Étude du roman L'Apprentissage de Duddy Kravitz

The Tragedy of Virgil

In the novel the Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz, Duddy is an up and coming film mogul who`s business is booming, which is good because he is trying to make money to obtain a patch of land. He has many other business ventures on the side. While on a trip in the United-States Duddy meets a young man who goes by the name of Virgil. Virgil is stuck with pinball machines, which are illegal in the state he is in, and so Duddy offers to sell them off for him in Canada, and to give him a percentage of the sales on each of the machines. When Duddy has to hand over 1000$ to Virgil because of their deal, Duddy devises another method of paying back Virgil so that he may keep the money to purchase his land. Duddy offers Virgil a job as a driver and a truck which Duddy is getting for a reduced price.

There is one major flaw, amongst many small ones, with the deal that Duddy gives Virgil. This one flaw is that Virgil is an epileptic. The fact that Virgil becomes a driver for Duddy will cause many other problems to surface. These problems vary from causing problems in his relationship with his girlfriend who takes a liking to Virgil, to putting Duddy in a dangerous position since he is Virgil`s boss. When Virgil is involved in a serious accident that leaves him paralyzed from the waist down, Duddy can`t help but feel guilty for Virgil`s unfortunate tragedy, and with good reason since Duddy is the reason for Virgil`s accident. In a court of law, Duddy would be found responsible for Virgil`s accident for many reasons, but there are two concepts that puts the responsibility of the accident on Duddy`s shoulders.

To begin the examination on whether Duddy is responsible or not for Virgil`s tragedy, you have to have a certain degree of knowledge in law. The two concepts that will be used to demonstrate that Duddy is responsible for Virgil’s tragedy are the mens réa and the actus réus. The mens réa is that the author of the incident or crime wanted to intentionally harm or place the person in a position where it could hinder or harm the victim. The actus réus is pretty straight forward; the person intentionally put the victim in a dangerous position, was negligent and/or intentionally harmed the person (Tessier). In this case, Duddy put Virgil in a dangerous position, and was also negligent in hiring him and letting him drive as one of his employees (Richler 250 - 251) knowing about his epileptic fits and not taking care of the problem, like seeking medical help or ensuring that Virgil was on medicine.

First off, to determine if someone has the mens réa, you have to determine whether or not they have the actus réus. Duddy’s actus réus can be found in the fact that he convinces Virgil of becoming an employee for him and letting him drive, he was thus negligent. As his ‘’employer’’, Duddy should have foreseen the possibility of Virgil having a fit while driving, and there are no plausible excuses as to why Duddy couldn’t predict or see the possibility of him having a fit: “He’s an epileptic. I wouldn’t let you drive with him because I was afraid of an accident. I think of your welfare you know. You’d be surprised.” (253). This proves that Duddy in no way cared for Virgil, and intentionally put him in the position of driver, without either taking the precautions necessary to ensure he did not have a fit, for example making sure Virgil was legally

...