The Criminology of “Oliver Twist”

oliverLet’s face it.  The protagonist of “Oliver Twist” just isn’t a very interesting character.  Things start out promisingly enough with his famous request, “Please, sir, I want some more.”  And who can resist applauding when he gives the boorish Noah Claypole a well-deserved thrashing?  But we’re then forced to endure nearly 400 pages of Oliver as an insufferable milquetoast, passively cast here and there to suit the needs of Dickens’ laughably improbable plot, weeping copiously on cue to amplify the author’s sentimental excesses.

No, Oliver himself gives us no good reason to continue to read past page 50.  It’s the villains who really carry the show.  Mr. and Mrs. Bumble, of course, supply some darkly memorable comic relief, and they are villains of a sort.  Venal and hypocritical public servants, we might think of them as the forebears of some of today’s white-collar criminals.  (Mr. Bumble is also the source of a perennially favorite statement about the law; upon being informed that “the law supposes that your wife acts under your direction,” Bumble sputters helplessly, “If the law supposes that, the law is a ass–a idiot.” (402))

But the real scene-stealers are the criminals of a more conventional sort.  Is there any doubt that Fagin is the most memorable and richly realized character in the book, with the murderous Bill Sikes not far behind?  

Continue ReadingThe Criminology of “Oliver Twist”

Still Dreaming: The 50th Anniversary of the March on Washington

untitled2Today marks the 50th anniversary of the March for Jobs and Freedom, more commonly known as the March on Washington. Today, in 1963, an estimated 250,000 people—of all ages, races, and creeds—descended on the Lincoln Memorial in a peaceful show of solidarity for full civil rights for African Americans. It was also the day that Martin Luther King, Jr. gave his famous “I Have a Dream Speech.”

There have been a number of interesting pieces presenting the story behind the march, behind the people who organized it, and the people who participated. You can find some of those pieces here, here, here, here, and here (linking to writer and broadcaster Jean Shepherd’s incredibly interesting radio broadcasts about his participation in the march; the popular movie “A Christmas Story” is based on Shepherd’s autobiographical stories). Or just click on today’s Google doodle to find a host of links.

While reading a good number of pieces on the march, I realized that I cannot recall once in my entire 19 years of public schooling (elementary and secondary schools, plus public college and law school) that I ever read or heard about that event and never, not once, did I ever read or hear King’s speech.

Continue ReadingStill Dreaming: The 50th Anniversary of the March on Washington

Howard Zinn’s “A People’s History of the United States”

For over twenty years, I have enjoyed reading and assigning Howard Zinn’s “A People’s History of the United States.” I especially like Zinn’s efforts to see history “from the bottom looking up,” that is, to capture the thoughts of not leaders and prosperous citizens but rather simple and subjugated people – workers, immigrants, women, African Americans, and Native Americans, among others. It therefore came as a surprise to learn that Mitch Daniels, Indiana’s former Governor and now President of Purdue University, attempted to drive Zinn’s book from Indiana’s schools.

While he was still Governor, Daniels emailed Indiana education officials asking them to prevent the use of Zinn’s book in the state’s K-12 classrooms. Daniels said “A People’s History of the United States” was a “truly execrable, anti-factual piece of disinformation.” Daniels also called the book “crap,” and he seemed pleased that “this terrible anti-American academic has finally passed away.”

Daniels’ criticism of Zinn and his work is on one level political. To wit, we have a right-wing politician condemning a leftist historian, albeit one who is deceased. (Didn’t Daniels’ parents ever tell him to let the dead rest in peace?) On a more fundamental level, Daniels’ criticism of Zinn also betrays a failure to grasp what the writing and the study of history entails.  

Continue ReadingHoward Zinn’s “A People’s History of the United States”