Notes from the Abyss

MECHANICSVILLE, Va. (Originally written: Nov. 27, 2019; Revised: May 8, 2025) — The Emperor’s Club (2002) is a drama that aspires to be something of a morality tale: In the vein of similar movies both before and after it (such as Goodbye, Mr. Chips, Good Will Hunting, Mr. Holland’s Opus, and Finding Forrester), the plot centers around a teacher and the impact the teacher has on the young lives he has encountered (and vice versa).

The central conflict of The Emperor’s Club involves integrity or the lack thereof; as such, it raises questions of the virtue ethic because, from the opening credits of the film, the values espoused emphasize the importance of contributing to society rather than taking what you can from it.

While the virtue ethic is not mentioned explicitly on the campus of the fictional prep school, St. Benedict’s, in which the movie is set, but the importance of the virtue ethic is strongly implied. The opening sequences establish Aristotle’s test of what constitutes the ultimate good: 1) it must not be something that is merely instrumentally valuable; 2) it must be must be self-sufficient in that possession of it is enough to make a life worthwhile; and 3) it must involve the use of reason (Shafer-Landau 2018, 265).

During the opening credits—a scene built around the headmaster’s address at the beginning of a term—we learn that the philosophy of St. Benedict’s is “Non sibi,” or “Not for oneself.” Its motto is “Finis origine pendet,” or “The end depends upon the beginning.” We gather from that and other hints that the students should follow, should embody, the exemplars of virtue who preceded them. As Aristotle writes:

If it is true that in the sphere of action there is an end which we wish for its own sake, and for the sake of which we wish everything else, and that we do not desire all things for the sake of something else (for, if that is so, the process will go on ad infinitum, and our desire will be idle and futile) it is clear that this will be the good or the supreme good. Does it not follow then that the knowledge of this supreme good is of great importance for the conduct of life, and that, if we know it, we shall be like archers who have a mark at which to aim, we shall have a better chance of attaining what we want? (Aristotle 1912, 2)

The protagonist, a teacher named William Hundert, tries to provide the moral education necessary for a virtuous life, tries to inspire his students to adopt a life of selflessness, studiousness, and integrity. In one early scene, he has a student read the translation of a 3,000-year-old stele:

I am Shutruk Nahunte, King of Anšan and Susa, Sovereign of the land of Elam. By command of Inshushinak I destroyed Sippar, took the Stele of Niran-Sin, and brought it back to Elam, where I erected it as an offering to my god.[1]

Hundert asks his students if anyone has heard of this Elamite king. They scramble to find a reference in their history texts. No one can, and Hundert points out why: “Because great ambition and conquest, without contribution, is without significance.” He then challenges his students by asking, “What will your contribution be?”

A potential weakness of the virtue ethic is that not everyone recognizes the importance of a virtuous life. The movie’s antagonist, Sedgewick Bell, the son of a U.S. senator, is one such person. Bell’s main motivation is gratification, whether it be by disrupting class for his own amusement or cheating to get what he wants. Because of the privilege he was born into, he more often than not succeeds in that endeavor. Even when Bell does the work necessary to achieve a goal—to qualify for the “Mr. Julius Caesar” contest—he spoils the effort by cheating in the end. Hundert catches him in the act, but—with the senator present in the audience—the headmaster tells him to ignore it. Hundert is forced to go off-script to give a more deserving student the chance to win, but Bell, as the movie reveals, fails to learn the lesson. He ignores an earlier warning offered by Hundert:

A word of warning. As the great wit Aristophanes once wrote, roughly translated, “Youth ages, immaturity is outgrown, ignorance can be educated, and drunkenness sobered, but stupid lasts forever.”

Virtue ethicists acknowledge that those without virtue can lead pleasurable lives, but they deny that a life of pleasure without virtue can be regarded as a “good” life. There is a cost, and it can be high as we find in the movie. Some decades into the future, Bell arranges for a rematch in the “Mr. Julius Caesar” contest. The contest is a stunt during which Bell will announce a campaign for the U.S. Senate. And again, Hundert catches Bell cheating and, eventually, confronts him when they encounter each other in a men’s room:

All of us, at some point, are forced to look at ourselves in the mirror, and see who we really are. And when that day comes for you, Sedgewick, you will be confronted with a life lived without virtue, without principle, and for that I pity you.

Ever defiant, Bell responds:

Well, can I say, Mr. Hundert, who gives a shit? Honestly. Who out there gives a shit about your principles and your virtues? I mean, look at you. What do you have to show for yourself?

I live in the real world, where people do what they need to do to get what they want. And if it’s lying and it’s cheating, then so be it. So, I am going to go out there, and I am going to win that election, Mr. Hundert, and you will see me everywhere. And I’ll worry about my contribution later.

At that point, Bell’s young son walks out of a stall and looks with disgust upon his father. Whether or not Bell ultimately proves successful in the campaign, the loss of his son’s respect suggests that Aristotle is correct in asserting that a life lived without virtue is a life lacking. It’s a lesson that some would-be emperors, like U.S. President Donald John Trump and his sycophantic fans, should consider taking to heart.

Editor’s Note: This piece was originally written for an ethics class at J. Sargeant Reynolds Community College and submitted on Nov. 27, 2019.

Literature cited

Aristotle. 1912. The Nicomachean Ethics of Aristotle, Translated, with an Analysis and Critical Notes. Translated by J.E.C. Welldon. Edited by J.E.C. Welldon. London: Macmillan and Co., Limited.

Hoffman, Michael. 2002. The Emperor’s Club. Kevin Kline, Steven Culp, Embeth Davidtz, Patrick Dempsey, Joel Gretsch, Edward Herrman, Emile Hirsch, Rob Morrow, Harris Yulin. Music by James Newton Howard. Costume Designer Cynthia Flynt. Edited by Harvey Rosenstock. Production Designer Patrizia Von Brandenstein. Director of Photography Lajois Koltai. Executive Producer Sean Bailey, Cooper Layne, Armyan Bernstein, Thomas A. Bliss, Sidney Kimmel, Eric Newman. Produced by Andrew Karsch, Marc Abraham. Based on the Novel by Ethan Canin. Screenplay by Neil Tolkin. Directed by Michael Hoffman. United States: Universal Studios.

Shafer-Landau, Russ. 2018. The Fundamentals of Ethics. Fourth ed. New York: Oxford University Press.

Tolkin, Neil. 2002. The Emperor’s Club (script). Los Angeles, California: Universal Pictures.

[1] All quotes from the movie are taken from Tolkin (2002).