Based on Our Readings/viewings and Your Experience, What Is and Should Be the Relation of the Individual to the Institution(s)?

Individual Paper #1

Based on our readings/viewings and your experience, what is and should be the relation of the individual to the institution(s)?  

        In order to fully grasp the relation of the individual to the institution, it is necessary to understand how both internal and external factors can drive us to either act with or go against institutions. As the building block of institutions, individuals can have a great impact on their success or failure. In a vacuum, the needs and desires of individuals would perfectly align with the institutions they belong to and no conflicts would arise. However, values, beliefs and morals on the individual level can easily become misaligned with those of an institution, leading to potentially serious consequences. Additionally, individual exposure to many different institutions with contrasting priorities can lead to situations that are difficult to navigate, since there is no clear path to follow. Individuals typically grow up within the constraints of established institutional structures and are accustomed to a certain set of values and beliefs. However, when personal values clash with those of the institution, few people have the courage to uphold their beliefs and rise up as leaders. This type of situation was apparent in two of the films we have watched thus far. Both The Queen and Hotel Rwanda depict individuals facing difficult circumstances where their relation to an institution is subjected to external pressure.

        These two examples of the relation between individual and institution stood out to me because they shared several similarities. The Queen of England’s relation to the monarchy and Paul Rusesabagina’s relation to his society transformed throughout the course of their respective stories. Both of these changes were caused by sudden shocks to both the individuals and the institutions they belonged to. I will analyze both and then take a look at what they have in common and how it relates to our understanding of individuals and institutions.

        Individuals spend their lives enveloped by the influence their institutions, and that is what enables the stability of our societal structures. In Hotel Rwanda, Rusesabagina lives his life as part of several different but interconnected institutions. He is Rwandan, and so he maintains a strong bond towards his people. Through his work at the hotel, he is also strongly involved with the Western world, as most of his guests come from abroad. These two institutions, while very different, allow Rusesabagina to embrace the values of both without enduring personal conflict. As soon as the conflict between the Tutsis and Hutus arises, Rusesabagina is faced with difficult decisions that test his moral values, courage and relation to his society. In the end, he becomes a hero and develops from a person who pursues his own interests to someone who risks his life for the sake of others. This change shows how a shift in the values of an institution can lead an individual to deviate from the institution when their morals are called into question. Rusesabagina’s decision to prioritize the safety of strangers and jeopardize his own well-being as well as his family, indicates an individual’s ability to disengage from an institution they were once very involved with, especially when faced with difficult circumstances.

WILL ADD ABOUT QUEEN FILM HERE

        The two films I use as examples of the relation between individual and institution share several characteristics that can be used to explain the main characters’ decisions. Both Queen Elizabeth and Rusesabagina are part of well-defined institutions that have clearly have a strong impact on their lives and the choices that they make. The Queen is a member of a long-standing ruling monarchy, and she has maintained stability, which has been heavily dependent on a respect for the monarchy’s traditions. Rusesabagina led a stable life within his community, even as he was clearly involved with two very different types of institutions: his personal life as a Rwandan and his work life at the westernized hotel. While The Queen is faced with a difficult decision after Diana’s death, the options she is presented with are quite well defined and simple. She must either follow tradition and her own values or follow the path of what the public wants from the monarchy. For Rusesabagina, the options are not as clear as he must navigate a number of tough decisions. As his community becomes increasingly divided, he is faced with the reality that the institutions he once belonged to are no longer viable and could turn against him at any moment. Both films depict how much influence an institution can have on an individual, even when right and wrong are fairly easy to distinguish between.

        In addition to sharing strong ties to their respective institutions, I noticed another interesting similarity between the situations that Queen Elizabeth and Rusesabagina find themselves in. Both leaders have a hard time recognizing and acknowledging the seriousness of the crises they are facing. Queen Elizabeth was in a country house, fully detached from the situation occurring in London. Her physical distance from the outpouring of grief of the British public could be seen as similar to the emotional distance from the institutional values that public wanted her to accept. Similarly, Rusesabagina was not fully aware of the severity of the genocide happening just outside the walls of his hotel. Even though he was physically much closer to the conflict than Queen Elizabeth, his ties to the Westernized institution of the hotel caused him to underestimate the killing of his own people. In both cases, the turning point for the characters was an eye-opening experience that led them to question their own relations with institutions. For Queen Elizabeth it was the magnificent stag and its death, symbolizing the potential downfall of the monarchy. In Rusesabagina’s case, it was his discovery of the bodies of members of his community.