The Significance of The Third Man in the Abortion Debate

       I mentioned in one class how the infamous ferris wheel scene in The Third Man could be likened to arguments in the abortion debate.  I would like to elaborate on its use.

       In the scene, Harry Lime, murderer of children and leader of an illicit penicillin ring, takes the main character of the novel, Martins, up a ferris wheel.  Martins, angered by Lime’s involvement, demands an explanation for why he would commit such an atrocious act.  Lime tells him to look down at the people in the distance.  From so far away, they appear to be just dots.  He says: “Would you feel any pity if one of those dots stopped moving forever?  If I offered you £20,000 for every dot that stopped - would you really, old man, tell me to keep my money? Or would you calculate how many dots you could afford to spare?...Free of Income Tax, old man...”  Simply put, Lime claims that it is easy to kill when removed from the situation.  It would be much different if he personally walked up to and killed those children in the hospital; this makes it simple and emotionless.

      Now, how is this analogy likened to abortion?  Many philosophers claim that our morality (in regard to human life) stems from likeness to human beings.  For example, no one would have any moral qualms (well, maybe except for hippies) about squashing a bug, whereas if someone were to talk about killing a dog which is more human-like (larger size, man’s best friend, have a likeness of a personality) we would have many more qualms about it.

      Jane English, in her article, “Abortion and the Concept of Personhood,” says that this is often why aborting first trimester fetuses is deemed “OK” by many.  Because in the first trimester, and even in the second trimester, fetuses are small and lack human characteristics, people don’t see them as human and feel that it is fine to abort. (Note: I am not taking a stance on this, just identifying what certain people say).  This is exactly what Lime said.

      Even the Supreme Court itself uses this as a moral standard.  It claims that it is in the “state’s interest” to protect life, and claims that life, or recognizable life, really only begins once the third trimester begins.  Granted, Blackmun (the justice who wrote the majority opinion) does use viability as part of the reasoning, but viability is itself a somewhat shoddy standard, as it fluctuates due to evolving technology.  Hadley Arkes, another standout in the debate, proves that Blackmun’s argument does center around whether a fetus is human in another article, though I won’t get into that here.

      What I find so impressive about Graham Greene is how he can write perfect analogies into his books: analogies that are so effective and sound that they are representative of and literally used in completely other subjects entirely.  It is very interesting to see his work appear in other scenarios.