Liberal Arts Voices

Read the perspectives of our current students

Stand Your Ground, Trayvon Martin, and Serious Business

by

“Serious business.”

These were the words used to introduce a lecture on Stand Your Ground (SYG) laws, most recently known for generating controversy in the Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman case in Florida.  The discussion was led by Tamara F. Lawson, who indeed emphasized the seriousness of this business and its relevance to a number of recent court cases in her presentation.  Ms. Lawson, an Associate Dean for Faculty Development and a Professor of Law at St. Thomas University School of Law in Miami, Florida, focused on what she called the “dilemma of discretion” in cases like the one involving Trayvon Martin.

For those who are unclear about the nature of SYG laws (like I was), Ms. Lawson boiled them down to their elements by employing what is known as the “castle doctrine”—an analogy directly concerning when and how it is appropriate to use self-defense.  Laws have existed for a long time dictating that when you are in your “castle” (your home), and someone invades your territory, you have a right to react self-defensively and use violence if you deem it necessary.  SYG laws extend the boundaries of your “castle,” essentially suggesting that any time you feel threatened, you are legally allowed to react as if you had been threatened within your own home.

The problem is, you may not be the only one feeling threatened.  In Ms. Lawson’s own words, there are now “two castles” fighting to protect their territories.  Whose castle trumps?  These laws operate under an arbitrary understanding that individuals will act “reasonably and proportionately” to threats outside their homes (though technically still within the domain of their “castles”).  But, as demonstrated in the Martin-Zimmerman case, it might be hard to determine who really felt threatened or if the first engagement of violence was really “reasonable” or “proportionate” to the threat.  This becomes especially tricky when discrepancies in race and age play a role.

The decisions in cases like Martin-Zimmerman are often left to the discretion of judges or juries.  In the case of George Zimmerman, the arresting officer recommended to the Florida state attorney that charges should be pursued against the man, who claimed that Trayvon Martin had attacked him before he shot and killed the young boy.  The state attorney initially rejected this recommendation, inciting public outcry by those seeking justice; eventually this decision was overturned, leading the state of Florida to press charges against Zimmerman.  Discretion also plagues juries, who must make their decisions of indictment or innocence under the strict instructions of the court.  In the Martin-Zimmerman case, for example, the jury was not allowed to consider that Martin may have been the individual who was provoked, though they asked for permission to do so (and were denied).

While the consideration of the complications of these laws could fall under any of the four core values of the liberal arts, perhaps the most appropriate might be critical thinking.  Especially for those individuals who plan to pursue careers in politics or law, it is imperative to recognize that decisions concerning laws like SYG are not simple to implement or execute.  For these laws specifically, it takes a critical thinker to realize the profound complexity of issues surrounding imminent domain outside of the home, especially when the lingering ghosts of racism protrude and further obstruct the truth.  This isn’t easy; this is serious business.

As You Like It at the American Shakespeare Center

by

Students in English 197H took a trip to Staunton, Virginia to the American Shakespeare Center. There they saw a production of the play “As You Like It”. Here is one student’s account of the trip and the production. 

By: Anna Lombardo

A basic and widely understood requirement that must be met before attending a performance of a Shakespearean play is to understand what type of play is about to be performed. Someone who sits down in a theater expecting to see a comedy is likely to be disappointed upon witnessing the tragic cascade of dishonesty and murder that marks Shakespeare’s Othello. It’s important to recognize the literary template upon which a play performance is based in order to gain a fuller theatrical experience of that particular play (though as our viewing of Othello proved, some adaptations of the tragedies can have their funny moments).

When I sat down at the American Shakespeare Center (ASC) in Staunton, Virginia, to watch As You Like It, I already knew the story was a comedy. There were even times in my reading of the play when I unexpectedly laughed out loud, a reaction that admittedly few pieces of writing are able to induce—especially works from the 1600s that are written in Old English. However, one of the great aspects of the performance of As You Like It was how much funnier those already humorous scenes became when they were delivered by the ASC performers.

There are two reasons why I think the play was rendered so much more amusingly during the live performance. The first has to do with the relationships between not so much the characters, but the actors and actresses themselves. I sensed a real chemistry between the members of the cast that seemed to lend itself to a more enjoyable viewing experience. This goes beyond the simple matter of finding a good character fit for a part; I noticed the cast members smiling or laughing at the manner of delivery of another actor or actress in a way that seemed slightly out of character for the former. Their “out of character” behavior provided an atmosphere of playfulness and even informality that allowed the audience to feel comfortable and free to laugh. In comparison, many Shakespeare plays today—even comedies—maintain an undertone of tragedy or intense sophistication that unfortunately appears to have become standard for the famous playwright’s works. ASC’s version was refreshingly easygoing.

This is not to say, however, that the performance was unprofessional—which leads into my second point. The actors were clearly enormously gifted in the abilities and were so skilled that they could successfully engage the audience in order to enhance the quality of their performance, bringing real life to the jokes. In Act 1, Scene 2, Celia converses with her cousin about honesty and beauty. During the performance, the actress playing Celia approached a woman sitting on the stage and touched her chin, commenting “for those that she makes fair”—she removed her hand from the woman’s chin and hit her lightly on the leg—“she scarce makes honest.” The woman accepted the joke good-naturedly and the audience (as well as some of the cast) laughed. These kinds of interactions helped to break down the so-called fourth wall, directly engaging those who were watching the performance and by doing so, making the play that much more entertaining. Overall, the talent and passion with which these individuals did their jobs created a unique atmosphere found only at the ASC that heightened the most poignant qualities of As You Like It.

Skip to toolbar