Empathy, Sympathy, and a Moment for Grace…Even For Alec Baldwin

 

Alec Baldwin is not a good man.

We can go through his long personal, political, and professional history and document all the ways in which Baldwin has acted in disgusting, horrible fashions. It would take about 50 seconds on Google to come up with enough information to write a 2,000-word piece on the subject.

But this moment is not about Alec Baldwin.

In a horrible incident in New Mexico, on the set of the movie “Rust”, Baldwin apparently fired a prop gun, and some kind of projectile of unknown type was ejected, with horrible consequences: Director of photography Halyna Hutchins, 42, was transported to the hospital via helicopter and pronounced dead by medical personnel at University of New Mexico Hospital, according to the Santa Fe County Sheriff’s Office.

Director Joel Souza, 48, was transported to Christus St. Vincent’s Regional Medical Center by ambulance for care. Details on his condition were not released.

The scope of the tragedy is hard to comprehend for the Hollywood community. Hutchins was a well-known cinematographer, and the grieving throughout the industry was seen all over social media. Souza is expected to make a full recovery, and is lucky not to have been more seriously injured.

Baldwin expressed his shock and sadness regarding the tragic events on social media. “There are no words to convey my shock and sadness regarding the tragic accident that took the life of Halyna Hutchins, a wife, mother, and deeply admired colleague of ours.”

As those closest involved with the incident deal with the repercussions of this tragedy, the public spectacle is one we are all familiar with. Those that despise Baldwin have often been almost gleeful at what has befallen him. Others are simply using the moment to point out the many times Baldwin has failed to show sympathy or empathy to those he dislikes, most famously former Vice President Dick Cheney. Baldwin famously ridiculed Cheney after the Vice President accidentally shot and wounded a friend on a hunting trip (the man survived with minor injuries).

None of this speaks well of civil society in America today. These are the moments that define what type of nation we want to have, and want to aspire to. Our nation remains engulfed in a divisive culture war, with all sides treating Americans they view as the enemy as a ‘foreign’ force that must be politically destroyed and excluded from public life.

Baldwin is clearly not a sympathetic character in this regard. Few have done more to worsen our civil discourse. He has had long-running feuds with numerous conservatives, and his despise for former Presidents Donald Trump and George W. Bush is public and well known.

This is however when the concept of empathy, sympathy, and grace become most important. When things are well, and people are content, it is far easier to express sympathy to those we not only dislike, but fail to understand. But in times like these, when we are polarized and divided, it becomes extremely difficult to rise above the rancor and anger.

I’ve written about the concepts of empathy and sympathy many times, and especially in regards to our failure to promote these concepts for the greater good of civility in American society. Here is an excerpt from 2018:

When someone tries to display sympathy for another person’s hardships and anguish, it is simply an acknowledgment that we understand what that person is going through, and we simply hope for their quick recovery. In traditional society, the quickest and most common way to demonstrate that heartfelt belief was to send prayers to those that were suffering. Sharing sympathetic thoughts is one significant way in which we experience a greater sense of shared similarities together, and allows for a more profound personal engagement than one would generally have with people under normal situations.

Empathy, on the other hand, is the ability to put one’s self into the shoes of another, and to truly understand their point of view. It allows us to come to terms with how others came to make the decision they chose to make, without allowing our own biases to cloud that judgment. So the uniqueness of empathy is that, unlike sympathy, it allows for people to join together and at least attempt to have a shared experience. First and foremost, it involves seeing someone else’s situation from their perspective, and second, sharing their emotions, including their distress.

Most of us cannot truly understand the grief that Halyna Hutchins’ family is going through, nor can we comprehend that devastation and despair that Alec Baldwin is feeling. But we can attempt to be empathetic in trying to understand the devastation caused by this tragic incident.

Baldwin may not be a generous or open-hearted person to those he politically disagrees with, but he is a human with human emotions. And this is a moment in which our common humanity should rise above the anger, rhetoric, and divisiveness that Baldwin, and many of us, have contributed to over the years.

And this is why the concept of grace is so critical to a civil society. Grace, ultimately, is the generous, free and totally unexpected and undeserved understanding of one to another. It is a concept unencumbered by the concept of just deserts, which demands we take ‘an eye for an eye’ as a just punishment for prior injustices.

Grace requires that our sympathetic, empathetic and graceful nature rise above the bad behavior of others. Baldwin probably is undeserving of our empathy. He failed to be graceful when his enemies were in a similar position. But grace requires us to elevate our spirit above and beyond what we would expect of others. Grace requires us to do what we believe is right, even if those we bestow that gift on would not do the same for us.

