Now this is just season one. The show is currently in the middle of its fifth (and last) season which the second half of is set to air in the summer of 2013. Clearly, a lot has happened since the first season, shown in the video above.
So you can clearly see where the idea of dirty hands is going to come in. To recap and to simplify what we learned in class and through Walzer's reading, having dirty hands comes about in a situation where one is forced to make an immoral decision, yet he/she does it for the betterment of the general population.
In Walt's situation, I believe he definitely started out with dirty hands. He was faced with two choices. Either die leaving his family with practically nothing or cook crystal meth and leave his family with an abundance of money. He very obviously chose to cook meth and rakes in so much money his wife was forced to launder it. I don't really think there is any arguing against the fact the when the show started Walt definitely had dirty hands.
I think it is also important to discuss his parter, Jesse Pinkman. I think when the show started out, Jesse didn't have dirty hands. Jesse was selling meth to make money and that is it.
However, as I said before, a lot has happened since season one. To find out more about the show and get summaries of all that you might have missed you can go to AMC's website here and find out all about it for yourself.
I bring up this topic, because I think that now, the roles might have completely switched from where they started. But so much has happened, it is hard to determine if they really have, or if both Walt and Jesse are just completely immoral. I'd like to see what you guys have to say, because I have an opinion but there is so much to consider I could be completely wrong.
I think Walt no longer is dealing with an issue of dirty hands. I would personally argue that Walt is an immoral human being. Walt currently has so much money, his wife cannot even launder that amount without looking suspicious. Yet he doesn't stop. He has directly, and indirectly, caused the death of so many people. Which before, one might have been able to argue has a case of dirty hands if he still didn't have enough money to support his family and saw their deaths as necessary in making money for them. But, as I said, he has so much money at this point but he continues to act like this.
He no longer seems to be making these decisions for the good of his family. He has practically lost his family actually. His wife hates him, his children aren't even living with him, and it seems that if he wanted to better his family, he would stop cooking meth. But he doesn't. He doesn't even seem to care about Jesse or his wellbeing anymore either. In fact, he has done so much to manipulate and hurt Jesse, that Jesse just doesn't even know about. The video below highlights some of the things Walt has done to hurt Jesse.
So the answer should seem clear. That obviously Walt doesn't have dirty hands. He clearly hurts Jesse, and never stops cooking despite the constant pleas from his wife and for his family. And he only does it it seems to prove to himself that he can make so much money. In one of the last episodes when Jesse tries to get out of the meth cooking business altogether Walt explains to him that years ago, he founded a company with a couple colleagues. The company was doing well but for reasons of his own, he sold his share of the company for $5,000. The company went on to become worth billions. Bitter over his loss, he says he will not let that happen again. So it seems his motives now are not what would cause a dirty hands scenario. At least thats what I think.
But are they? I mean although his cancer went into remission, he still has the threat death constantly lingering over him as his cancer could come back at any time. So even though he may act out of some selfish reasons for getting the money, he most likely won't even spend the money. It will still be left for his wife and kids. So is that still a case of dirty hands, or is Walt just immoral as I thought?
Now for Jesse. As I hinted at before, every bad thing Jesse does now, seems to be to help out Walt or Mike or one of his girlfriends. He practically kills himself over guilt every time someone dies or is hurt because of him and puts himself through torturous days and nights alone, but lets it happen to help Walt. He also continues to give money an ex for her rent and to take care of her son. He then tries to buy his way out of the business and leave his partnership with Walt, as he feels things have gone too far and they have gotten what they initially wanted. Walt makes it very hard for him and doesn't even want to give him his last share of money. So does Jesse develop dirty hands throughout the show? It seems that unlike Walt every bad thing they did was so hard for him and it eventually got to the point where he couldn't take it anymore. Everything he did was for Walt. So it seems he might have dirty hands. But, he also gets to keep all his money and didn't really better a community with what he did, just Walt. So is Jesse just immoral?
It's a tough call on both of their situations, I think. But I've voiced my opinions. What do you guys think?
I have thought about the dirty hands concept while watching this show, too. I agree about Walt. In the beginning I think it's clear that he had dirty hands. Now, I don't think he does. The cancer could come back I suppose, but there's no doubt his family is more than set-up to do fine without him (financially.) I think part of the reason he won't get out has to do with a fear of violence for leaving the game, but I don't think that qualifies as dirty hands. I definitely don't think Jesse had dirty hands at the beginning. Later on in the show, I can definitely see the argument that he does, but I do not agree. I think his motive mostly has to do with making money. He does do some good things with his money, such as supporting the ex-girlfriend. However, I do not think that qualifies as dirty hands, either.
ReplyDeleteFor Pete's sake, put a spoiler alert on this!
ReplyDeleteI agree: Walt began the show doing something virtuous and has long since become a self-serving turd. I mean, poisoning Jesse's girlfriend's son? Forcing money onto his genuinely family-oriented wife? He's in it for recovering his sense of masculinity, pride, and control, not his family.
I suppose this raises something else interesting about dirty hands: what gets to count as morally right? Walzer seems willing to leave this question alone, but it seems like an essential one. Must moral right always be other-regarding, or can one do the right (virtuous) thing by doing something soley self-serving? Even if Walt's actions are inexcusable, where do we want to draw that line?
In one way, it's tough to answer this question because dirty hands is fundamentally a political problem. That is, the morality that guides politics may be entirely different from the morality of everyday individual life.
I definitely agree with what you say in this post. Walt set out with a number in mind as to how much he needed to support his family in case he died. Walt, however, earns more than he needs but gets greedier and greedier as he goes. In a way, Walt represents exactly what the problem with dirty hands is, as in many cases people start off doing what is right for their families or for society, but as they grow in power their objective changes. I also agree with the idea that, in terms of intentions, Walter and Jesse are definitely going in opposite directions as the show progresses. This post was a very interesting take on the idea of dirty hands.
ReplyDeleteJustin pointed out a really good question when he said, "Must moral right always be other-regarding, or can one do the right (virtuous) thing by doing something soley self-serving?"
ReplyDeleteIn trying to answer that, I definitely think one can still be doing the right thing even if the decision is made out of completely selfish purposes, if and only if, it doesn't negatively affect any other people. I think that this is the only case in which a selfish decision is made where you can definitely say the decision was just. Because if it affects anyone negatively, even if it is only one person, you can't argue that the decision was just because everyone will have a different perspective on that. However, decisions are never that theoretically perfect in real life, obviously. People make decisions everyday that might, even unknowingly, affect other people. So although I think that that is true, I don't think it is realistic.
In the case of making decisions based on how it will affect others, I think that if you have the best interests of others in mind, and making the decision will be helpful to others and not hurtful, I believe those decisions are always right. Because they are made with good intentions.