The Different Views of the Characters and Acceptance of Gay Rights - Essay Example

Challenging Minds with the Sociological Viewpoint Literature is a powerful means to persuade people. Using elevated language andstyle, a literary author can easily twist a story to make it beautiful, tragic, strange, or simply persuasive enough to make people see the way the author sees an issue. Through dramatic means, literary authors can easily achieve emotionality so as to carry away audience’s emotions and make them view things differently. By relying on emotionality, literature can deface truth, eventually leading people to hypocrisy. Therefore, literature should be mimetic. It should present the truth despite literariness. It should avoid emotionality in order to lead people to a critical understanding of ideas that literature evokes. In the play, Laramie Project, Moises Kaufman attains realism and avoids emotionality by exploring the story of Matthew Shepard’s murder using the sociological viewpoint. The use of the sociological angle makes Kaufman’s version of the story superior over other accounts written around the time of the incident. One reason is that it allows a presentation of the full account of the events. The views of the people regarding the suspects, namely, Aaron Mckinney and Russell Henderson are revealed, thus making the audience dig further into the reason for their behaviors on the night of the murder. Another reason is that the sociological angle appeals to the audience’s logic rather than their emotions. As the play progresses, key persons that provide truth about the incident are introduced to reveal truths about the tragedy. This style impacts on the logic or reasoning of the audience to solve the mystery as the play unravels. Instead of dramatizing how the events led to the murder like in a typical play, Laramie Project comprises interviews that relate the sequence of events. This way, the audience is not just led to pity the victim, rather to think of the reason for the murder and its aftermath. Third, the sociological angle not only leads the audience to focus on the reasons behind the murder but on the sociological context that surrounds the crime. The audience is led to formulate conclusions out of other people’s views. Moreover, they are led to reflect on their own views about the ideas and issues presented, especially as regards morality and homosexuality. One advantage of having the plays is because it provides a full account of the story. Unlike newspaper stories that focus only on the incident that happens, the play even brings out the observations of the characters of the two suspects involved in the crime, their activities and behaviors before the murder, the character of Matthew and his family, especially his father, and other details that were not reported in the news. In fact, the play serves as an investigative report of what happened. Unlike news articles that do not delve into the reasons for the murder, the play discusses the character of the suspects, with Aanenson finding Russell to be “quiet and sweet” (Kaufman 501) thus allowing view of the two sides of the coin, one of Matthew’s and another of Aaron’s. Moreover, the play also provides the confession of Aaron, thus allowing the audience to understand the issue from his point of view. News articles reported the reason for the crime but they did not bear the full story based on the two suspects’ narration. Likewise, the other characters who expressed their minds about the issue help the audience to see the story in the bird’s eye view, which helps to understand why the jury decided for death penalty and why Mr. Shepard said what he said regarding his son being a loser in the beginning then a winner in the end, and why later decided to forgive Aaron and choose to bestow life sentence instead of death penalty. Second, the sociological angle results in the use of logos instead of pathos. Among Aristotle’s rhetorical devices, the logos is best employed as the play gives account of the two sides of the issue. Logos is required in dealing with Aaron’s case because murder will not happen without a cause. As his confession bears, Aaron was insulted as Matthew tried to “grab his balls” (Kaufman 526) while they were in the car. Aaron acted that way basically because he was annoyed and was drunk at the same time. It is easy to tell from his narration that he could not control himself due to the alcohol he drank, thus he says, “it was like somebody else was doing it” (Kaufman 526). Although Aaron could have just made up that part, his confession cannot deny that the two of them were drunk that night and their actions must be influenced by alcohol. Without the Laramie Project, the reports alone could have moved the people to believe that Matthew was completely innocent and helpless. The letter of the Shepards, saying, “He came to the world premature and left the world premature” was too touching. Thinking of Matthew as a premature, hopeless and innocent baby could draw sympathy from the public. Based on this, it was easy for people, including the jury, to give the death penalty. However, people should also consider the harassment that Matthew could have done to Aaron, which caused the beating. Likewise, there could be other reasons involved as it seemed difficult to believe that the two were too concerned to give Matthew a lift. With the play, it was easier for later audiences to rationalize, not to the point of forgiving the two, but at least saving them from a very tragic ending. The support of the media and other people also affected the verdict of the jury. The memorial hosted by Ellen De Generes was very moving. Seeing that would have readily convinced the jury to convict the two suspects, which was what must have transpired. However, later audiences could have different thoughts and feelings. They could side with Reverend Fred Phelps or simply see the issue as a learning experience to respect gays or simply let them live. There is likewise a lesson for gays to be discreet or be careful with their actions and respect others the way they want to be respected. Third, the sociological angle of the play leads the audience to formulate conclusions out of the given views. Giving different sides of the coin helps the audience form their own conclusions. As such, it can be expected that those who watch the play will consider not only the immediate effects of the murder but also its underlying impacts and generational impacts including the fear that the public feels at Laramie. Some characters expressed their fear of what happened. The account of the murder itself makes Laramie appear remote and backward in terms of its treatment of gays and security at night but the play can erase that view as audiences learn about the nice climate and peaceful surroundings of Laramie. Sociologists will benefit from the play as they could see various stories of people, describing Laramie before and after the crime. Furthermore, the play’s sociological view will challenge different organizations and even politicians to provide means to heal the people of Laramie, to establish programs to restore peace, and to find ways to avoid the incident from recurring. It also guides them to think about the rights of the gay population and other issues relating to the crime. In sum, the sociological angle that Kaufman employs in the play makes the public consider the different sides of the story, from the account of the Laramie residents, the confession of Aaron, up to the words of Matthew’s father. By seeing the different views of the characters, the play’s audience will be able to clarify their biases against Laramie and the gay population in general. They may also be led to relearn the value of respecting people, regardless of gender and social status. Furthermore, the sociological angle also allows the people not to focus on emotions but to see the issue with a rational mind. Considering this, it is worthy to investigate the views of spectators 17 years after the incident. In his observations of Matthew Shepard’s murder site, Dan Tham claims that the site has been isolated, 13 years later. This implies that after all, the death of Matthew is just a phenomenon. In another account, Andrew Gumbel destroys all beliefs about Matthew’s murder. He claims that a new book by investigative journalist Stephen Jimenez challenges previous investigations regarding the true identity of Matthew and the two suspects. Gumbel reports Jimenez’s findings that Matthew knew Aaron and Russell even before the incident and that the latter were after Matthew because of his debts incurred from taking meth from the suspects. The accounts of the Laramie case clearly illustrate that despite the rigid attempts of Kaufman to bring out the truth, the real reason behind the killing still remains unveiled. The report by Jimenez may just be one of the reports that will surface to unveil the truth. Several others may come out to debunk earlier beliefs and opinions. Nevertheless, the fact that these reports appear in circulation nowadays shows that in one way or another, the Laramie Project has served its purpose, that is, to make audience critically analyze the issue. Using the sociological viewpoint, it has challenged further investigation of the case and has opened the mind of the public regarding acceptance of gay rights. Works Cited Gumbel, Andrew. “Matthew Shepard’s Murder: What It Came Down to Is Drugs or Money.” 2013. theguardian. Web. Kaufman, Moises. Laramie Project. In Morgan, M. Stailings, K. and Townsend, J., Ed. Strategies for Reading and Arguing about Literature. Harlow: Prentice Hall, 2006: 482-527. Print. Tham, Dan. “Visiting the Matthew Shepard Murder Site 13 Years Later.” 2013. Travelling with Twain. Web. Read More

