What is a criminal? Is one who commits a crime necessarily a criminal? Put another way, is it possible for a person to steal a bag of bread without becoming a thief? If a one who commits a theft or a murder is called a criminal at a certain point in his or her life, could the one thus labeled ever escape this negative designation? That is, could there ever be a time when S is no longer described as a criminal by other societal members? More importantly, could S actually live in a way that demonstrates he or she is the complete antithesis of that which he was formerly called at ten years of age? If so, then is S really a criminal or has he or she simply committed a crime? I guess it could also be possible that we are metastable creatures, who change over time and possess no constituted nature at any time in our existence. In this way, Genet could BE a thief (a criminal by most ethic codes) at a certain point in his existence, then later not BE a thief.
Jean Paul Sarte gives us food for thought on this matter, when he writes about St. Genet:
"A voice declares publicly: 'You're a thief.' The child is ten years old. That was how it happened, in that or some other way. In all probability, there were offenses and then punishment, solemn oaths and relapses. It does not matter. The important thing is that Genet lived and has not stopped reliving this period of his life as if it had lasted only an instant."
"Genet learns what he is objectively. It is this transition that is going to determine his entire life."
Despite the fact that the gaze of the other constitutes the nature of Genet, transforming him into a thief, a description he was given at ten years of age, he himself does not internalize the term. In the face of the other's gaze, therefore, his "absurb determination will produce the poet Jean Genet."
Think about it!
Duns the Scot