 |
| The once-rambunctious
Arnold Schwarzenegger |
| Photo:© Ken
James / Corbis |
|
To Jefferson Powell, a Duke professor of both divinity
and law, the prevalence of the public apology signals a "general
leeching out of American life of real substance." It also
points to a harsh moralizing tone, a reflexive and malicious sanctioning,
that has infected public life. "We have a culture that has
a kind of intense moralism about it. But it's a moralism that is
divorced from a strong connection to any religious tradition. It
looks rather bizarre when we tolerate behavior of all sorts that,
according to my religious tradition, is intolerable on the part
of public officials--for example, bitter and uncharitable attacks
on opponents."
The public display becomes "an end in itself, which is often
accompanied by anger. That's what you have to expect from this
brittle, superficial moralism. It serves as a tool of anger rather
than a means of reconciliation and forgiveness."
As both Jones and Powell see it, repentance that doesn't express
itself in action is not true repentance. But there's an obligation
on the other side: Healthy communities must provide a means of
reconciliation. "That's in large measure what my religious
tradition is about," Powell says, "finding ways to repair
the damage that we all create in our lives and our communities." The
dynamic of repentance and forgiveness, for many religious traditions,
is part and parcel of moral teaching.
| Controlling political
damage: from top, Pakistan's explosive Khan, former
birthday-party guest Trent Lott, a not-quite-contrite
Bill Clinton |
|
 |
| © Mian Khursheed
/ Reuters / Corbis |
|
 |
|
 |
| Photo:© Wally
Mcnamee / Corbis |
|
The memorable media coverage of televangelist Jimmy Swaggart's
tearful confession, Powell says, points to the culture's problem
with understanding authentic religious expression. In 1988, Swaggart
admitted in a Sunday-morning sermon that he had engaged in improprieties
with a prostitute. "It was very obvious from the tone of the
reporting that part of the story was about making fun of these
people for being so naÔve and foolish as to think that Swaggart
was doing anything other than trying to save his own neck. But
Christianity doesn't give you any options other than to forgive;
that's what Christianity says you must do. That doesn't mean you're
being naÔve. And then if the apology was insincere, the reconciliation
of the person with God and the community won't go through. It won't
go through because the person hasn't genuinely repented, not because
people are unaccepting of the apology and unwilling to forgive."
Other cultures have recent and powerful experiences with forgiveness. "One
of the most interesting laboratories in recent years for all of
these dynamics has been South Africa and the Truth and Reconciliation
Commission there," says Greg Jones. When he was in South Africa
several years ago, he interviewed a number of members of the commission. "One
of the things over and over again that they said was, 'Find somebody
who is candid, forthright, and truthful.' There's a remarkable
willingness on the part of victims' families to be forgiving, to
say, 'What we really wanted most was the truth.' And so it opens
up a new horizon for a new future."
Some of what was confessed was "chilling and horrifying," Jones
says. Still, the overwhelming sentiment was, "What we really
want is the lying to stop, the uncertainty of what happened to
my loved one to be finally answered," he says. There are hugely
complicated issues, including questions of reparations. But the
first step was the sense of responsibility and truthfulness linked
to a genuine contrition. There are some white South Africans whose
contrition has become manifest by doing work in economic empowerment
of black Africans. If it was an issue of murder, you obviously
can't make things right by bringing back the murder victim. But
you might be able to help others. You can live in a different way."
Nations, too, can live in a different way. That's been true for
Germany since the end of World War II. Among Germans who lived
through the Nazi era, there's a denial of individual responsibility,
and so of the need for individual apology, says Duke history professor
Claudia Koonz, author of the new book The Nazi Conscience. But
they have a much different sense of collective responsibility.
Germans were caught up at the time in a movement she calls "ethnic
revivalism, or ethnic fundamentalism," a celebration of national
virtues and national destiny at the expense, it turned out, of
a marginalized population.
Paradoxically, Koonz says, "the active pursuit of major perpetrators
of war crimes made those who didn't get accused feel that they
had nothing to apologize for." Even Nazi loyalists saw their
affiliation as "patriotic" rather than "partisan." Almost
none of those put on trial at Nuremberg apologized for their actions.
"The whole process, from the beginning of prejudice to persecution
to deportation to extermination, was gradual," Koonz says. "It
looked legal--measures came down one at a time--and individuals
incrementally found themselves collaborating, in small ways. That's
why the culture of collective apology is so important in Germany:
It's because people individually didn't feel responsible, but they
feel horrified at belonging to a country that was responsible."
The German writer Martin Walser has repeatedly urged Germans to
adopt a less guilt-ridden sense of national identity. At a ceremony
in 1998 where he was awarded the German book trade's prestigious
Peace Prize, he declared that he was tired of the "endless
parading of shame" and warned against what he called "the
instrumentalization of Auschwitz." Still, Koonz says that
no country has done more than Germany to apologize for its past
and pursue a path of redemption. As one sign of that, she says,
Germans remain "intensely interested in the public culture
of commemoration." It's a country engaged in "monument
mania," as she describes it. "Every town has to have
a monument to the Jews who are no longer there. The extent to which
every single aspect of every monument is debated in public is really
incredible."
Apologies, redemption, and forgiveness have a resonance in the
marketplace. Consumers are ready to forgive companies, but only
if they think that an apology is sincere and is accompanied by
corrective action. That's the assessment of Gavan Fitzsimons, associate
professor of marketing at Duke's Fuqua School of Business. "The
work I do shows that, basically, at the moment that the recipients
of a message pick up on the fact that you're attempting to persuade
them through that message--whether it be an advertisement, a public-service
announcement, or an apology--its effectiveness diminishes dramatically.
And in many cases, you actually get a backlash, a negative effect." In
other words, a business apology might be public-relations spin,
but its sponsor certainly doesn't want it to be perceived as such.
Fitzsimons says that a model corporate apology came in the early
Eighties after a presumed psychopath poisoned Extra-Strength Tylenol
capsules. Johnson & Johnson, the manufacturer, ordered a massive
recall involving more than 31 million bottles at a cost of more
than $100 million, temporarily ceased all production of capsules,
and replaced them with tamper-resistant caplets. The company's
CEO maintained a high profile throughout the episode. The Washington
Post observed at the time that "what Johnson & Johnson
executives have done is communicate the message that the company
is candid, contrite, and compassionate, committed to solving the
murders and protecting the public." With a massive marketing
campaign, and a repackaging program, Tylenol staged an impressive
comeback.
A contrary example appeared in the late Eighties. Audi, the luxury
carmaker, was confronting reports of sudden-acceleration problems
when the transmission was shifted out of "Park." CBS'
60 Minutes featured the story of a mother who had run over her
six-year-old son; she insisted that she had had her foot on the
brake the whole time. When her claim came to court, the jury found
no defect in the car. But that jury finding was almost irrelevant
to Audi's standing, Fizsimons says. "Audi's response was,
'It's not our fault, it's basically the dumb American driver who's
ramming his foot on the gas and running it into his garage.' They
didn't say, 'We apologize for the trouble. We're not sure what's
at the root of the problem but we're going to do everything in
our power to solve it.' Audi basically disappeared from the U.S.
marketplace for about ten years."
continues on page
three. |