too many plots at the same time. A better choice for making that pronouncement would have been John or Elly Patterson, if they had chosen to accompany Liz to the courtroom. But if John or Elly are there, then you can’t have the "Liz spending time alone with Anthony" plotline. Well, actually, it would have a very different dynamic with John or Elly there, and frankly, it would have been a much better story. There are only so many times you can do the bit with Elizabeth or someone making some statement which can also be taken as a statement about the relationship between Liz and Anthony like today’s “All this waiting isn’t fair to us!” which also means it isn’t fair that Liz and Anthony have to wait to be together. If Elly or John had been there, then they could place a proper emphasis on the part of the Liz / Anthony relationship which Lynn Johnston infuriatingly seems to be ignoring. Elly could praise Anthony for rescuing Liz. John could bring up uncomfortable questions about Anthony’s relationship with Thérèse because of Francoise. Instead we get this nonsense about how things were better in the old days, from a person who wasn’t even alive in the old days.
Tomorrow’s strip: Remembrance Day celebration. Usual questions from me. Where are Elizabeth and John? Followed by a very different question. What war is April talking about? Canada is not in the Iraq War, so April could be talking about Canada’s involvement in Afghanistan, but that war was over in 2002. Maybe April means the generically stated, “War on Terrorism”. I am sad to report April, that is a particular war which is going to go on for awhile.
posted by howard at 9:42 PM
2 Comments:
Yes, I wasn't sure how to take April's question. Did she mean a particular war, or war in general, as in "When is all the war going to stop?" Well, you'll see how I managed to dodge the whole thing.
So really, it is not a changed attitude toward assassins, but in all three cases, the upheaval of the laws on the death penalty and legal insanity that probably resulted in those sentences.
I agree with that, and I really appreciate you giving me the legal background that led to the decision. I learn so much from you.
However, my main point was to give a clear cut example that the legal system had changed, and not so much how it changed (which is the information you so kindly provided). One of the other assassins, Charles Guiteau (who assassinated President James Garfield), as I recollect, was crazy on a whole different scale than Hinckley. I wonder how he would fair in today's legal system.
Post a Comment
<< Home