This is a sacrifice for many of us. It is easy to be mean-spirited and spiteful to those that have behaved that way toward us. Ultimately, however, such a society only damages us all. The true spirit of a truly peaceful and accepting society is one where we forgive, and try to rise above the anger and rancor. And only by acting in this manner can we hope to become a more civil society.

Published in Culture
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 193 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. MiMac Thatcher
    MiMac
    @MiMac

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Does anyone remember when a tall, Swedish-looking young actor, starring in his own spy (I think) TV show some decades ago, finished a shot and collapsed on the set’s bed and took a .44 loaded with blanks and pretended to shoot himself in the temple? The wad penetrated and killed him. I hate to say it, but everyone who handles guns should know not to play with them. That includes play-actors.

    Jon-Erik Hexum

    addendum- I later saw someone else answered this…

    • #91
  2. Instugator Thatcher
    Instugator
    @Instugator

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Instugator (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    A few years later I took it down and worked the lever, considering taking it out to the range. Imagine my surprise when, after cycling the action a few times, working the lever caused a live round to be ejected.

    Hmmm. I always look in the feed mechanism when I am “cycling” the action in preparation to take a firearm somewhere.

    Had you done that you would have caught it before it was loaded.

    Oh, I had looked into the feed mechanism. I just hadn’t looked half way up the feed tube.

    You expressed surprise when “working the lever caused a live round to be ejected”.

    I was pointing out that, had you been looking in the breech while “working the lever” you would have seen the round before it was inserted into the barrel and thus would not have been surprised when the round was ejected.

    • #92
  3. Instugator Thatcher
    Instugator
    @Instugator

    BDB (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    Gun safety isn’t religion.

    Right. It’s science.

    And has been enshrined into case law.

    • #93
  4. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    BDB (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    Gun safety isn’t religion.

    Right. It’s science.

    Heh.  It’s a set of guidelines. And they have to vary, depending on the context. Lots of apparently irresponsible behavior occurs in movies, mostly involving guns, cars, and women, none of which should be attempted at home. 

    • #94
  5. EJHill Podcaster
    EJHill
    @EJHill

    kedavis: Except in movies/TVs they can’t always point the weapon in a safe direction, because that would mean not appearing to shoot whoever they’re pretending to shoot.

    That’s a fallacy. Camera angles lie.

    How many times have you watched a sporting event and watched 6 replays of the same play only to find out only one of them shows what really happened? You don’t actually have to point the weapon at another human.

    Lenses can be used to distort reality as well. My favorite shot is the hero walking away while something explodes behind him. In reality, if they were as close as the lense makes them appear, they would be blown forward and the concussive force would kill them.

    • #95
  6. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    EJHill (View Comment):

    kedavis: Except in movies/TVs they can’t always point the weapon in a safe direction, because that would mean not appearing to shoot whoever they’re pretending to shoot.

    That’s a fallacy. Camera angles lie.

    How many times have you watched a sporting event and watched 6 replays of the same play only to find out only one of them shows what really happened? You don’t actually have to point the weapon at another human.

    Lenses can be used to distort reality as well. My favorite shot is the hero walking away while something explodes behind him. In reality, if they were as close as the lense makes them appear, they would be blown forward and the concussive force would kill them.

     

     

    Tell me another story.

    • #96
  7. Instugator Thatcher
    Instugator
    @Instugator

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    Gun safety isn’t religion.

    Right. It’s science.

    Heh. It’s a set of guidelines. And they have to vary, depending on the context. Lots of apparently irresponsible behavior occurs in movies, mostly involving guns, cars, and women, none of which should be attempted at home.

    Dana Loesch disagrees with you.

    I don’t believe that this is a result of malice on Baldwin’s part. I don’t know who set up the prop gun, but even prop guns and blanks can misfire. Accidents are called accidents because they’re accidents. Yet this is why we say in firearm etiquette to treat every gun as though it’s loaded (emphasis added) because the person handling the gun is responsible for where the barrel points

    As the lead on set and handler of the arm you absolutely bear the responsibility of checking your firearm regardless who hands it to you.

     

    • #97
  8. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    Gun safety isn’t religion.

    Right. It’s science.

    Heh. It’s a set of guidelines. And they have to vary, depending on the context. Lots of apparently irresponsible behavior occurs in movies, mostly involving guns, cars, and women, none of which should be attempted at home.

    Just like science!

