Fargo: From Morality To The Coen Brothers

Jerry and Gaear being persecuted for their crimes shows the Coen brothers traditional view of morality. The Coen brothers believe in the good, this is why they created Marge as a character. Understanding the philosophy that is behind each of the character’s actions clarifies the need for each of their roles. In order to understand the purpose of morality to the Coen brothers, one must break down the thought process that goes into each of the characters. The Coen brothers are quite diverse in their filmmaking, basing all of their scripts on film noir and screwball comedy. Therefore, they allow themselves to explore multiple genres and test the limits of standard filmmaking. For example, in their 1996 film Fargo, the Coen brothers push the boundaries

of morality and shame.
In Fargo, the Coen brothers create a moral spectrum represented through Marge, Jerry, and Gaear.

Marge Gunderson is representative of centered morality. As a police officer, she understands the difference between right and wrong, and refuses to obstruct justice even if it means she has to be rude, and rudeness goes against the ‘Minnesota nice’ stereotype reinforced by the Coen brothers. Since Midwestern America comes with the stereotype of hospitality and politeness, morality is challenged in Fargo because the immoral characters stand out against the stereotype. Fargo shows how the crimes that occur and how the immoral acts that follow contrast so well with the Midwestern setting. By using Aristotle’s theory of shame, I will place the characters of Fargo on a spectrum of emotional morality. Through this spectrum I will prove Fargo is the Coen brother’s study of

shame.
The characters that express true lack of shame are Jerry, Gaear, and Carl. These men refuse to think through what they are about to do, ultimately avoiding the shame that might have prevented them from moving forward with their actions. To begin breaking down the lack of shame felt in each characters, it is necessary to explore Aristotle’s theory of shame. According to Aristotle, shame is an emotion that arises when one has done something that would result in disgrace or discredit (Hanrahan and Stearns 106). One’s recognition of others as morally significant is important to feeling shame as well. In order to properly feel shame, we must care about our standing in relation to those who matter, specifically, those “persons whom we admire, or who admire us, or by whom we wish to be admired, or from whom we desire some service that we shall not obtain if we forfeit their good opinion” (94). Applying this theory to Fargo, the absent morality within Gaear, Jerry, and Carl is proven through specific characteristics. Gaear implements acts of absolute barbarity without an inkling of shame. Jerry lacks self-control. He understands that what he is doing is wrong, but does the shameful act nonetheless. Finally, Carl is purely selfish. To counteract these men, Marge is the example of ideality. She possesses a sense of shame, so much so that she feels shame for others.
Gaear is almost the exact opposite of Marge, feeling no shame whatsoever.

In Fargo, Gaear is known for his lack of lines and for killing five people over the course of the film. Gaear kills with disturbing indifference. His reasoning for killing Jean is, “She started shrieking, you know” (Fargo). Gaear is self-indulgent and according to Aristotle the self-indulgent man “craves for all pleasant things or those that are most pleasant” (Hanrahan and Stearns 97). This means that Gaear wanted silence so badly, he was willing to take Jean’s life. Gaear’s neutrality continues throughout the film, especially with his partner Carl. The scene right after Carl shoots Wade Gustafson is an example of this. In this scene, Carl returns to their cabin covered in blood with a bullet wound to his face. Gaear is silent during Carl’s return, displaying no emotion on his face. Gaear expresses his only concern is how they are going to split the ransom money. Carl becomes enraged and begins to leave with the money. Gaear responds in the most logical way he knows how: hitting Carl with an axe then putting his body through a wood chipper. Consequently, after he puts Carl through the wood chipper, Marge finds Gaear. Even though Marge announces herself multiple times, Gaear cannot hear her over the wood chipper. The law, as well as society’s norms for behaving, is not able to make itself known to Gaear until Marge stops him with a single shot in his leg. Once he is handcuffed in the back seat of her

