prostitutes are closer to heaven than nobles

Quite a wonderful bottom group portrait. Prostitutes, grooms, blacks, thieves, nuns, a three-dimensional figure, clear love and hate. The climax of the final murder is great, full of drama and tension. Obviously, "male robbers and female prostitutes" are more lovely and more human than nobles, judges, and slave owners.

At a time when the "middle class" dislikes the poor and loves the rich has become the new normal ("you are weak, you are justified", "more noble than you are harder than you"), this drama can bring people some thoughts: the bottom is the bottom, and in the end Is it because of laziness, stupidity and moral depravity, or because of not being lucky enough to be born? Taking a step back, if a bad birth makes people lazy and stupid, should we blame the victims of injustice, or the injustice itself?

The background of the series is set in a historical era with a huge gap between the rich and the poor. In a rotten phrase, "this is the best era/this is the worst era". The contradiction is sharp and the contrast is strong.

Prostitutes and nuns: ethics

The old nun was a prostitute when she was young, but when she was old, she repented and loved her daughter very much. God put her to the test (and made her work for her daughter, Quigley, her former bad bustard, this time to scold her rival, Margaret Wells. She was serious about her work, full of bibles, and had a vocabulary large enough to People doubted her English proficiency. Later, determined not to be played by Quigley, she joined Wells.

The little nun, the very kind little white rabbit, has sincere friendship and love with the thieves and prostitutes, and is willing to pray for the thieves in the slums and fight with black girlfriends. At the end of the episode, she is even willing to risk her life as a bait to help Wells, the prostitute who once wanted to kill her, to do the right thing. Lala's character was simply added to prevent her from becoming a role model for a nun.

It can be said that there are almost no black spots in the quality of nuns and mothers and daughters. But the writers seem to have made them more like prostitutes and prostitutes rather than contrasting. They have a similar mother-daughter love and are willing to sacrifice themselves for their daughters; they are troubled by poverty, but they do not sell their souls (though prostitutes sell their bodies). They understand and help. even in love. The nun is like a mirror, more like reflecting the kindness of the soul of the prostitute than reflecting the depravity of the prostitute.

This group of comparisons shows the dignity of prostitutes. There are not a few people who are inferior to prostitutes. The Bible already gives an example:

They kept asking him, and Jesus straightened up and said to them, Whoever is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at him. (John 8:7)

This is what Jesus said when the Pharisees were about to stoning the harlot. The Pharisees were also sinners, and it was dehumanizing to stick to (God's) law in this way. However, in the city of London in the 18th century, the Pharisees not only compiled laws for themselves, but also stopped using laws to cover up their bloodthirsty ugliness.

Bottom and nobility: human nature

In the 18th century, the old and the new, the Pharisees of the City of London. Aristocrats have good fate, mainly by birth; slave owners have a lot of money, mainly by inheritance. But as the saying goes, God opens a window for the nobles and closes a door for them - in "Ming Shu", they all seem to lack humanity. Even the loveliest of the vinegar king, the relationship with Charlotte seems morbid, not treating each other as a complete, equal individual.

In comparison, small people are more like people. The nuns and the prostitutes have been said above, and here are the grooms and the negroes.

The groom was Irish, not as noble as the Anglo-Saxons. I like Charlotte, she is handsome, so they are in love with each other. But as mentioned earlier, he was not born well and came to London alone. Pulling a carriage can’t make money, and he didn’t study cultural knowledge well before (so he wanted to find a part-time job for a good life. He could only be a duck and sleep with noble women and men. This kind of person is nothing but handsome, so barrage netizens He especially despised him. He coaxed Charlotte to go to the New World, but he couldn't get the money himself, so he must have taken a fancy to her money. If he got into the game with Charlotte, the judge held a separate trial, and he would betray him immediately. Sister. This kind of scumbag who can be seen at a glance, but later it was different from what the barrage imagined. He didn't betray Charlotte, and he still really loves her? If you want me to say, the screenwriter is not good, and the experience is not as good as our Chinese. Is this the truth? It is also possible that the screenwriter's husband is Irish, a conjecture, not necessarily correct.

It's not too bad to be born Irish, you can go to North America to try your luck if you can't make it in London, and the lives of black people are not so good.

The black prostitute turned out to be the nominal wife of the old colonizer and the de jure slave. When the old colonist died, the young colonist inherited his father's property, as well as her and her children (also the little colonist's younger brother and sister). As I said earlier, God closed a door for the little colonists. He was shy and pretended to give freedom to a woman, but he wanted to kidnap her children (his own brothers and sisters) as slaves. Obviously, he and his father are 1/2 of the same genetic material, and they are also half-brothers and sisters. How can they be successful? But at that time, the bosses in North America (like some eastern netizens more than 300 years later) advocated genetics that said that niggas can't do it. They are bad and stupid and can only be coolies. Mixing blood will pollute. In London in the 18th century, a black woman said she was free, and she needed a lot of money to redeem her children. What else could she do?

