Rrisoners choice in Les Miserables and Crito - Essay Example

Rrisoner’s choice in Les Miserables and Crito Crito, one of the Socratic dialogues recorded by Plato, and Les Miserables, the novel by famous Victor Hugo that became a basis for numerous film adaptations, are two works rather different in their shape and time period. “Crito” as a written work was created by Plato and demonstrates the conversation between Socrates and his fried Crito in the prison cell as Socrates was awaiting implementation of the death sentence. The prominent Greek philosopher was sentenced for introducing new deities and denying the deities Athens, the city he lived in, acknowledged. In other words, he was accused of dissidence which was, obviously, the result of his great mind and philosophical questions that he asked. As the trial condemned him, he was expected to drink poison. Willing to help the friend and to save the righteous man, Crito tried to persuade him to escape from prison and promised him any possible assistance in his further life. Moreover, Crito as a noble devoted fried was ready to sacrifice his wellbeing for the sake of Socrates’ salvation. In this way, Socrates faced an intricate choice, the choice between life and death, between reputation and salvation. The story of Jean Valjean depicted in the novel seems to be more complicated and rather different, with several turning points offering their dilemmas. The protagonist is a former convict who has carried his burden for nineteen years and was finally released with an overwhelming feeling of disappointment and resentment towards the world and society. The very origin of his story implies the theme of justice and an individual, as Valjean was convicted for the crime he – similar to Robin Hood – committed in order to recover justice and help those who were in need. Having stolen a loaf of bread for his sister’s starving children, the man became a criminal in the eyes of law (created by the strongs, as it has always been) and was punished. Although Valjean bears enormous contempt in his soul after being released, his outlook on life changes as he meets the bishop, and probably this is the factor influencing his further decisions. As he became a wealthy noble man running a factory, holding the post of a mayor and hiding behind the false name, he learns that there is a man facing trial in the neighbor city as Jean Valjean. As he is present in the court he comes across one of the fateful decisions in his life – decision between justice and personal freedom. “This indecision only lasted a few seconds” (Hugo), and Valjean came out into the open, condemning himself for penal servitude on the ship “Orion” and saving an innocent man. The second turning point offering the opportunity to escape justice wasn’t long in coming – as he saves the life of a sailor on the ship, he dived into the sea and was later reported to have sunk. Thus, Valjean took the opportunity to escape, even though he did it in such a dangerous way. It is clear that the character has taken an opposite decision in the second situation: whereas he chose to surrender into the tenacious claws of law in the court, here, serving on the ship, he chose to escape. However, both decision were taken for similar reasons or, it is better to say, affected by similar motivators. Leaving “Orion”, Jean was led by the goal to perform his noble vow – he sought to find Cosette and take on custody over her. On the other hand, coming out into the open in the court, he obviously wanted to save an innocent person from trial and punishment that was originally meant for him, and for no one else. Socrates vs. Jean Valjean Although facing different circumstances, these two men undertake difficult decisions that require responsibility and courage. To add more, the same motif threads these two stories – the motive of the prisoner’s choice, the motif of justice, law and personal responsibility. Both of them face difficult choice between escape from justice and getting punished. However, certain aspects also differ in these two. First and foremost, the main topic that can be recognized in Socrates’ considerations is obedience to law (Howse). He chooses to take his punishment with dignity, coming face to face with justice, and justifies his decision with willing to preserve his reputation of a righteous man. The argument he resorts to in proving his point of view to Crito are based on perception of laws as the icon of justice and righteousness. Moreover, the philosopher’s waiting for death was a conscious decision to end up his life as decently as he led it through years. When Crito argues that his friend will be condemned by the society for not helping him to escape, Socrates wisely comforts him, saying that only that opinion that is valuable and competent for one, should be considered by him. To my thinking, Socrates clearly understood at the bottom of his heart that he was condemned unjustly and that the law wasn’t equal to justice, but he chose to take this challenge decently, leaving judging those people to the god. On the other hand, Valjean chose to escape the system of justice in the second case, but the motives he was led by can justify his decision, as it was taken for the sake of a girl who was left alone and unprotected. In other words, the sense of responsibility and mercy acted as the key motivating powers in his decision to escape from “Orion”. And here, to my mind, comes the principal difference between the two prisoners: it lies in perception of law by them. Having been imprisoned for 19 years, Valjean abhors the system of “justice”, as he understands clearly the scale of its corruption and sees its real rotten interior. Dealing with his dilemmas, he constantly keeps in mind the simple truth about the law: it isn’t intended to protect people and promote justice, it is intended on restraining people and keeping them in the limits that are favorable for the strongs. Thus, probably, his choice to intervene on behalf of the innocent defendant in the court was even more knightly and heroic, and it can be easily concluded that his noble nature – just like that of Socrates – played a significant role in his choice. In comparison to Valjean, Socrates’ perception of law is more idealistic (which is probably depends on the historical period). He argues that, having lived and thrived for many years under Athenian laws, he is obliged to comply with them even in this case – this will be the decision of a wise noble man. Although he understands that the sentence he was given is unjust in generally human context, but, nevertheless, his perception equalizing righteousness with obedience to the laws motivates his decision not to escape. Moreover, Socrates’ perception of laws gives rise to the thought that the law as it is, on that particular stage, was virtually worse obeying. And had Socrates escaped with help of Crito, he would contribute to the process of corruption of the values he protected for his entire lifetime. Drawing a conclusion, I would like to mention that I rather support decisions of both characters as they meet the circumstances and the historical period, without going against moral values. Works Cited: Howse, Robert. The voices of law in Plato’s Crito, 2002, from: http://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/ECM_PRO_060032.pdf Hugo, Victor. Les Miserables, from: http://www.gutenberg.org/files/135/135-h/135-h.htm#link2HCH0087 Read More