I just watched the Season 7 finale of 24, and it occurred to me that religious themes of sacrifice and redemption were powerful undercurrents in this season.
In the two-hour movie prologue to Season 7, suggestively titled "24: Redemption," Jack Bauer is on the run from the law and from his guilt for all the terrible things he has done in the line of duty. At the end of "Redemption" he turns himself in in order to save some African children and to honor a fallen friend. Season 7 begins with Jack facing interrogation before a Senate tribunal investigating his use of torture in the line of duty. Jack refuses legal counsel, choosing instead to speak on his own behalf. He is insistent that he does not regret anything he has done, but he also seems prepared to face the legal consequences for it.
Throughout the season there is a constant tension between what is right and what is necessary. Jack readily admits that the things he has done are wrong and weigh heavily on his conscience, yet he regrets none of them, because they were necessary. An exchange between Jack and Renee in the Season 7 finale perhaps explains it best. Jack says that if there are fifteen people and a bomb on a bus, he will do anything-- anything whatsoever-- to save those people. He knows at an intellectual level that the laws should be more important than the people, but his heart would not be able to live with that. Thus he is willing to break the law and to face the consequences for his actions. Jack is prepared to make himself a moral sacrifice for America: to sacrifice his conscience to save lives, and then to sacrifice his freedom to save America's collective conscience.
I think this is a profound take on the morality of torture. It insists that torture is wrong and that there are no exceptions to its wrongness. Yet it also suggests that there might be circumstances under which it is necessary for the greater good. Torture does not cease to be wrong in these cases, and those who carry it out must be held accountable. They are guilty. But it is a noble guilt, because they took it upon themselves knowingly and for a worthy purpose. These people know when they torture someone that they will be prosecuted for it. They are willing to become sacrifices to the founding ideals that we as a nation cannot afford to compromise.
At the end of the season finale Jack is dying due to exposure to a biological weapon in the line of duty. On his deathbed he calls in a Muslim imam in hopes of finding some peace with what he has done. The imam tells Jack it is not too late to find forgiveness. "You don't know what I've done," Jack says. The imam forgives Jack anyway, and Jack finally seems at peace. "It's time," Jack whispers in words reminiscent of Jesus' on the cross. He thus becomes a literal as well as a moral sacrifice for the nation.
Jack, however, is not completely dead. At the end of the episode his daughter decides to go through with an experimental stem-cell treatment that might yet save her father's life. Since filming for Season 8 has already begun, it seems that he is to undergo a resurrection of sorts.
In a parallel storyline, President Taylor turns her daughter in to the Justice Department, even though it tears her apart inside to have to do it, and even though her husband urges her to cover up the murder her daughter orchestrated. President Taylor sacrifices her family to a higher power for which she feels an even greater love and duty: the Constitution.
This, for me, was the most powerful season of 24 yet, partly because here we had here some of the deepest moral struggles the show has yet depicted, and partly because of the powerful mythic resonances we feel as nearly all the show's main characters sacrifice themselves in one way or another for the ideals on which the country is founded.
4 comments:
I like a lot of the points that you bring up here. I've never had any interest in 24 but perhaps with such a good recommendation I'll have to re-think my position...
As for the torture issue, you have a good point about the greater good but it still sticks in my throat. You say that the person must be held responsible, but when torture is committed, my first thought is never whether or not someone is responsible or how they are punished. I merely feel sick about the treatment of the tortured. Once it's been done, who cares about justice? Justice almost seems trite in such a case. I realize that it's not, but the feeling remains. It's like when they prosecute a mass-murderer (Nazis, dictators, w/e). Once the trial begins, it doesn't feel noble or just or anything. It's just...empty. So I can't help but wonder about torture...
I remain unconvinced one way or the other but I'm glad to hear a point of view that makes me consider it.
24 is awesome! And this season was good, but yet falters a bit. You can tell they desperately wanted to shake things up (especially after season six was so rightfully disregarded by most), but it's obvious the writers and directors have a hard time branching out. It seems whenever they stumble upon a really cool and fresh idea, they get nervous and rein it back in to the very-typical 24 formula.
For example, the conflict with General Juma was great I felt and a much-needed breath of fresh air for the series. But, in typical 24 fashion, that storyline ends halfway through the season so that they can show some other force that is really behind it all.
We'll see what happens next season... it's supposedly in New York and CTU is back in operation. Whether that is good or bad remains to be seen.
Eric,
Well, yeah, I'm with you. I think that our default should be never to torture people. It's wrong and it usually does more harm than good. But of course people always come back with the one-day-to-stop-a-nuke-from-killing-millions scenario, which is hard to argue with. I doubt such a circumstance will ever arise, but if it did, I'll be honest: I would torture somebody if I thought it would make a difference. It would make me sick to do it, and for good reason. It would be wrong. It would be horrible and unjust. But it would also be necessary.
One nice thing about the "moral sacrifice" model-- as opposed to traditional "just war" thinking-- is that it means we will only claim an exception to our ideals under truly dire circumstances. If an interrogator knows he'll be prosecuted and might go to prison for a long time, he'll think long and hard before he tortures anyone. He'll only do it if he absolutely has to. He'll only do it if he's certain it will save lives.
Moral sacrifice is a step up from giving judicial immunity to everyone involved in the Bush torture regime, that's for sure. If Bush's cronies felt that the benefits of torture were worth the sacrifice of other people's human rights and dignity, then maybe they did what they had to do. But to make sure they're sure, I think people who make that decision for others should have to surrender their own freedom. They should not force others to suffer so much for a cause if they don't think it's worth even a lesser sacrifice from themselves.
As for whether you should watch the show, I recommend it, but only if you get the DVDs so you can watch them straight through. The biggest problem with the show is that 24 hours is a lot of time to fill with sequential, action-packed events, so sometimes you can tell they're really reaching for material. Random sideplots, characters that act dumber than humanly possible to drag out the crisis, terrorist plots that go eight layers deep. That sort of thing. If the show was called "12" it would probably be better.
But it's addictive, and once you pop you won't be able to stop. ;)
Josh,
I really liked that this season was in Washington with the FBI and an African bad guy instead of the usual LA schtick. Hopefully they can keep it fresh if they go back to the old setting for Season 8. One of the nice things about the show is they kill off characters with such regularity that there are always new faces. :)
Post a Comment