By that logic Carol is justified then.
You've essentially boiled Carl's action down to "Threat = Right to terminate individual representing said threat."
What got Carol condemned isn't what she did, it's that what she did FAILED in its objective. Had there been no further outbreaks of the "Bloody Eye Disease" no one would've wanted to articulate it in the Prison Group, but they all would have had feelings of thankfulness that they, their loved ones and friends are now safe.
As to Rick's decision not being a kneejerk one: A few probing questions over a couple-hour period, interspersed with 90% silence? That's the exhaustive consideration of motive and mindset that ANYONE would want before being exiled into the Zombie-filled post-apocalyptic wasteland?
My point about Carl was this: In an apocalyptic situation, anyone of a proactive mindset, working within a small social collective will EVENTUALLY do something that significantly treads on the morality of one or more others within that social collective. Whether it was Lori hopping in the sack with Shane before Rick's imagined dead body was even cold (And the whole scene where when she takes her top off and Rick's wedding ring on the chain around her neck makes Shane uncomfortable, so she immediately takes it off is conclusive evidence that she had, for all intents and purposes already moved on.) Or whether it was Rick, in the midst of an urgent crisis and having to deal with a belligerent and probably imminently violent Merle, who knocked the guy out and cuffed him to a rooftop where through a series of unfortunate coincidences ended up leaving Merle in a "fate worse than death" sort of position, necessitating self-amputation. Or whether it was Dale, taking it upon himself to hide all the guns in the swamp, where they well could've been lost to the group had he fallen to the Walker 12hrs earlier than he actually did.
Or even more positively-inspired, but still risk-creating decisions: Such as Daryl going back for Merle, despite the fact a moment's thought would've told him that Rick and Co. would surely come after him and thereby get put in harm's way due to his actions. Or Michonne's little detour to kill zombie-Penny and gouge out the Governor's eye. Or even Andrea's "There has to be a better way than shooting the guy who turns out to be a complete sociopath."
The point is that ANYONE is EVENTUALLY going to fuck up epically in the judgment of their peers. Hell, Daryl chose to break ranks and go off with his brother, who was responsible for handing Glenn and Maggie over to the Governor, and TRYING TO FEED GLENN TO A WALKER, but when he thinks better of it not only is he taken back, they ACTUALLY *allowed Merle a) To live, and b) To remain in the Prison*
And what about the reverse? What about when, because someone (like Rick), operating by pre-apocalypse morality makes a decision that in the pre-apocalypse world would be right and proper, but in the POST-Apocalypse world puts OTHER PEOPLE'S *lives* in danger? T-Dog died too as a result of Rick's decision not to finish Andrew when he had the chance, and Carol was very nearly fatally entombed alive...besides what went down with Lori. Rick, seeking to atone for the "wrong" he did Merle by leaving him on that roof, instigates a foray back into crawling-with-Walkers downtown. As a result, nearly ALL the firearms went with Rick, as did a large % of the able-bodied men. That decision contributed to all the deaths at their camp.
The standard one needs to use in a post-apocalyptic environment isn't "Do something very immoral and you're gone." A far more rational, pragmatic standard would be "Based on EVERYTHING I know about this person, are they a) A CONTINUING THREAT to the group, or individuals within the group, b) A major asset or not to the group's continuing existence. And c) What is the likelihood of recidivism, Ie: How likely is it that if faced with a similar situation they would behave in the same unacceptable manner?
The entire "Tyreese will kill Carol" excuse was just that. An excuse, because he immediately goes on to say if everyone except him, Carol, Carl and Judith died, he wouldn't want her around. Furthermore, let's even forget Tyreese's "rage out" since Karen's death. He doesn't want to work the fence, and doesn't want to go on runs. He has no valuable knowledge, and is essentially worth only what he can accomplish as any other warm body, or in a Walker-defense role. As to Walker-defense, he's a poor shot and his head is definitely NOT on a swivel when it comes to situational awareness.
In other words, to paraphrase: Everything Tyreese can do, Carol can do better and then some.
Yes, Rick had Carol's rather cold, very pragmatic statements to go by. Yet he also had her undeniably valuable role in caring for and strengthening the minors under her care at the Prison. He had the knowledge that Carol is not so far gone that she wasn't able to bond with Lizzie and her sister. Most importantly: By his own admission he knows Carol would do ANYTHING for the good of the group. Whatever the risk, whatever the personal cost.
