The readings “Narrative, ethics, and empathy” by Utell, The Baby in The Well by Bloom, and “Narrative Emotion” by Keen discuss the potential for narrative to elicit empathy from the reader/audience. Each of the readings also clarified the specifications of narrative in order to reach this potential. Bloom discussed the different response to names, as a result of “‘the identifiable victim effect.'” when making their case ‘against empathy’. Utell went over a variety of engagement techniques the writer can use to engage the reader through connection to the narrator and characters, including Rhetoric, mimesis, instabilities, tensions, denouement, and the varieties of strategic empathy. Keen defines and exemplifies a variety of terms relevant to narrative emotion and empathy, including narrativity, and affect. All of these terms and ideas implicate the use of empathy in narratives to access the emotionality of the audience. This has direct applications within the legal system- as narrative is the key method of translating factual information into the truthful retelling of the crime.
Perhaps most applicable was Utell’s explanation of Keen’s variations of Strategic Empathy. This reasonably correlates with Bloom’s argument for rationality over empathy- in reference to the viability for actions to be carried out on behalf of the empathy derived from narrative. Utell identifies Kenn’s different strategic empathies as bounded, ambassadorial, and broadcast. Each of these would have different effects when employed in the courtroom by a lawyer attempting to plead or prosecute the defendant’s case. Bounded strategic empathy, would perhaps be better used by the defense attorney, as they get to choose a jury that likely has shared experiences with the defendant. Ambassadorial strategic empathy would best be used by prosecuting attorney, as the victim is a clear ambassador for injustice, and the attorney could rely on most members of the jury (and the judge) to associate this with suffering and procure empathy for the victim, and not the defendant. Broadcast strategic empathy could be reasonably utilized by either the defense or prosecution because it relies on human characteristics to supply empathy to the audience, however, it would be far easier to use this strategic empathy as the defense lawyer, since the defendant has likely already been dehumanized by the prosecution’s narrative.
List of Current Events:
-Torrential downpours in texas (Empathy is correct response because there is a small # of casualties)
-Effects of tarriff war (Empathy is incorrect response because there is not a calculable # of people effected)
-Palestine & Israel conflict (Empathy is incorrect response because it is cultural issue with numerous casualties that not everyone can associate with or accurately form an unbiased opinion on)