    See: Stress Diagram of a Strapless Evening Gown, which I suspect you have close at hand. 
    The book, not the gown.  

    • #98
  9. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    BDB (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    Gun safety isn’t religion.

    Right. It’s science.

    Heh. It’s a set of guidelines. And they have to vary, depending on the context. Lots of apparently irresponsible behavior occurs in movies, mostly involving guns, cars, and women, none of which should be attempted at home.

    Just like science!

    See: Stress Diagram of a Strapless Evening Gown, which I suspect you have close at hand.
    The book, not the gown.

    I prefer Man Of Steel, Woman Of Kleenex.

    • #99
  10. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Instugator (View Comment):
    Dana Loesch disagrees with you.

    I am completely okay with Ms. Loesch disagreeing with me.

    • #100
  11. EJHill Podcaster
    EJHill
    @EJHill

    kedavis: Tell me another story.

    You never see him actually pull the trigger. That’s the Psycho effect, so named after the fact that in the infamous Hitchcock shower scene at no time do you see the knife meet flesh. Cut, cut, cut. The gun in Connery’s hand could be plugged, but at no time do you see the end of the barrel. The “victim” has his back to the camera. No sign of a muzzle flash, no smoke. 

    • #101
  12. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    EJHill (View Comment):

    kedavis: Tell me another story.

    You never see him actually pull the trigger. That’s the Psycho effect, so named after the fact that in the infamous Hitchcock shower scene at no time do you see the knife meet flesh. Cut, cut, cut. The gun in Connery’s hand could be plugged, but at no time do you see the end of the barrel. The “victim” has his back to the camera. No sign of a muzzle flash, no smoke.

    Not the point.  Putting a gun into someone’s mouth appears to violate at least one of the carved-in-stone-tablets rules being promulgated by the no-exceptions-ever people.  Even if we never see the trigger pulled.  It’s sure as hell POINTING A GUN AT SOMEONE, to start with.  Which apparently is never to be done even if 50 people checked to make sure the gun is unloaded.

    • #102
  13. EJHill Podcaster
    EJHill
    @EJHill

    kedavis: Not the point.  Putting a gun into someone’s mouth appears to violate at least one of the carved-in-stone-tablets rules being promulgated by the no-exceptions-ever people. 

    No, it’s exactly the point. You can’t prove that was a real gun. 

    • #103
  14. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    EJHill (View Comment):

    kedavis: Not the point. Putting a gun into someone’s mouth appears to violate at least one of the carved-in-stone-tablets rules being promulgated by the no-exceptions-ever people.

    No, it’s exactly the point. You can’t prove that was a real gun.

    It looked just like either soap or licorice to me.  But it might have been real.

    • #104
  15. Randy Webster Inactive
    Randy Webster
    @RandyWebster

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    Gun safety isn’t religion.

    Right. It’s science.

    Heh. It’s a set of guidelines. And they have to vary, depending on the context. Lots of apparently irresponsible behavior occurs in movies, mostly involving guns, cars, and women, none of which should be attempted at home.

    And you wasted the rest of your money?

    • #105
  16. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    kedavis (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    Gun safety isn’t religion.

    Right. It’s science.

    Heh. It’s a set of guidelines. And they have to vary, depending on the context. Lots of apparently irresponsible behavior occurs in movies, mostly involving guns, cars, and women, none of which should be attempted at home.

    Just like science!

    See: Stress Diagram of a Strapless Evening Gown, which I suspect you have close at hand.
    The book, not the gown.

    I prefer Man Of Steel, Woman Of Kleenex.

    Figures.  I love Niven, but that is not one of his prouder moments.

    • #106
  17. Randy Webster Inactive
    Randy Webster
    @RandyWebster

    BDB (View Comment):
    Figures.  I love Niven, but that is not one of his prouder moments.

    I love Niven, too, and I’ve read most of his books several times.  I don’t recognize the phrase.

    • #107
  18. Gary McVey Contributor
    Gary McVey
    @GaryMcVey

    “Guns, cars, and women”…the subjects of every ’70s Blaxploitation movie. 

    • #108
  19. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Gary McVey (View Comment):

    “Guns, cars, and women”…the subjects of every ’70s Blaxploitation movie.

    Every movie worth a damn.

    • #109
  20. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Randy Webster (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):
    Figures. I love Niven, but that is not one of his prouder moments.