People here are holding up the "Bringing her back could've caused division within the Prison population" justification. Isn't that in and of itself indicative of the fact that this decision affected too many people for Rick to make on his own and then inform them of afterward. Doing it himself, however you try to spin it, is Rick saying "I know better than everyone else at the Prison, and because many of the strongest personalities are currently laid up sick, I can take life-and-death decisions into my own hands and expect not to even be second-guessed.
Where is this faith in Rick's judgment coming from? During the "Governor Crisis" Rick was wildly hallucinating and drove Tyreese and Sasha into the Governor's camp. He was wandering around outside the fence, seemingly only partially aware of his surroundings and thereby any potential danger. Subsequent to this period wherein he was mentally and emotionally compromised, he did everything in his power to shut out the very reality of the Zombie Apocalypse, playing Farmer Bob while others were working in hours-long shifts terminating Walkers at the fence.
Carol believed she was protecting the majority from a deadly microorganism. NOTHING ELSE indicates she has been anything but tirelessly selfless and utterly devoted to the group. If ANYONE deserved a second chance, it was Carol. Carol's decision and Rick's many decisions are simply 2 sides of the same coin. It doesn't matter how many times making a choice based on pre-apocalyptic morality rises up and bites the group, Rick always gets the default defense "He was trying to do the right thing"
People here shouldn't make the mistake of assuming his moral judgments hold any more worth than anyone else just because as the main protagonist the writers invariably let him off the hook time and again. Trying to do what you think is best for the group and having extremely negative consequences result from that effort is the same principle, regardless of who is taking action. Carol never allowed complacency to dominate her outlook and behavior. She loved those kids enough to do what no one else was interested in doing, and teaching them to defend themselves. Beyond the physical benefits, she was re-empowering children who in many cases undoubtedly had felt tossed hither and yon by chance and circumstance, while in other cases were wrestling with their inability to protect themselves or those they cared for. Those children will ALL be worse off without Carol.
This wasn't a built-to-a-crescendo feud over control of the group and possession of Lori/Carl like with Shane and Rick. Much as I agreed with a lot of how the Shane character saw things, I recognized HE had pushed matters beyond a Point Of No Return. Instead, we have a single crisis-specific reaction. Even if you completely erase the value of emotional ties between members of the group and Carol, didn't her PRACTICAL expertise and unwavering commitment, that included selflessly shouldering great personal risk, make her worth something like this:
"Carol, what you did was WRONG, and nothing you say or do will ever convince me otherwise. If you EVER do something like this again I will PERSONALLY put a bullet in your brain. We clear?"
Because the part I just don't get was where the "I don't want you around" was coming from on Rick's part. He's taken chances on people who at one juncture were actively antagonistic to the group. Why didn't Carol merit a second chance...if not for herself, then for the sake of two little girls who just lost their only parent and were now looking to Carol to fill that void. "Keeping them safe" isn't enough. Lizzie has SEVERE emotional and psychological issues that, in the absence of a trained professional, are best handled by the ONLY adult she seems to have formed a significant rapport with. We'll never know if that damaged little girl could've been saved, because the only person with an inkling as to her issues, and with the trust from Lizzie necessary to reach her and inspire change was sent away.
Will Rick get a pass on ?
|
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there--on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam. [click for more]
Posting Permissions
Originally Posted by Publius
Reply With Quote
(Hell, I bet there were a few heated debates among the writers as to how this should go down).
Will you go by Governor, el Jefe or something else in the post-apocalyptic wasteland?
Their relationship is chaste and based on a mutual understanding - they both come from abusive backgrounds, unlike the rest of the group, so they have this deep common ground between just the two of them. A lot of their relationship is just hinted at as it's not really something you can visualise very easily - it's more of a feeling - whereas with Rick/Carl you can easily show the father/son relationship, with Glenn/Maggie you can easily show the married couple angle, and with Tyreese/Sasha you can easily show the sibling relationship ... Daryl/Carol has always been a relationship that's far harder to define and illustrate, but it is there.
Bookmarks