An apologetic accomplishment, or just an accomplished apology?

What was the best apology you ever received? How did it change your relationship with the person who made it?

Do you think that formal, official apologies to long-dead victims -- like the ones made by the U.S. government for the internment of Japanese citizens, Pope John Paul II's apology for the condemnation of Galileo, or the British Government's apology for the treatment of Alan Turing -- accomplish anything important?

---

 

The Board Administration Team
(hapax, Kit Whitfield and mmy)



Comments

[Michael Mock]

I'd have to think about the first one - the apologies that matter most to me are the ones I've made, rather than the ones I've received.

The second paragraph is easier, which almost certainly means that what I'm about to say will be a vast oversimplification, and probably myopic into the bargain: I think that apologies have to be, in some sense, personal in order to be meaningful. Formal, official apologies to people no longer living are better made by correcting institutional behavior than by official pronouncements.

[Nenya]

Formal, official apologies to people no longer living are better made by correcting institutional behavior than by official pronouncements.

This is true. The formal, official apologies do have the benefit of saying outright that we (the entity or society represented by those making the apology) no longer wish to give our assent to the bad behaviour. It's important to state that outright sometimes, because otherwise the status quo is just assumed to continue.

But then, of course, you have to do differently in fact as well as in word.

[Ian needs a nickname]

I think that apologies have to be, in some sense, personal in order to be meaningful. Formal, official apologies to people no longer living...

As far as apologizing to Galileo goes, I agree with you. Public repentance is necessary, but don't call it an apology. However, large scale historical injustices that took place within the last century or two usually have living victims to whom we could apologize.

- Many victims of seemingly distant, historic crimes are still alive. George Takei was interred during WWII. Living victims deserve apologies.

- Historical crimes often do intergenerational harm. Residential schools did massive harm to the First Nations of Canada. Individuals who were not yet born at the time the last residential school was closed are still suffering the consequences. They too deserve apologies.

- Hate crimes are designed to make all members of a demographic group feel afraid. If what was done in the past to someone of your demographic group makes you afraid for yourself, that historical hate crime is still doing harm, and has harmed you personally. If that's where you're at, you deserve an apology.

The past ain't dead. It ain't even past.

One other thing: the linked apology by PM Gordon Brown to Alan Turing is really weird. "I am pleased to say how deeply sorry I and we all are for what happened to him...I'm very proud to say we're sorry." No, no, no.

[Ian needs a nickname]

Gah, sorry for the broken link. (better to apologize now than in 50 or 60 years)