GIVE ME A BREAK!
Understanding the struggles between the Citizen and the government
GIVE ME A BREAK! brings up a very important question that many have struggled with in life. And the question is, has there ever been a time in human history when the ruler and the ruled have spoken the same language on issues related to their society? Throughout my life it seems like the push and pull between the two has always been there. The ruled is always complaining about how bad things are. If it is not the economy, it is the education system, if not the education system, it is the environment that is not working. I am yet to see a time when the ruled can sit down and say, “ah! life is good.”The ruler on the other hand is always looking for ways to justify the current situation (even when it reeks). Sometimes he blames the weather, and if the weather is not bad, he blames his predecessors, and if he did not have one or the predecessor was good, he just finds another scapegoat (immigrants, a certain group of people, or the media). The ruler never seems to be wrong. To him, there is always an external justification as to why things are the way they are. Considering the above, I wonder whether it is normal for the ruled to be in a perpetual state of need or is it that our rulers do not know how to rule us? What is the problem?
GIVE ME A BREAK! in a nutshell
GIVE ME A BREAK! is a dialogue between the citizen (the ruled) and the powers that be (ruling class). The characters in this exchange are CIVIS, which means citizen in Latin and POWER, which represents the government or the ruling class.
In Part I the characters are expressing the frustrations and resentments they harbor toward one another. The Citizen on one hand accuses the government of being the source of all his/her misery. The government on the other hand tries to defend itself by showing how it protects and provides for the citizen. They both throw accusations at each other in a heated way. However, as the exchange continues the ruler realizes that they may not get anywhere if they continue talking that way.
In Part II the ruler seems to take the lead in suggesting a tone adjustment. They both introduce themselves and share what their purpose in life is. That seems to help quiet things down and the exchange moved on in a more constructive way. In this segment POWER candidly reveals how he sees CIVIS and shares what he thinks are the reasons causing CIVIS’ suffering in his current situation. As the conversation continues, both parties seem at ease with one another. The animosity that dominated the first part of the conversation seems to have given way to a certain camaraderie as can be seen in part II and III where POWER offers advice to CIVIS. He seems to believe in CIVIS’ cause and presents himself as a partner or at least someone who can be relied upon in difficult times.