The Two-Face(s) of Justice in the City

So we were all drawn to this class by how great a teacher Mr. Dean is ... along with the Batman quote that he used at the end of last school year to entice us to sign up for this class, "Joker: They'll be doubling up at the rate this city's inhabitants are losing their minds. Batman: This city just showed you that it's full of people ready to believe in good." Batman -- the Dark Knight. But why the Dark Knight? What happened to the White Knight?

This takes me to one of the iconic Batman "villians" Harvey Dent, better know as Two-Face. Starting off as the clean-cut district attorney of Gotham City and an ally of Batman, Dent goes insane after a criminal throws acid on him during a trial, hideously scarring the left side of his face. Due to this, Dent becomes schizophrenic, bi-polar and adopts the "Two-Face" persona. He becomes a crime boss, choosing to bring about good or evil based upon the outcome of a coin flip. Occasionally he is on the side of Batman and other times he is trying to shoot him.

Once the White Knight of the city, pursuing justice under the law, Harvey Dent becomes a metaphor for the duality of the city. A district attorney and a crime boss, a hero and an enemy. The definition of good and evil is too complex in the city, as shown by a schizophrenic psycopath flipping a coin to make the decision on what is just. What this is saying is that in the city there is always going to be good with the bad and justice in the city is obscure in definition. Was it just that Harvey Dent be scarred for life on shit luck? It brings about a new type of justice in the city, one that is not so politically correct. The White Knight's chivalric justice is gone. One cannot expect the White Knight to just kill the bad guy while following the rules. Now to be able to do good one must also break some rules (the idea of the ends justify the means).

What Two-Face also shows is that it really is not possible to have a White Knight in the modern city. Two-Face throughout his career has represented good and evil combined, the hope of the city and the destruction of the city, and the pure luck that the city is ruled by. This complexity skews the ability to obtain justice through the old style of chivalry that the White Knight used. Due to this complex idea of good vs. evil and justice vs. corruption, it is simply impossible to avoild breaking the rules to achieve "true" justice.

Two-Face's approach, although encompassing this idea, is unhealthy. Batman is the true Dark Knight because he has been able to balance the good and evil to maintain justice in the city. He might break some rules to get to a good conclusion. For example, in the movie The Dark Knight (2008) Batman takes the blame for all the people Harvey Dent killed, after he kills Dent to save the son of a man Dent kidnapped. This way the city could look upon Dent as the White Knight district attorney he used to be and not the maniac he became. It is easy to see the complexity of this "justice." Although it came at a price and followed no set rules, he was able to achieve the closest thing to what he believed to be good. Even then the end might not be complete justice, but this must do for the Dark Knight.

"It's happening now. Harvey is that hero. He locked up half of the city's criminals, and he did it without wearing a mask. Gotham needs a hero with a face."

--------------------------------------------------

Here is another clip I found that has many of the same ideas. It seems that the Joker really has this seered into his head, this idea of justice.

The Philosophy of Cities

Crito is a short semi-fictional dialog written by Plato depicting the way in which the government of a city operates in relation to its citizens. Plato wrote many short pieces set as conversations of Socrates trying to express his philosophies, called Platonic Dialogs. One of the more famous ones is as Socrates is held prisoner awaiting his execution. Meanwhile, his dear friend Crito is planning to sneak him out.

Socrates was arrested, technically, for presenting new gods, not respecting prior ones, and corrupting the youth -- to put it more bluntly, teaching. His real crime to Athens was that some of his childhood friends had recently been removed from a terrible tyranny over Athens. In Athens at that time, it was illegal to charge people for political crimes, and since the "Tyranny of Thirty" got off, Socrates was awarded the brunt of the misplaced aggression. Though, to Athens' credit, they weren't planning to kill him. They were planning to exile him or fine him, and then move on. But Socrates had a rather spectacular reaction. In Athens, you defend yourself and suggest your own punishment, and the jury must then pick either your suggested punishment, or the prosecutions. When choosing his sentence, Socrates asked for free room and board and to be honored throughout Athens. Compared with that and death, when the jury could only pick one, they had no choice but to fall to the latter.

Strangely enough, as Crito explains his great plan for Socrates' rescue, Socrates argues him down. His opinions about the city, (at least according to Plato) lead Socrates to accept his unfair execution.

Socrates argues first that he should obey this law of Athens to protect Athens itself, asking if "a city can still exist without being overturned, if the legal judgements rendered within it posses no force" (27). Socrates believes that if he should escape his punishment, he is proving the laws of Athens have no power, and without enforceable laws, the city is doomed to crumble.

But then some would ask: Hey wait. Why does he care what happens to Athens? Aren't they about to kill him just because he used to be friends with some tyrants who got off easy? But Socrates has reasons for feeling so honor-bound to Athens. Without the city, of Athens, there'd be no Socrates. His parents were married under Athenian law, and Socrates was born in Athens. By the laws and regulations of Athens, Socrates was educated well enough to become the brilliant philosopher he was. Socrates felt he belonged to his city "as [its] offspring and slave" (28). Socrates felt indebted to his city, for raising him and housing him and teaching him to be Socrates.

Still others would say: Well still. That's a bit excessive. I don't want to be a slave to a place just because I grew up there! Socrates has a response for you too. If you don't like it, MOVE! The city of Athens gave him every right to leave at whatever time he wanted. If Socrates "wishes to emigrate to a colony, or to go and live as an alien elsewhere, he may go wherever he pleases and keep his property, if we and city fail to satisfy him" (28). Socrates could have left Athens at any time if he didn't agree with the laws, and yet he didn't. By staying in Athens, Socrates accepted any future judgement it may have for him.

What I find sort of fascinating about how indebted Socrates felt to Athens is that now people would cringe at that concept, and yet environmental determinism results in the same sort of slavery Socrates agreed with, only unconsciously obeyed. When Jimmie feels the need to fight and blindly hate the upper class, it is because the city has shaped him. The slums of Jimmie's city, in a way order him to become what he does; without one complaint he does it. When Maggie dies, she's accepting her unjustly awarded death sentence, just as did Socrates.


(PS, Don't fret if my quotes don't match my link for Crito. This was originally written in Greek, and some of the translations differ, it wasn't exactly the same one I found online, but it expresses the same ideas.)

Cahn, Steven M. Political Philosophy: the Essential Texts. New York: Oxford UP, 2005. Print.