A stunning notion in these modern times, when right doesn’t seem so clear-cut and when it seems as though we are falling back into ‘might makes right’. The notion that one’s wrath should undo the wicked, which hearkens back to the idea of righteous indignation could almost be called a novelty in recent days. Certainly, there will be plenty of people pointing to places such as twitter where such notions seem to be a ‘dime a dozen’ but the truth is that this is not the case. Over there and in other such places it is simply a wastebin of ‘Wrath’, not righteous indignation.
Maybe it is high-time this essay get underway and actually begin to get into exactly, what is ‘righteous indignation'?
Well according to wikipedia; Righteous indignation, also called righteous anger, is anger that is primarily motivated by a perception of injustice or other profound moral lapse.
Okay, this begs the question of where we get the notion. One possible source is the incredible Christian philosopher St-Augustine of Hippo who says; “Hope has two beautiful daughters; their names are Anger and Courage. Anger at the way things are, and Courage to see that they do not remain as they are.”
This is not to say that he encouraged anger as he cautions against it in a number of letters and other places. Warning that it could easily overtake a man, and make of him a kind of slave. It is however crucial I think to bear in mind his notions of a ‘moral anger’ or a ‘anger at the way things are’, and ‘courage to see that they do not remain as they are’.
What is more is that our notions of moral-outrage, which is not particular only to the Occidental world, but also to that of Asia. This can be seen in the histories of countries such as China, Korea and Japan. We know for a fact that the myriad sins and crimes of Dong Zhuo from the end of the Han-Dynasty period, evoked in the people of the time (and those from 1000 years after the fact) a great deal of outrage and fury. Such that the people rose in rebellion on a multitude of occasions, with a number of nobles and warlords rising to work together to overthrow him.
This was because of his excesses, and the same thing was to happen in Japanese history at the end of the Kamakura period. The Hojo had ruled for nigh on a hundred years, and were mostly unchallenged during that time succeeding in pushing back even the Mongols from their shores, only for them to fall to excess and revelry which so offended the people that they preferred for a time Go-Daigo’s rule. But when he gave way to even more expenses, high taxes and incompetence than the Hojo, they welcomed the ruthless rule of Ashikaga Takauji, who swept his way to power after many years of war and enjoyed likely quite a bit of support from the people.
Moral outrage was what swept away two dynasties here; the Han and the Hojo. It is a powerful force, and a natural one.
In the case of France, it is what smashed the Capet-Valois to pieces when they became dominated by the brutal and incompetent Catherine de Medici, so that her rule and her sons’ tyranny was swept away, and they were replaced by the abler Capet-Bourbon, Henri IV ‘le Grand’ (the Great) and then later his son Louis XIII ‘le Juste’ (the Just).
With regards to America we have the example of the Founding Fathers, who were offended by the idea of ‘taxation without representation’ and insisted on their basic rights. Britain would not at first oblige as swiftly as they ought to have, and were even a little annoyed by the American colonies’ desire for independence and so war happened and Washington and his followers with aid from Lafayette tore apart the British regiments and established the ‘United States of America’.
Another example one might utilise are those from Roman history, when Lucretia was violated and made to commit suicide to reclaim her honour. The Romans were so angered at the besmirching of a lady’s honour that they insisted on putting an end to monarchical rule. And established their ‘Res Publica’ (Public Thing). Then centuries later they were to conquer Carthage as much thanks to the force of their ‘wrath undoing the wicked’ as they defeated Hannibal Barca after he had inflicted a thousand humiliations and nigh on half a dozen defeats upon them.
Rome was destined to also be brought low by the force of moral-outrage when the heroic Gracchi Brothers were destroyed by the Optimates faction. Slain unjustly, this was to be the great event that launched Rome into nigh on a century of civil war so that the ‘Res Publica’ style of rule semi-collapsed and was overtaken by the rule of the ‘Princeps’ or as we like to call them to-day; ‘Emperors’.
His wrath undoes the wicked is really a call to arms for men, a call to manhood and strength and vigour. For more literary examples; we have Roland standing against the ravages of the Moors in Spain, he cannot abide the idea of the enemies of his people besmirching their honour and heaping indignities upon them.
There is also that of Gawain, who is always keen to smash to pieces the oppressor of all ladies and children, defending their honour where few others would be willing to. And doing so at no personal reward, or for any other reason than because it is his duty as a knight and as a man.
We also have characters such as Merry Brandybuck in the Lord of the Rings, along with those of Gimli and Theoden King who are more than eager to do what is right. They wish to do this not because they are obligated to because of rank, but because they feel it to be their obligation. They love others, they see what oppression Sauron and others would heap on their people and upon the people of their neighbours and rise to the occasion.
There are of course also characters such as Jim Hawkins both in Treasure Island and the Disney adaptation Treasure Planet who upholds this particular virtue. There is Hercules from Legendary Journeys who embodies this value, and also tends to do so with one quality that some would likely think utterly opposed to moral-outrage; wisdom.
You see, Heracles in Legendary Journeys employs a great deal of reason, wisdom and patience when clashing with the wicked. He is keen to make sure that he doesn’t get the wrong man, doesn’t hurt the wrong person, doesn’t get angry at the wrong individual. He is aware as the greatest man on earth that he holds a special place in creation in the mythological version of earth he inhabits. He could easily crush much of the world between his fingers, but as he wishes to set an example, one that boys and men could be proud of, he approaches the vice of ‘wrath’ with a great deal of caution.
Cautious and yet prone to anger, he tries not to let it be misplaced. Heracles here is rarely ever wrong in seizing and taking down this king or that god, and the reason is that he combines wisdom with anger and courage. Wisdom to look at a situation fully and completely, combined with patience.
In this way, his wrath does indeed undo the wicked, which is important and he also takes great care not to lose himself in his wrath.
On that note, I’d argue that Bowen within the context of Dragonheart was swallowed up by wrath after Einon’s betrayal. But ultimately what he had to do was let go of his bitterness and pain, and realize that in this situation his wrath such as it is, ought to be used to undo Einon’s poisonous rule, but first he must help others be able to do something productive with their own anger.
You see he helps others find courage and wisdom, so that they do not follow his earlier (bad) example all while showing them the way of honour and goodness and leading them in the battle against Einon.