There’s a guy in Lawrenceville who is gathering postcards from famous people, asking them to define freedom. The responses are posted on a website called The Freedom Project.

Reading through a bunch of the responses, I’m struck by how many of them are either too vague, or too narrow.

Many of the responses remind me of the documentary Why We Fight — the filmmaker, when he asked people why do we fight in wars like what we’re in now, typically got the answer “for our freedom.” But when he asked the respondents to define freedom, or how the war protects our freedom, most of the respondents were unable to offer a clear answer.

Similarly, trying to define freedom on a postcard is clearly no easy task — as demonstrated by the folks who have responded to this Define Freedom project.

What also strikes me is how some of the answers clearly originate more from a partisan ideological background than from a more unifying viewpoint.

Geraldo Rivera, and several others, respond by talking about choices — as though freedom is nothing more than a marketplace of material goods. Several would go no further than expressing freedom as freedom of speech — as though freedom is nothing more than a marketplace of ideas. Others went no further than freedom of religion — but in a creepy sort of way, as though freedom is nothing more than that person’s right to engage in religious or moral crusades.

Then, there were the responses that sounded like the inane musings of a PR executive. Rather than answering the question, they responded with some variant of saying that we are a free nation, or freedom is what we defend.

My favorite response, of the ones I read, was Edward Albee’s. His response is more vague than the ultra-specific answers, and more specific than the vague non-answer answers.

And my second favorite is Jon Stewart’s — which, in a way, is kind of sad.