car, Marge shames him by asking if everything he has done was worth it. She asks, “For what? For a little bit of money” (Fargo). Gaear does not have a reaction to her scolding, confirming he does not possess the ability to feel shame.
While Jerry does have the ability to feel shame, he continues to commit shameless acts. He struggles to commandeer his role as a leader in his own home but also at work causing him to resort to cheating the system to create false success. Jerry using the unnecessary “TruCoat Sealant” in order to trick his customers into paying several hundred dollars extra on their car inspection is an example of this. One customer becomes so enraged that he breaks out of his polite Minnesotan nature and calls Jerry a “fucking liar”. This does not seem to bother Jerry because he’s getting an extra four hundred dollars out of this deal. Jerry is able to push his feelings of shame aside and live his life as if he is doing nothing wrong. He is obviously disturbed by being sworn at, therefore we can conclude he is able to feel shame. He is aware of moral rights and wrongs but chooses to take the easy way out of hard situations. Money is Jerry’s weakness and he is willing to go to great lengths to get it. This fact is made more apparent with the interaction Jerry has with his son, Scotty (Tony Denman). Scotty is highly stressed and anxious about his mother’s kidnapping. He urges his father to contact the police, but Jerry refuses because he knows exactly where Jean is. Scotty is the only character to emotionally convey that he is worried for Jean’s well-being. Jerry understands fully that he is harming his son and his wife, his only family, yet he does not care. His need for money does not allow him to act on shame, so he continues with his plan. Jerry pushes his feelings of shame inward as if he believes if he does not show his shame, it is not real.
“For Aristotle, the incontinent person fully grasps universal moral truths, such as the truth kidnapping is wrong” (Hanrahan and Stearns 100). Jerry’s extreme want for power and money keeps him from understanding the depravity of the situation he is the sole catalyst of. Just as he refuses to express his shame, he keeps most of his emotions concealed, but when Jerry comes up with his plan to con him out of a loan for a ‘small business’, Jerry feels confident of himself. However, this plan backfires when Wade offers Jerry a “finder’s fee” and wants to continue with the deal on his own. During their conversation, Jerry shows little emotion. He waits to take his aggression out on his car as soon as he reaches the parking lot. This tells us Jerry is capable of heightened emotion, but this conclusion of emotion can only be brought on by his own shame telling him what he is doing is wrong. Jerry’s greed drives him to a point where his only motivation is to avoid public disgrace. He struggles to keep a grasp on his dignity as he is bound by fear, greed, and pride; the three things that do not allow him to accept his shame.
Marge Gunderson is the epitome of morality in Fargo. She is not one to obstruct justice, nor would she ever do wrong herself. In Marge’s introductory scene, the mise-en-scéne of her home consists of her husband’s painting supplies. Marge is introduced by her husband’s interests which insinuates she puts his interests before her own. This observations informs the audience that Marge and Norm have a strong, healthy relationship. Then, Marge is awakened by a phone call that the viewer can assume is coming in at an early hour. After her husband fixes her breakfast, we meet Marge at the scene of the crime. As she is inspecting the three dead bodies lying in the snow, she asks her partner, Lou, if they can stop by a local fishing shop so she can pick up night crawlers for Norm. Her thoughts never stray too far from Norm. According to Aristotle, this is an example of a friendship of the good. “Aristotle distinguishes three kinds of friendships; two of them - the friendships of utility and pleasure - are deficient, while one - the friendship of the good - is excellent” (Hanrahan and Stearns 102-103). The relationship between Marge and Norm is mutually beneficial. Norm completes typical female roles. This is shown when he cooks breakfast for her, as well as when he brings her lunch at work. Marge reciprocates the favors when she gives her attention to his art and other interests. While she is completely immersed in her relationship with Norm, she still finds time to gently cajole others in the film.
While Marge has no cause to feel shame, she is the one who mediates other character’s shame. She is not one to shame others when they do not deserve it, however. For example, her partner Lou fails to recognize the license plate on the stolen car at the crime scene has dealer plates. Lou is a simple man, and is embarrassed by his mistake. Marge, being the good-hearted person she is, makes a joke to lighten the mood. Marge is in possession of the Minnesotan niceness, but that doesn’t stop her from being assertive. Marge is able to empathize with other without compromising her own dignity. Marge has the capacity for shame, but she uses this ability to show others when they should feel shame. She is the true moral center of Fargo. The personification of these differing levels of moralities shows the Coen brothers want to portray their characters as real people, despite all stereotypes. However, they are sure to punish people who misbehave to keep consistent with their own moral code