Margaret's husband, a part-time brothel manager, is a relatively positive male in the whole play, responsible and affectionate. He was lucky, he was born a free man, and he was looked down upon all his life because of his skin color. Margaret said that money is the only power a woman has. Why not for black people? The husband of the prostitute, the steward of the brothel, must be looked down upon by upright Anglo-Saxon Christian men. But looking at the whole play, is there any aristocratic marriage that is better and happier than that between him and the prostitute? After all, they are the only ones who are united voluntarily. Margaret always thinks of him first in times of crisis, seeking his unreserved help and advice. As for the wives of nobles, some accompany their husbands to find chickens, and when their husbands are unhappy, she eats slaps, and some live in separate places to give their husbands money to support mistresses (but later they are happy, because "it's easier for a dead husband to go out").

The class/class division is relatively fair, competition for hard work, talent, education...

I believe that anyone who has experienced public opinion online in recent years knows that this kind of opinion is held by certain groups of people - some are worried about "class slipping", some worry about "class solidification", and they all look down on stupid, lazy and bad inferiors. There is a market among people. "Ming Shu" just finished this sentence.

Class divisions are relatively fair, competing for effort, talent, education, and most importantly, luck, with the exception of women, blacks, and Irish.

Crime and Law: Society

Is it a crime to take someone else's child by force?

Is it a crime to treat your own brother as a slave?

Is it a crime to deceive an unworldly girl and imprison her?

Is it a crime to rape and kill a girl in a cage?

Maybe a violation of God's holy law, who knows. In the eyes of upright Anglo-Saxon Christian men (aristocrats, judges, colonizers), it's nothing.

But a mistress and an Irish groom ran to the door of a nobleman who had just died in the middle of the night. It must have been a man and a woman who killed the nobleman and wanted to rob him.

The ending is a full-blown climax. The two murders are staggered, and many characters are in danger of dying. We can see how just George III's London was.

Speaking of the murder case of King Vinegar, here is how much my sister hates it. Talk about Margaret's choice, let's just wash the floor. Murder is wrong (besides, the vinegar king is still a lovable character), but the law really doesn't give the prostitute a choice. According to what she said, he was the most cheap prostitute in the law, and he was likely to be hanged for attacking a nobleman.

From this point of view, torture cannot improve the social order, but may drive people to a dead end, create more desperadoes, and cause two people (the victim and the perpetrator) who should never die, to lose their lives. If there are still people who torture their souls in the name of calling for justice, they can look back.

Prostitutes attacked nobles (manslaughter, attempted) and faced hanging. In contrast, the nobles raped and murdered virgins, but they could get away with it, or in other words, with impunity, after all, the judges helped to sell human blood. Some people say it's not right, the nobles are also breaking the law, and the sentence may be very heavy (I really don't know if it will die). Yes, they are the same as prostitutes when it comes to evading the law, but they can always legally escape the law. There is a metaphor in the play, justice is the clear spring, and the judge is the source. Then the person with the water gun will never spray himself. That's why you say you can't punish a doctor, de jure, no, de facto, that's true.

Finally, let’s talk about prostitution from a social level.

Feminism has always had two approaches to prostitution. Supporters emphasize free will, arguing that sex work is also a kind of work, women have the right to choose freely, and if they happen to like sex work, they should not be criticized. Opponents of the leftist theory argue that in the past, present and foreseeable future, the vast majority of sex workers have no right to choose and are oppressed; prostitution is often associated with human trafficking, and sex workers are forced to Prostitution is not the master of one's own body at all.

"Ming Shu" provides us with another interesting perspective. A woman, who needs a lot of money to redeem her children who have become slaves, voluntarily prostitutes, is it forced? A woman, who wants money, the only power she can have, is a maid and a maid who is too slow to get money, voluntarily prostitutes, is it forced? A woman, born in a brothel, wants to climb to the top, voluntarily prostitutes, is it forced?

Some people may say that there are always other options.

I have no idea. But if 1/5 of women in a city are prostitutes, even if everyone is willing, it is probably because society forces them to be willing.

But we are often taught by netizens not to blame the system every day. Maybe I'm wrong. At that time, British women were very lazy and liked to make quick money by lying in bed, or white women were very sassy, ​​dissatisfied, and liked prostitution. Is that so?

After watching the whole play, according to my understanding, prostitutes are closer to heaven than nobles. Looking forward to next season.