Law & Order (TV Series) Ritual (1997) User Reviews

"A 3000 year old abomination"

[bkoganbing · 7/10 · 24 February 2013]

It is really hard not to sympathize with the defendant in this case on Law And Order. Jerry Orbach and Benjamin Bratt catch a homicide involving a rich Egyptian/American importer. The guilty party is Cotter Smith, husband of Ava Haddad is the deceased's niece.

What the deceased man wanted to do is give their eleven year old child the gift of an operation that will remove her clitoris. It's an ancient custom in their part of the world, even before Islam became the religion of Egypt to remove the clitoris to prevent women from enjoying sex. The better to keep them faithful and certainly assert male dominance like nothing else would. This was done to Haddad and it was done to Maryann Urbano who is her mother and the deceased's niece. She's for upholding tradition.

Sam Waterston is trying to cut the defendant as much slack as possible and in the meantime Carey Lowell takes on a custody battle pro bono for the paternal grandparents. Steve Landesberg lends his laconic presence to the role of Smith's defense attorney.

Steven Hill called what was happening a 3000 year old abomination. It's one incredible argument for the fact Smith was defending his child against an assault.

A really interesting episode about a twisted practice.

Law and culture

[TheLittleSongbird · 9/10 · 1 July 2021]

The subject matter and the debate of law versus culture are truly fascinating and definitely brave to tackle. There are many episodes of the original 'Law and Order' that have heavy and controversial topics and do so in a way that pulls no punches but also sensitively. Did worry though that with the subject and debate being as divisive as they come would be done too heavy-handedly and/or be too one-sided, as there are some 'Law and Order' episodes that are those things while meaning well.

"Ritual" luckily is one of those episodes that handles its story uncompromisingly and sensitively, apart from one part that may likely not go down well. A lot of homework had clearly been done on such a twisted practise and the kind of mutilation involved. "Ritual" is a great episode and as far as Season 8 goes at this point, in what was a very solid first half, it's one of the better and more interesting episodes. It does nothing to waste its subject, nothing at all. And regardless of the overall execution, there still would have been admiration for the show to even tackle the issue in the first place.

Very nearly everything is more than great here. As usual for 'Law and Order' and its spin offs, the production values are solid and the intimacy of the photography doesn't get static or too filmed play-like. The music when used is not too over-emphatic and has a melancholic edge that is quite haunting. The direction is sympathetic enough while also taut. The writing is smart and thought-provoking, raising interesting questions without taking sides. Especially with everything regarding the debate of culture versus the law.

A vast majority of the story is tautly paced and truly absorbing, with enough surprises and it never becomes hard to follow even with a complicated issue. An issue that is difficult, brave to take on and has evoked and will evoke strong opinions on each side. The episode does not hold back when it comes to the execution while also on the most part being tactful, it also explores the subject from more than one viewpoint and in a way where you can see where each side is coming from.

It is a case of the perpetrator not being the one that one hates by the end, hated their actions while part of me felt pity for them and understood their point of view. Actually had more disgust for the victim. The acting is excellent from all, especially in the legal portion.

One thing stops "Ritual" from being flawless. The part where someone is suspected of being a bomber with no evidence or connections, as well as no knowledge of explosives, was uncharacteristically (for the early seasons) sloppy and borderline distasteful police work. With everything with the practise and mutilation being so well researched, it stuck out like a very sore thumb which is a shame.

Concluding, great. 9/10.

Different Strokes.

[rmax304823 · 8/10 · 6 April 2011]

A man is found dead of a bash on the head, on a rooftop parking lot. He turns out to be an Egyptian who had insisted that his niece's genitals be mutilated according to tradition. Brisco and Curtis determine that the victim has just paid to bring in a doctor from Egypt to perform the surgery. But the young girl's family is divided over whether to proceed. And the enraged father of the girl followed the uncle to the parking lot, an argument ensued, and the uncle wound up dead. McCoy and Ross see that justice is done.

Somebody did his homework. The genital mutilations of young girls is pretty accurately described. I wrote a column on it for Medical Aspects of Human Sexuality. At least until recently it was practiced in Islamic countries of northern Africa and spottily distributed south of the Sahara. It's generally done without anesthesia. The technique varies from place to place but ordinarily involves the mutilation or removal of the clitoris. But the most severe forms aren't found in Egypt but among the Hottentot of South Africa. I won't get into it because it's too gruesome but you can Google "Hottentot apron" and probably find it there. It's usually interpreted as an assault on women, which is most definitely is, but it's not as common as the various forms of circumcision in males, which can be just as rough on the patient. I've helped hold down a boy of about ten while he was circumcised with a sharp slice of bamboo with no anesthesia. The "doctor" was paid off with a chicken.

But -- all that aside -- what I found interesting was the clash of customs. Of course, in this story the jurisdiction is New York City where such a practice is prohibited by one or another law. But over the past several years I've seen posts on news boards and blogs supporting our interference in Islamic countries because women's rights were routinely violated. I would expect that, by now, genital mutilations are found only in isolated rural areas. That's what usually happens when a practice dies. Still, it happens. Should we feel justified in invading a country because some of its citizens practice clitoridectomy, or beat their women, or don't allow them to vote? Shouldn't we also get rid of homemade circumcision? How about wearing too much makeup or listening to music we find offensive or dysharmonic? Doesn't it all add up to the white man's burden? The larger questions are left implicit in this story -- as larger questions often are -- and the chief concern of the representatives of the law is the murder, not the practice it was committed to prevent.