In the movie "On the Water Front" the main character Terry has two different ideas of stool pigeons and traitors. At first he believes that if you tell on someone that wouldn't tell on you or someone who has helped you before that you are a traitor. Later in the film he realizes that even though they might not tell on you and that they helped you before you probably should tell on them. He also understands that most of the time if the person has done something so bad that you need to tell on them, that person probably helped you for their own personal gain. Another character takes an extreme view on this, Edy. She thinks that no matter what you should be a criminal informant. She doesn't fully understand the slight feeling of guilt that Terry gets because she has no real connections with the mob.
My personal opinions on Stool pigeons and traitors is as follows. Rule number one: check the severity of the crime, if it goes completly against your morals you probably should turn them in. Rule number 2: would they turn you in? If not then try to return the favor, if so well refer to rule number one. Rule number 3: do you owe them anything? If you do then you might want to compare the severity of the debt to the severity of the crime, then use this as a guidlines. If you use these rules to help you decide when to tell and when not to tell life will go swell. For all the people who think of only the extremes, AKA always tell or never tell, life is not perfect, and the best way is a moderate middle of the road way.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
You make it sound like its really easy making a decision between being a tattletale and a traitor. However, it doesn't appear that way according to Terry's perspective. He was equally influenced on both sides of his equation. On the right side of the equation, Edy and the priest were trying to gain more weight then the left side. On the left side, the mobs and his brother was trying to gain more weight then the right side. However, after the mob decided to kill his brother, the scales became unbalance and the priest and Edy's side of the equation became heavier, making him choose to side with them, against the mob that killed him brother. And in the process, he didn't seem like he was debating any of those 3 rules. Instead, he debated in his mind about the moral obligations that can be any rule.
Your stance on dealing with being a stool pigeon or traitor is very practical. I agree with you that one cannot always operate from the far extremes and that taking a moderate stance will allow an individual to do what's right. Questioning oneself truly is the best way to determine what should be done in regards to a situation.
Post a Comment