thread: 2009-11-23 : The interesting prob with Sons of Anarchy
On 2009-11-24, Vincent wrote:
Ralph: Right. Whatever Jax feels, he quite consistently makes the same moral decisions Clay makes. I just think that the writers expect us to judge him differently because of how he feels.
Brand: Well, the show really has only two moral bands. First: selfish violent people. Second: rapists and white supremists. There are also a few innocent children, but they don't have any moral voice, they exist as moral objects for the others to act upon and react to.
In the first band, some people have the opportunity to and are capable of acting effectively on their selfishness and/or violence, while others don't and aren't, but that's not a moral difference. The show certainly doesn't present victims as inherently morally superior to their victimizers (which is just fine with me).
There is an interesting counter-case to Jax and Clay, which is Tara and Gemma. Here's how it looks:
Clay: I'm going to keep this thing I did a secret, to protect myself.
Jax: Oh yeah? Well I'm going to keep it secret too, to protect you, but I'm cranky about it.
-vs-
Gemma: I'm going to keep this thing that happened to me a secret, to protect Clay.
Tara: I'm going to keep it secret too, because I promised you I would.
Jax's reasons for keeping this thing secret are the same as Clay's, but the writers expect us to think differently about them as moral decisions, because Jax doesn't feel content about it and Clay does. Tara's reasons for keeping this other thing secret ARE different from Gemma's, and the writers are right to expect us to think differently about them as moral decisions.
