Justice Served?

Evelyn Duron 1/29/2013 L202 Justice Served?

In Sherman Alexie’s poem, “Capital Punishment”, a part that was very interesting, yet confusing was when the narrator was being sympathetic. The narrator was very considerate of the prisoners. In the poem, Alexie makes the narrator be a cook at a jail that had the death row. Perhaps Alexie made the narrator be a cook instead of someone else like a guard or a warden because the cook would not represent the law; the cook just works for the jail. Readers of the poem, “Capital Punishment”, might at

first be puzzled by the sympathy of the cook towards the minorities that get the death sentence, but a close reading of the poem helps us see that the cook is against capital punishment. Throughout the poem the narrator shows us the controversial commentary about how the cook is for capital punishment. When the cook mentions, “Those Indians are always gambling”, it makes it seem like it is an everyday thing.(14). Then the cook states, “What did they expect? All of the stories should have been simple. ” (96­97). he/she is implying that it is not important that a person just died. It is a normal thing for people to died, so we should not care. A reader of this poem might assume that cook is just doing his job, but in reality, he/she does care for what they are serving to the Indian man. In the poem there are sections where the cook says, “(I am not a witness)” (5,22,41,64,79) though it is clear the cook is because he/she is the one telling the poem. The narrator periodically repeats that staza five times. The first time it is mention is after the cook mentions that he/she is to prepare the last meal for the a prisoner that is going to be executed. Where the cook specifies that the prisoner is an Indian man. As the cook continues his story, we know that the cook takes pride in his/her cooking when the cook mentions, “I just cook for the boss but I cook just right for the Indian man to be executed.” (26­28) The cook is telling us that he/she just cooks for the boss but takes pleasure in cooking well for the Indian man. But we ask ourselves why the cook takes so much pride in making food for the killer. Is it because the narrator sympathises the “Indian” killer? We can see that as the cook prepares the simple meal of a baked potato,a salad, and a glass of ice water, he/she tries desperately to make the last meal as memorable as possible for the Indian man that is about to receive the death sentence. In addition to the first “(I am not a witness)”, the narrator explains why the Indian man was

sentenced to have an execution. The cook reveals that the Indian man killed a white person over a gambling bet. (1158). Though the narrator confesses something else, “ It’s mostly the dark one who are forced to sit in the chair especially when white people die.” (6­8). From this we now know who are the people that sit in the electrocution chair; who are the colored people. That confession implies that there is some racism involved with the death sentencing. The narrator also points out, “It’s true, you can look it up.” Which means that most of the people that were giving the death penalty were colored. Perhaps the cook finds it unfair that the only reason the Indian man is get the death sentence is because of his color and feels guilty, he/she makes the man’s last meal as meaningful as possible. (1158). After the fourth “(I am not a witness)”, the cook notes that how he tastes the food before it is served to the condemned prisoner. (1160). As if he meant to share the last meal with the Indian man. As the cook goes on in this section, he/she imagines the Indian man being electrocuted as the narrator says, “his body arced like modern art curving organically, smoke rising from his joint, wispy flames decorating the crown of his head.” (76­77). Yet even though he imagines it, it is nothing compared to when the Indian man is being electrocuted. The cook informs us that after the third “(I am not a witness)”, he/she hands the food to the guard. (47). Then sits alone in the dark as the chair is being turned on. When the cook turns off the lights, he/she does not notice when the power surge that causes lights to flicker. (48­53). In the darkness the cook is able to forget for a bit about what is occurring in the other room, the execution of the Indian man. In the last “(I am not a witness)”, the narrator explains that how he was in the dark kitchen when they killed the Indian man. He/she continues by saying that even though they killed the Indian man everyone has his own definition of justice. (1160). The narrator says, “ 1 death + 1 death = 2 deaths.

But we throw the killers in one grave and the victims in another.” (97­102). The cook is saying that is what a crime comes to. A simple math problem is what justice is. That is the death penalty in our society. We would expect that the death penalty would bring justice in our lives but does it really? Capital punishment just takes the life of a murderer but in the end it is still the same result. We can not bring our loved one back. The only thing that resulted from this is the taking of a second life. When the cooks says, “We form sides and have two feast”, the narrator is implying that how in a crime we divide our attention. (102). Most of us go on the victim’s side but in this case the cook goes to the killer’s side. The cook knows that the Indian man clearly committed a crime but that does not mean it is fair that the Indian man deserved the death penalty. In the last stanza that is in parentheses the cook says, “( I am a witness)”. (103). Unlike the other stanzas that are in parentheses, this time he does claim he is a witness. The narrator is saying he is a witness to this to what happened to the Indian man. After that the cook reflects on what he/she learned, “ If any of us stood for days on top of a barren hill during an electrical storm then lightning would eventually strike us and we 'd have no idea for which of our sins were reduced to headlines and ash.” (105­110). Alexie is trying to say that the only thing we leave behind after death is the impact of people and piles of ashes. In my conclusion, even though a reader might believe “Capital Punishment” is just about a cook preparing a meal, the narrator actually is trying to say to the readers that capital punishment is wrong. The speaker in this poem speaks about how making the last meal is important to him/her because the cook tries desperately to make it the best last meal.The cook also mentions how it was mostly the colored people that were put on death row which shows the racism in the system. How we as the

readers take sides when it comes down to a crime, for most of the time we go to the victim’s side. Though the most important thing is the reflection the narrator does at the end. In the end there is two things that happen: we have two deaths and no justice.

Work Cited Clifford, John, and Schilb John. “Capital Punishment”. Making Literature Matter. Fifth Bedford/ St. Mary’s. 2012. 1158­1161. Print

Cited: Clifford, John, and Schilb John. “Capital Punishment”. Making Literature Matter. Fifth Bedford/ St. Mary’s. 2012. 1158­1161. Print