In fact, the play serves as an investigative report of what happened. Unlike news articles that do not delve into the reasons for the murder, the play discusses the character of the suspects, with Aanenson finding Russell to be “quiet and sweet” (Kaufman 501) thus allowing view of the two sides of the coin, one of Matthew’s and another of Aaron’s. Moreover, the play also provides the confession of Aaron, thus allowing the audience to understand the issue from his point of view. News articles reported the reason for the crime but they did not bear the full story based on the two suspects’ narration.

Likewise, the other characters who expressed their minds about the issue help the audience to see the story in the bird’s eye view, which helps to understand why the jury decided for death penalty and why Mr. Shepard said what he said regarding his son being a loser in the beginning then a winner in the end, and why later decided to forgive Aaron and choose to bestow life sentence instead of death penalty. Second, the sociological angle results in the use of logos instead of pathos. Among Aristotle’s rhetorical devices, the logos is best employed as the play gives account of the two sides of the issue.

Logos is required in dealing with Aaron’s case because murder will not happen without a cause. As his confession bears, Aaron was insulted as Matthew tried to “grab his balls” (Kaufman 526) while they were in the car. Aaron acted that way basically because he was annoyed and was drunk at the same time. It is easy to tell from his narration that he could not control himself due to the alcohol he drank, thus he says, “it was like somebody else was doing it” (Kaufman 526). Although Aaron could have just made up that part, his confession cannot deny that the two of them were drunk that night and their actions must be influenced by alcohol.

Without the Laramie Project, the reports alone could have moved the people to believe that Matthew was completely innocent and helpless. The letter of the Shepards, saying, “He came to the world premature and left the world premature” was too touching. Thinking of Matthew as a premature, hopeless and innocent baby could draw sympathy from the public. Based on this, it was easy for people, including the jury, to give the death penalty. However, people should also consider the harassment that Matthew could have done to Aaron, which caused the beating.

Likewise, there could be other reasons involved as it seemed difficult to believe that the two were too concerned to give Matthew a lift. With the play, it was easier for later audiences to rationalize, not to the point of forgiving the two, but at least saving them from a very tragic ending. The support of the media and other people also affected the verdict of the jury. The memorial hosted by Ellen De Generes was very moving. Seeing that would have readily convinced the jury to convict the two suspects, which was what must have transpired.

However, later audiences could have different thoughts and feelings. They could side with Reverend Fred Phelps or simply see the issue as a learning experience to respect gays or simply let them live. There is likewise a lesson for gays to be discreet or be careful with their actions and respect others the way they want to be respected. Third, the sociological angle of the play leads the audience to formulate conclusions out of the given views. Giving different sides of the coin helps the audience form their own conclusions.

As such, it can be expected that those who watch the play will consider not only the immediate effects of the murder but also its underlying impacts and generational impacts including the fear that the public feels at Laramie. Some characters expressed their fear of what happened. The account of the murder itself makes Laramie appear remote and backward in terms of its treatment of gays and security at night but the play can erase that view as audiences learn about the nice climate and peaceful surroundings of Laramie.

Read More