Similar to my last blog entry, I am currently reading The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar and Six More. I just now finished book four, entitled, The Swan. It's a story about a smart boy who gets cornered by two out of control pre-teens. The older boys, named Ernie and Raymond, torture little Peter by threatening him with a gun and making him retrieve hunted birds. At one point, the boys tie Peter vertically to a railroad, unsure as to whether or not he would be killed. Peter pushes his head into the gravel and the train goes over him.
While I was reading about Peter and the train, I started wondering about the consciences of Ernie and Raymond. Would they have been able to be as carefree as they are if Peter had actually been killed? Granted, they seemed disappointed when they saw that Peter had survived. So maybe that means that certain people don't have as high natural morals. Ernie was raised in a careless home but Raymond had a pretty decent life. Was it just Ernie's influence that led him to not caring who was dead and who, alive? Niccolo Machievelli was a famous philosopher who believed that everyone was born evil, and then some stayed evil while others were taught to be good. A bit later on, Thomas Hobbes, another philosopher, wrote a book called The Leviathan, which agreed with Machievelli's theory.
I don't agree with this theory because there are some people who grow up in terrible situations but still manage to have a positive outlook on life. I don't believe that one's upbringing is an excuse for brutish behavior.
Dahl, Roald. The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar and Six More. New York City: Puffin Books, 1988.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment