Since old times, in stories, there has been a hero with thrusted heroic qualities. And then there have been other people to light the path of the hero and make the story more touching. The Shawshank Redemption is no different. Andy being the hero of the story, and Brooks being the doomed hero, and Red, somewhere in between them.

Andy, Brooks, and Red

Andy was a talented banker on the outside, and that helped him on the inside. In this scene. And this scene. Also this scene. This scene too. And so on…and ultimately, he escaped because of this.

On the other hand, Brooks was doomed from the start. He was just an old librarian, who had been imprisoned since 1905, a stranger to the ways of the outside world when he was released in 1955.

Red was pretty much on the same track as Brooks, unless it was for Andy. Now, did Red do it himself? No, luckily, he got a friend. And it didn’t even happen easily. Andy tried many times to install hope in Red, but failed. And when hope wasn’t installed in Red, Andy gave him a purpose.

Belongs to Warner Bros, edited by me

So, what if Brooks had a friend like Andy in his time? Yes, that would be awesome, and he might have been saved. But not everyone gets a friend. Most of the time all we have is just ourselves. Andy saved himself without anyone’s help. So what might have Brooks lacked? A banking degree to help the prison officers to do tax-returns and gain their trust? A prison cell at the end of the lane that luckily connects to the waste pipeline, rather than another cell with another prisoner?

I think even if fate hadn’t allowed Andy to escape, and if he had to spend all the years he was sentenced, i.e. 40 years, he would have still thrived. That’s how he was from inside.

So how can Brooks be this strong? Even Red wasn’t this strong. If he wasn’t given a purpose by Andy, he would have decided not to stay too.

I don’t own this picture. Hope it’s okay to use

There’s a famous book, Man’s Search For Meaning, by the psychiatrist Dr. Victor Frankl who was forced into the Auschwitz Concentration Camp during the Second World War by Nazis. In his book, he talked about hope and purpose and dreams. He proposed to his friend to share one amusing dream everyday. About what could happen after their liberation? Whom would they go to? Some people had no answer, no one to wait for them outside. But some men thought of being at the party in the future and losing themselves and asking the waiter to ladle the soup from below. He writes that having an ability to see things in a humorous light is some kind of art of living when there is nothing else to live for. So, in a way, we have to fantasize, we have to dream, or should I say, practice to amuse ourselves with idiosyncrasies.

Screenshot from the Book

In the movie Andy thinks like this as well. He even shares one of his fantasies with Red. Fixing boats, charter fishing, living in a place with no memory. Zihuatanejo.

We are to believe Brooks never thought like this. He might have fantasized about life outside of the prison cell, but along the way he stopped. He probably thought it was stupid.

Screenshot from the book

I don’t claim to own this picture.

And fate didn’t grant him the hope within and what he had was only taken with the passing of each day. Well the truth is he wasn’t written to be saved. Life I said already, it’s a story. In fact the letter scene from the movie wasn’t even in the book written by Stephen King. It was Frank Darabont, the director and screenwriter, who expanded the story of this a few times mentioned character from the book. But this story has touched me. A story of a man wearing his best clothes for his suicide, so that to die with a little dignity, which is all he owns in the world. So, I am not going to stop by saying the writer didn’t even think this much about Brooks. What if we take Brooks’ story as a description of a real human experience somewhere or a metaphor, what are to take from this? That it’s really a sad story of a man who cannot be saved?

Saving Brooks

So what things should be corrected then? Well, the things that are very easy to say. That he shouldn’t have been hopeless, he should have had imagination. He should have dreamt, and he should have had courage. He shouldn’t have given up. He should’ve waited.

But for what?

Is it even worth it? You know, pushing someone around 70 years old to go on when he has absolutely no one and nothing, just for the sake of us wanting it to look like a happy ending? Now, this is a thousand years old question with an impossible answer. But we can’t stop here saying it’s impossible. We want it to look good, look natural. That’s why we asked the question in the first place.

So imagine Brooks living and contacting Andy and Red, and embracing them and being happy at the end. It already feels like we are stretching too far and unnatural. And this thought experiment requires some complications. So yeah, not applicable.

Now imagine Brooks meeting some old and rich woman, or someone else not in a romantic way, some caregiver. So, he got a family in some way. A happy scenario…but unlikely to happen.We need to imagine Brooks only and he becoming happy by himself.

So, imagine him not giving up and being a painter or a writer afterwards, poor one of course, and searching for the meaning of life in nature and also being depressed most of the time. But there are people like that in our history. Again, similar fate. Whether fast or late. One way or another.

I don’t own this picture

I don’t own this picture

I don’t own this picture

I don’t own this picture

There is only our profit in this. Turning everyone into an artist. We will get something out of their sadness. Some art. Some stories. So that it will help us live.

Then what should we do? Should we just leave him, accept it's a story of a doomed man? That it’s just a fiction and we should stop overreacting?

Yes. We let him go. We can not save him. The narrative won’t work then. It’s just a work of fiction. It isn’t fair, but this is how it is.

But you know what would have been the best?

Taking a time machine and jumping to the right point of his life and planting a tree of hope in his mind, or watering the bud that was already there, but withering. Yes, that would have been the best. Very best. For another Brooks maybe. Maybe for ourselves.