Film’s Character Had to Hate Hard to Find Compassion

I feel compelled to respond to the Counterpunch by Millard Farmer regarding Tim Robbins’ treatment of the subject of capital punishment in his film “Dead Man Walking” and his faithfulness in translating Sister Helen Prejean’s book.

First, I must admit that I have not read Sister Helen’s book. Farmer is undeniably closer to the subject matter than almost everyone in this country, but in his proximity to the actual events surrounding the execution of Pat Sonnier, he has inadvertently overlooked the film’s intent and impact. I believe that what Robbins set out to do, and accomplished with utmost precision, was to get the viewer to go deeper into the controversies of capital punishment and victims’ rights. It’s easy for the average citizen to spout armchair philosophy about the pros and cons of the state taking the lives of murderers, but it is quite another thing to delve into the hearts and minds of the death row inmates, their supporters and the families of their victims.

It is unfortunate that Farmer has measured the depiction of the fictional conglomeration of death row inmates called Matthew Poncelet with a yardstick of fact. To touch the many facets of this controversy, which pits compassion and forgiveness against fear and the human desire for vengeance, and to deeply explore them in the context of a story that must be told in a couple of hours, takes an approach which condenses and expands on fact. But rest assured, Farmer, the complexities of the issue of taking a murderer’s life were not lost by the characterization of Poncelet as arrogant, unremorseful and racist.

In fact, the portrayal opened the door to reevaluation of death row inmates, whom most citizens would view as monsters. Newspapers routinely report statements from death row inmates that are hateful and unrepentant.

A case in point is an article about the use of lethal injection for state executions on the front page of The Times in the same issue that Farmer’s Counterpunch appears. This article reported that convicted killer William Kirkpatrick Jr. “told the U.S. Supreme Court in an obscenity-riddled letter that he was guilty, felt no remorse, and wanted to be executed.”

*

While this kind of statement would generally sway people like myself toward thinking capital punishment is certainly warranted in a case such as Kirkpatrick’s, the film “Dead Man Walking” gave me insights into the fear and hopelessness that motivates such statements. Had the filmmakers stayed truer to the character of humbled and repentant Pat Sonnier, the viewer might have been denied the experience of initially feeling that Poncelet was definitely someone deserving to die, not to mention the personal perplexity Sister Helen must have gone through in her decision to help such a person. In other words, making Poncelet hate-able actually enables us to see his humanity more clearly and to understand the motivation of his supporters.

Also, whether the ostracism of Helen Prejean by the residents of a housing project in which she worked actually took place or not, the point was well made that supporters of death row inmates are viewed as supporters of the actions of those inmates, rather than compassion for a human being who has lost his or her soul. I don’t believe that Robbins set out to make a docudrama surrounding the events of Pat Sonnier’s execution, but rather a moving examination of the issue of capital punishment that would bring the subject to a personal level for the viewer. To that end, the filmmakers should be congratulated by all those in opposition to the death penalty, not disdained for not keeping to the facts.

I have been affected profoundly by the film.