    I love Niven, too, and I’ve read most of his books several times. I don’t recognize the phrase.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_of_Steel,_Woman_of_Kleenex

    From the article:

    Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex” is a 1969 essay in which science fiction author Larry Niven details the problems that Superman would face in sexual intercourse and reproduction with a human woman, using arguments based on humorous reconciliation between physicsbiology, and the abilities of Kryptonians as presented in Superman comic books. The issues discussed include Superman’s loss of physical control during intercourse, the presumed “super powers” of Superman’s sperm cells, genetic incompatibility between humans and Kryptonians, and the dangers to the woman during gestation. The title is a reference to Superman’s power and invulnerability, contrasting it with the relative fragility – like Kleenex brand facial tissue – of a human. The hypothetical woman is referred to in the essay as “LL”, the initials of three women Superman has been romantically involved with: Lois LaneLana Lang, and Lori Lemaris.

     

     

    Text here:

    http://www.rawbw.com/~svw/superman.html

    • #110
  21. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Randy Webster (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):
    Figures. I love Niven, but that is not one of his prouder moments.

    I love Niven, too, and I’ve read most of his books several times. I don’t recognize the phrase.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_of_Steel,_Woman_of_Kleenex

    From the article:

    Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex” is a 1969 essay in which science fiction author Larry Niven details the problems that Superman would face in sexual intercourse and reproduction with a human woman, using arguments based on humorous reconciliation between physics, biology, and the abilities of Kryptonians as presented in Superman comic books. The issues discussed include Superman’s loss of physical control during intercourse, the presumed “super powers” of Superman’s sperm cells, genetic incompatibility between humans and Kryptonians, and the dangers to the woman during gestation. The title is a reference to Superman’s power and invulnerability, contrasting it with the relative fragility – like Kleenex brand facial tissue – of a human. The hypothetical woman is referred to in the essay as “LL”, the initials of three women Superman has been romantically involved with: Lois Lane, Lana Lang, and Lori Lemaris.

     

     

    Text here:

    http://www.rawbw.com/~svw/superman.html

    More explanation doesn’t make this better.  Unlike Stress Diagram ~

    • #111
  22. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    BDB (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Randy Webster (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):
    Figures. I love Niven, but that is not one of his prouder moments.

    I love Niven, too, and I’ve read most of his books several times. I don’t recognize the phrase.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_of_Steel,_Woman_of_Kleenex

    From the article:

    Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex” is a 1969 essay in which science fiction author Larry Niven details the problems that Superman would face in sexual intercourse and reproduction with a human woman, using arguments based on humorous reconciliation between physics, biology, and the abilities of Kryptonians as presented in Superman comic books. The issues discussed include Superman’s loss of physical control during intercourse, the presumed “super powers” of Superman’s sperm cells, genetic incompatibility between humans and Kryptonians, and the dangers to the woman during gestation. The title is a reference to Superman’s power and invulnerability, contrasting it with the relative fragility – like Kleenex brand facial tissue – of a human. The hypothetical woman is referred to in the essay as “LL”, the initials of three women Superman has been romantically involved with: Lois Lane, Lana Lang, and Lori Lemaris.

     

     

    Text here:

    http://www.rawbw.com/~svw/superman.html

    More explanation doesn’t make this better. Unlike Stress Diagram ~

    Eh.  I prefer the whatever it was, college student thesis about how many souls can fit in Hell or whatever it was.

    • #112
  23. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    kedavis (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Randy Webster (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):
    Figures. I love Niven, but that is not one of his prouder moments.

    I love Niven, too, and I’ve read most of his books several times. I don’t recognize the phrase.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_of_Steel,_Woman_of_Kleenex

    From the article:

    Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex” is a 1969 essay in which science fiction author Larry Niven details the problems that Superman would face in sexual intercourse and reproduction with a human woman, using arguments based on humorous reconciliation between physics, biology, and the abilities of Kryptonians as presented in Superman comic books. The issues discussed include Superman’s loss of physical control during intercourse, the presumed “super powers” of Superman’s sperm cells, genetic incompatibility between humans and Kryptonians, and the dangers to the woman during gestation. The title is a reference to Superman’s power and invulnerability, contrasting it with the relative fragility – like Kleenex brand facial tissue – of a human. The hypothetical woman is referred to in the essay as “LL”, the initials of three women Superman has been romantically involved with: Lois Lane, Lana Lang, and Lori Lemaris.

     

     

    Text here:

    http://www.rawbw.com/~svw/superman.html

    More explanation doesn’t make this better. Unlike Stress Diagram ~

    Eh. I prefer the whatever it was, college student thesis about how many souls can fit in Hell or whatever it was.

    Whatever, Entropy.  You are the Heat Death of topics.

