One way John Book changed throughout this movie was his
passion for others. At the beginning of
the film John is moving at a fast-pace and does not seem to care that much for
others. After encountering Samuel and
Rachel, Book learns to care. He learns
that he is no longer living for himself but is living for someone else that
equally cares for him. The part that
showed he cared when he got to the Amish community occurred when he took the
gun away from Samuel. Any adult would
have done this, but this was different. When
Rachel walked in the room and saw him and Samuel with the gun, he instantly
changed his mind. I think he realized
that life was bigger than him when he told Rachel to put the gun in the jar of
peaches.
The other way he changed was that he had a better
appreciation for life. He saw that the
simple life worked for the Amish people.
They valued each other and realized they were all on the same team. They helped each other out and I think this
is something Book realized this is something he wanted for the world he lived
in.
Another way he changed was that he became more
positive. I feel like he came to an
understanding that the world actually had a chance of changing for the
good. Living in his world made him
realize there was chaos after he came to the Amish community. He wanted more out of life.
His violence did not change.
When he entered the Amish community it appeared as though he resorted to
the peaceful life. When he found out his
friend was killed, he became angry. I think
this triggered his reaction when the teenagers were bullying the Amish people
in the town. They tried to calm him down
saying that was not their way, but it was clearly John Book’s way. This is what still kept him distinguished
from the others.
It might be useful to note that during his conflict with the men harassing the group in the street, his violence could be interpreted as either positive because he values the community and feels that they are worth fighting for, or negative because it means he can not hold up the Amish ideals of pacifism and nonviolence. In city society, it shows commitment and investment in an ideal that one would risk physical harm to protect it. The scene could be showing us how book has begun to identify with the community, and takes an insult to them as one to himself, deepening his alliance with the group.
ReplyDeleteHowever, like a cat bringing its owner a dead mouse, good intentions are not always welcome. His act of defense shames them, as they have to apologize for his violent behavior and hurriedly return home. It drives a divide between Book and the community, as we see without doubt that he cannot entirely abandon his roots as a violent city-dweller. When we English watch that scene, you must admit that it’s satisfying to see the infuriatingly insolent redneck put in his place. But were an Amish person to see that scene (suspension of disbelief here, please), they would only see the horror of the violence.
I agree with your point that certain aspects of John Book simply could not be changed. He is a product of his environment and that environment is a violent one. Philadelphia in the 1980’s was just about the polar opposite of the Amish community portrayed in the film. Transplanting a policeman with a jurisdiction over the inner city into a peaceful Amish community is an obvious recipe for disaster. It is a surprise that the trouble does not occur until the tail end of the film. I find that Book was justified in hitting the bully under normal circumstances; however, he was posing as a pacifist Amish folk. He blew his own cover and his seemingly insignificant act of violence led to a whole slew of violence being cast upon the peaceful community.
ReplyDeleteHowever, he did change for the better in the ways that you describe. His emersion in the caring Amish community provided him with a better appreciation and sense of compassion for others. The only form of compassion that he showed in the film prior to moving in with Eli and Rachel was his scolding his sister for having a man over while her children were in the house.