[lit-ideas] media violence
- From: JulieReneB@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 16:45:41 EDT
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/West/05/17/teachers.suspended.reut/index.html
I wonder if any of the (justifiably, in my opinion) outraged parents of these
students took their children to see The Passion?
I've been thinking alot lately about the role of technology and visual
representations of violence. This is going to be fuzzled because I'm actually
posting this hoping someone will articulate what I'm having trouble
articulating to
myself. I don't even necessarily want an answer articulated -- if someone
can figure out what question I'm trying to ask it would be a start. (I know --
if you don't even know what you're asking....). There's such an instantaneous
availability of information now -- theoretically someone could real-time send
live video of Iraqi prisoner abuse via a picture cell phone. The media is
able to portray to us in real time the destruction of the Towers, the bombings
in Iraq, etc. Things that used to be only written about or sketched are now
available to us individually instantly. Do I want congress to push to have all
400 or however many there are photos of Iraqi abuse splattered all over the
media? Do I think American's need to know? By seeing those pictures am I
participating in the act perpetrated by the photographer? What value is there
in
showing high school students (or adults, via Al Arabiya for that matter) video
of Berg's execution? How is it different from being told about it? If there
had been no pictures of Iraqi abuse, would it have gotten the attention it
did, merely from witness reports? What about The Passion? How is that
qualitatively different from showing an execution? Because it isn't "real" in
the
film? It was real once. Because it happened 2,000 years ago to people instead
of
2 days ago? What if someone had been in the concentration camps with a video
camera? Would we show children the footage? We let them see pic's in their
history books. The visual violence has an emotive impact that words
generally lack. I have very mixed feelings about all of these -- but there's a
seminal question that I can't form about what technology is doing in the area
of
real life violence and its sort of overlay with pornographic types of material.
How is the execution of Berg different from the incredible violence in movies?
(Ghost Ship, e.g., which I haven't seen but which College kids tell me they
walked out of, vomiting.) More than once I heard the word "pornographic"
applied to the movie, The Passion. My husband, when the Iraqi prison photos
were
released, said they looked like they were making snuff films. Is technology
turning information into something muddier? Is it making violence more
acceptable, innoculating us to it? Is it becoming a powerful vehicle for
change? --
i.e., people are outraged, the abuse in Abu Graihb will not continue....?
Okay. I'm going to quit blathering now and hope someone can tell me what I'm
talking about.
Julie Krueger
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