    • #113
  24. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    BDB (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Randy Webster (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):
    Figures. I love Niven, but that is not one of his prouder moments.

    I love Niven, too, and I’ve read most of his books several times. I don’t recognize the phrase.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_of_Steel,_Woman_of_Kleenex

    From the article:

    Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex” is a 1969 essay in which science fiction author Larry Niven details the problems that Superman would face in sexual intercourse and reproduction with a human woman, using arguments based on humorous reconciliation between physics, biology, and the abilities of Kryptonians as presented in Superman comic books. The issues discussed include Superman’s loss of physical control during intercourse, the presumed “super powers” of Superman’s sperm cells, genetic incompatibility between humans and Kryptonians, and the dangers to the woman during gestation. The title is a reference to Superman’s power and invulnerability, contrasting it with the relative fragility – like Kleenex brand facial tissue – of a human. The hypothetical woman is referred to in the essay as “LL”, the initials of three women Superman has been romantically involved with: Lois Lane, Lana Lang, and Lori Lemaris.

     

     

    Text here:

    http://www.rawbw.com/~svw/superman.html

    More explanation doesn’t make this better. Unlike Stress Diagram ~

    Eh. I prefer the whatever it was, college student thesis about how many souls can fit in Hell or whatever it was.

    Whatever, Entropy. You are the Heat Death of topics.

    You wanted to chat more about the stress diagram of a strapless dress?  I’m sure someone is interested, just not me.

    • #114
  25. Randy Webster Inactive
    Randy Webster
    @RandyWebster

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Randy Webster (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):
    Figures. I love Niven, but that is not one of his prouder moments.

    I love Niven, too, and I’ve read most of his books several times. I don’t recognize the phrase.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_of_Steel,_Woman_of_Kleenex

    From the article:

    Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex” is a 1969 essay in which science fiction author Larry Niven details the problems that Superman would face in sexual intercourse and reproduction with a human woman, using arguments based on humorous reconciliation between physics, biology, and the abilities of Kryptonians as presented in Superman comic books. The issues discussed include Superman’s loss of physical control during intercourse, the presumed “super powers” of Superman’s sperm cells, genetic incompatibility between humans and Kryptonians, and the dangers to the woman during gestation. The title is a reference to Superman’s power and invulnerability, contrasting it with the relative fragility – like Kleenex brand facial tissue – of a human. The hypothetical woman is referred to in the essay as “LL”, the initials of three women Superman has been romantically involved with: Lois Lane, Lana Lang, and Lori Lemaris.

     

     

    Text here:

    http://www.rawbw.com/~svw/superman.html

    I think I actually read that, but it has been 50 years.

    • #115
  26. Kozak Member
    Kozak
    @Kozak

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Looking forward to the future. I expect that the next time Baldwin appears on a red carpet, the press will celebrate the “courage” he displayed enduring the event and its aftermath.

    He’s been merciless in the past on people who shot someone.

     

    • #116
  27. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Kozak (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Looking forward to the future. I expect that the next time Baldwin appears on a red carpet, the press will celebrate the “courage” he displayed enduring the event and its aftermath.

    He’s been merciless in the past on people who shot someone.

     

    Well for one thing, Baldwin would say his shooting was “accidental” not “wrongful.”

    • #117
  28. Randy Weivoda Moderator
    Randy Weivoda
    @RandyWeivoda

    Kozak (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Looking forward to the future. I expect that the next time Baldwin appears on a red carpet, the press will celebrate the “courage” he displayed enduring the event and its aftermath.

    He’s been merciless in the past on people who shot someone.

     

    Maybe this will be an opportunity for Alec Baldwin to learn some humility.  Maybe even Alec Baldwin will see the worth in the values promoted in the OP.  But even if Baldwin doesn’t, it doesn’t mean Mr. Shanker is wrong.

    • #118
  29. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    If you have a gun in your hand, you have the responsibility to know – not guess, not surmise, not accept the testimony of an expert, but to personally know – the status of that weapon. It is negligence not to.

    • #119
  30. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Percival (View Comment):

    If you have a gun in your hand, you have the responsibility to know – not guess, not surmise, not accept the testimony of an expert, but to personally know – the status of that weapon. It is negligence not to.

    Sure. That makes sense. Up to a point.

    But does that mean he has to check the cartridge loaded, to make sure that the realistic dummy round doesn’t still contain a primer? Does that mean he has to check the barrel to make sure that there’s no bit of debris lodged in it that will become a dangerous projectile?

     

    • #120
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.