Prime Directive

In Prime Directive, David Griffith starts by presenting us with a doubtful, indecisive character. A character dressed as Captain Kirk of the Starship Enterprise. It is the Saturday night before Halloween, and "Captain Kirk" is regretting not going to evening Mass. He is also regretting not being with his wife, who is in another state. Instead, he is on the street waiting for his friend to pick him up to go to a Halloween party. The entire time trying to remain inconspicuous to the people who pass by him...

I believe that David Griffith picked Halloween and the darkness of night for his story for a reason. He has taken his character out of his normal everyday element to prove his point--that we all can do things we are not proud of when placed in different situations. If it would have been any other day of the year at any other time of day, Griffith's character would not have been placed in the position where he ends up in the story. He would not have been at a party around people dressed in costumes, spooky decorations, and creepier than normal vibes. He would have never met his old friend dressed in the Charles Graner costume. He would have never posed for the picture he was so ashamed of just moments after it was taken. No, in order for all of this to happen, Griffith's character had to be placed in abnormal circumstances--and what better time than Halloween night? Griffith even states in the story that "Halloween is when unsettled souls roam the earth. Under that circus tent, past midnight, we were all roaming, asking to be seen, looking for a connection. I found it."

The main character in Prime Directive tries to analyze what he has done after taking the picture. He calls his wife and can't even tell her because he is so ashamed. But his shame is our shame. Griffith's purpose in writing the Prime Directive is to open our eyes to what we are all capable of. It is easy to condemn others for sins they have committed when we have never been put in that situation ourselves. We, as humans are all capable of doing shameful and terrible things when placed in abnormal circumstances.

This is Griffith's intent, what he wants to prove. However, after reading over several articles about what went on at Abu Ghraib, I can honestly say that I could have never committed such horrendous acts of torture. It makes my skin crawl just thinking about doing such things to anybody. Those soldiers humiliated, raped, and even mutilated those prisoners. I believe that in order to do something as terrible, you would have to have some kind of deep, dark, hidden desire to do those things in the first place. No matter how much contempt I felt for the prisoners or how much I loved being in command, I could not picture myself taking pictures next to pyramids of naked, abused prisoners!! I can't fathom it. I understand Griffith's point, that we never know what we are capable of until we are actually put in that situation. But some things you just know would be too horrible for you to bring yourself to do.

Now, the fact that Griffith's character poses with his friend in the Charles Graner costume is pretty sick, but it is nowhere close to what actually happened at Abu Ghraib. The guy who dresses in the costume is sick for even thinking to dress in that costume, and who knows what his intent was for doing that, but there is still no comparison. The main character in Griffith's story probably never anticipated that he would participate in something so shameful. This is a good example of doing something you never thought you'd do because you have never been in that situation before. But if Griffith is trying to say that everyone is capable of committing the same acts that the soldiers like Charles Graner did at Abu Ghraib, I would have to disagree. One, because I know I could never bring myself to do anything like that to another human being, or even an animal. Two, there were other soldiers there who did not participate and who testified against Graner and the others.

Reading over Prime Directive the first time, I didn't really get what David Griffith was trying to say. But then again, I did not know what Abu Ghraib was. After I read about the subject and about Charles Graner, I reread Prime Directive again from the beginnning. I slowly began to realize Griffith's point, and to a certain extent I agree with him. Human nature is an unpredictable thing. And as humans, we change in certain situations. However, Graner and the other soldiers who took part in the unthinkable acts that ocurred at Abu Ghraid could not have been your everyday, "sound of mind" individuals. Even though the circumsances they were in were new to them, something had to have been "out of balance" within them for them to act in the way they did.