After
reading Baudrillard and Zizek I started feeling paranoid and began wondering if
everyone around me are actors that star in an entertainment show about me.
Does art imitate life or does life
imitate art? If you ask Zizek, he will argue the latter. He states “we can
perceive the collapse of the WTC towers as the climatic conclusion of twentieth
century art’s passion for the real.” Hollywood is obsessed with catastrophe
movies or of the “unthinkable” and Zizek claims that America had fantasized an
event such as 9/11 through these films. It was not until September 11 that our
sense of reality was challenged, as we had never once thought the terrors that
occur in other countries would ever happen to us.
“ It is not reality that entered
our image: the image entered and shattered our reality” (Zizek 2002, 234).
It is true that we all live
different realities but what discourages me is how we do not make an effort to
understand other realities until they actually occur to us. I always think “
one man’s terrorist is another’s hero” and how more than 3000 die all the time
in regions of the world. We immediately
see images of the horrors that occur in our nation but often do you see an
image of American intervention in another country? The “spectacular”
surrounding the events in other regions of the world rarely exist and when they
do its only for a brief moment. For example we had to visually see the image of
the Syrian child, Omran Danqueesh, to actually imagine the reality of those living
the reality of the war. Unfortunately, we all tend to forget about these images
a couple days later, until we are bombarded with some new ones that evoke some
type of an emotional response. Meanwhile, the image of the twin towers
collapsing is forever embedded in our memories. Why is that so?
Baudrillard argues that the WTC
collapse was indeed violent and catastrophic, however, this is not what makes
it “real.” Reality is a principle, which this event actually lacks; 9/11 is
something worse: it is symbolic. This tragedy continues to live on through the
images of the spectacle that the terrorists created. Indeed, if it were not for
the images, Baudrillard argues that, “terrorism would be nothing without the
media” (Baudrillard 2002, 229). As terrorism continues to regenerate easily on
its own it is hard to distinguish the differences between the event and the
images that we see. Baudrillard quotes “And it is this uncontrollable
unleashing of reversibility that is terrorism’s true victory” (Baudrillard 2002,
229). This victory completely threatens the Western value system and liberal
globalization, which aims to advance the ideology of “freedom.” Indeed, liberal
globalization is turning into a police state globalization.
I do not know about you but sometimes
in this country I do not feel free. As a nation where we are conditioned to be
slaves to capitalism, discouraged from questioning or challenging the status
quo as well as having the highest incarceration rates with a criminal justice
system that highly resembles Jim Crow Laws, it is hard to feel free. Granted
that we have so many privileges and opportunities that millions around the
world do not, I just to cringe whenever I hear “Land of the Free”.
Listening to Rage Against
the Machine in class the other day reminded me of this song about American contradictory.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqLUq_x2ZJg
Bianca-
ReplyDeleteGreat job on this post! I thoroughly enjoyed reading it and you made some great points. After reading Baudrillard and Zizek I felt similar feelings of paranoia and confusion. When you brought up Hollywood’s obsession with catastrophe and terror I was brought back to the documentary we watched during the GPFF Under Fire. Specifically when you quoted Zizek: “It is not reality that entered our image: the image entered and shattered our reality” (Zizek 2002, 234). I will never forget the moment that Tony told the story about the woman he found who had been brutally raped. Disturbed, he walked away unable to capture what he had just seen. The disruption of the scene horrified me. Tony explained that as troubling as the scene was to him, it was his responsibility to go back and capture the true horrors of the war. Little did I know they would go on to show the image of the woman on the screen before me. I will never forget that moment, when the image in front of me “entered and shattered” my own reality. The beautiful thing about it was that was Tony’s intention: to capture the savage, abhorrent, and true evils of war.
This semester I am taking another CMC class called “Media and Violence”. I was able to draw a lot of connections from these readings with what I have been learning in that class. In your blog you quoted Baudrillard: “terrorism would be nothing without the media” (Baudrillard 2002, 229). As much as I agree with this statement, I take issue with the idea that terrorism exists solely because of the media. Yes, terrorism is defined as the use of violence and intimidation in the suit of political aims. However, I believe ever since 9/11 terrorism has evolved from the quest after political power to striving toward merely stripping America of its dignity and worldly recognized power. Terrorists see them selves as altruists who act because they believe that self-defense is imperative. Where do these feelings of endangerment come from? The answer is simple: the media.
Through us of the media, America has established itself as a nation that believes in the Western value system and liberal globalization and preserves these beliefs through our powerful military. We are seen as a nation whose focus is entirely on politics, business, and entertainment. We may believe that we strive for power to protect ourselves, but power will always be intimidating in the eyes of the weak.
One last point I’d like to make is one that I drew from going to hear Gandhi’s godson speak on campus a few weeks ago. To my surprise he brought up the fact that the media is the most powerful and influential means to spark change. Yes, terrorists use the media to their advantage to bring about terror in those who either fall victim to or are directly affected by their attacks. However, what many people don’t consider is that it is possible to use the media to our advantage and fight against evil. In his speech he stressed the importance of fighting evil with nonviolence. He brought up the fact that in March of 2015, Syrian refugee population was more than 1.7 million in Turkey alone. Many Western Countries addressed the issue in refusing provide protection to the refugees. Arun Gandhi expressed that these people were begging for things we take for granted everyday: food, water, shelter, and the most important one of all, to feel safe and protected. The fact that human beings could deny these essential human needs is troubling. Arun Gandhi said that the single greatest solution was to protest the violence peacefully in such high numbers that it would be impossible for the media to ignore what was happening in these Western Countries. He suggested that if these millions of refugees took a stand and marched hundreds of miles into these countries, the media would have to cover the story. Through these news reports from countries all over the world, Arun stated it would be out of the question that someone wouldn’t step up to help MILLIONS of helpless people simply trying to survive.