There's a video out there of a young woman who's been shot while protesting in Tehran. She dies in her father's arms, who is apparently screaming hysterically all the while.
I say "apparently" because I haven't seen the video, and I don't plan on seeing it.
My first instinct is to say that I'm not saying that to make myself feel better than all the people who have watched the video, and I don't, but after reading the comments on all the various different sites that have posted it, I can't help but wonder... Why would you watch it?
(I'm not linking to the video, but you can find it easily enough.)
Nearly everyone who has seen the video and commented on it has either said, "I can't sleep now" or "I've had nightmares" or "I can't stop crying." It sounds horribly upsetting -- and I'm not surprised. An innocent woman has been shot (no one's sure by whom) and she dies.
Maybe people were expecting the fact that they're watching it through a screen, through a lens to soften that reality, but of course it's upsetting.
What a pale, useless word, "upsetting."
Did people watch the video for news purposes? To get an understanding of what it's "really" like in Tehran right now? Was it plain morbid curiosity? Were people planning on exposing it as a fraud? Do people watch it to bolster their political stances? Do people watch it because they've never seen someone die before?
Have you seen the video?
Why did you watch it? Are you glad that you did? Do you think others should as well?
Impudent Ways: Busy Nothings From EA Hanks
7 comments:
I watched it. I suppose I did so because it seemed like it was the sort of thing that should be witnessed; that to not watch was to let the forces that caused it off the hook. I'm not in Iran, and there isn't really anything I can do to try to help make the general situation better, but to actively make the choice not to watch what is happening seems to me dangerously close to intentional ignorance. It's upsetting because it should be, because the fruits of tyranny are upsetting, and by my moral compass, I felt I owed it to her to carry that image with me and be upset by it.
To clarify, I'm not trying to suggest that everybody has to go out and watch the video, but rather that I felt compelled to, and that was why.
Is it ridiculous to start by saying "thank you for your comment"?
Thank you for your comment.
A couple of people who have seen the video told me they felt compelled to see it because they felt beholden to witness it -- similarly to how you described that watching the video ensured that whoever shot Neda wasn't going to get away with it -- that is, whatever political movement her shooter is a member of, will be known as a movement that kills innocents. IE, they're a violent, tyrannical regime who are more interested in keeping power than anything else, and thus should be kicked out via honest elections.
I guess I'm not sure that watching a video like this can fully illuminate what's really happening over there, or that it's useful or... maybe good is the word I'm thinking of, to make one woman's death a symbol of it all.
I think it's that it's video that is throwing me off. If the coverage of her death were in photographs, I would feel like it would journalism, that is -- objective documentation of a traumatic, devastating event. Something about the medium being live footage makes me feel like the purporse wasn't documentation for documentation's sake, but rather, documentation for political purposes.
I'm uncomfortable with making someone's death into a symbol for a movement, even if it's a movement I agree with or would support
And who's to say anyone there wants America's or my support?
And that's where I'll stop talking out my neck.
Agree with the first comment.
I would also agree that video is different from stills for something like this, but I don't think that makes it more political. It is really just as objective as long as it isn't edited in such a fashion as to make it more dramatic. It feels more real, less distant, and it engages more of our senses. It makes it harder for us to put our reactions at a distance, or to put it a different way, it's easier with a still to not really react because it is less involving, and instead just observe.
ophelia_project said...
I did not watch the video.
Nor do I watch the news all day to see all these horrible pictures, neither of the crash of the Air France Flight nor of anyone getting killed.
I do read newspapers and listen to the news on the radio (oddly oldfashioned- but hey, that's me) in order to keep informed.
Watching all those things makes me feel like some sort of voyeur. On the one hand I think we are getting too much accustomed to seeing people getting tortured, killed, violated. Not only by the news but also by all that trash in movies and stuff.
On the other hand it leaves me feeling desperatly helpless. Someone is dying and you cannot do a single thing about it.
Innocent people are dying everywhere in the world all day. At all ages and even today.
It is disastrous.
It is horrible.
It is disappointing after all.
After thousands of years mankind did not learn to settle those things peacefully.
The brightest minds of all ages tried to find ways to avoid such dreadfull outbreaks of violence, to settle conflict peacefully.
Yet at all ages innocent people died most horribly and as we see they still do. Watching it on a tiny little screen (sitting comfortably in your chair in one of the western countries) does not change a single thing about it.
Please do not get me wrong, I am well aware of all the killings in the world. I am certainly not ignorant. Every innocent death deserves pity and severe mourning.
Yet I do have the feeling that these pictures are- and have always been- used to manipulate our opinions on certain issues- for instance the politics of the Iran. The suffering of innocent people has often been used to justify military operations in a couple of countries and much too often these battles were not at all fought for the sake of the suppressed people but for other reasons such as political interests, oil, land, diamonds and so on.
The next thing is that being at war for the sake of humanity did scarcely help the people it was supposed to help.
As for the Iran, I am well aware that Ahmadinejad is a dictator and that the election was fraud. Yet I doubt that an intervention would improve the situation. I understand too little of the country's politics and problems to say what would be the best. But I know no example for an intervention of a western country contributed to the benefit of the nation (remember Iraq?). I do have the feeling that the media is making people think "For God's sake, send some troops to the Iran and kill those bloody bastards that killed the poor girl". But what for?
I think I have talked enough on this matter but let me give you one more example.
I am writing from Germany. A few days ago three German soldiers were killed in Afghanistan. Our defense secretary threatened the rebels who killed them with the following words: "The ones who attack us will be punished equally. We have the forces necessary." Now tell me: Does this bring the three lads back to life? Does it improve the situation? He further demanded the Germans to support our soldiers abroad with their thoughts. That we should be proud of the brave soldiers serving in other countries. You see, the death of these boys is horrible. Yet it is used for political purposes. There has been a great reluctance among Germany to send soldiers abroad. Many were demanding to get them back home. And now we shall be proud of their bravery, right? We shall support the vengeance on their death?
I hope I made myself clear. That is why I do not watch these videos. I do feel sorry for every innocent man, woman or child being killed. But I fear being seduced to support political actions I normally wouldn't support.
OK, well it is late (at least in Europe...)
Bye
P.S.: I love "Impudent Ways"
Boston riot cops, outfitted and armed like true goon squad blue shirts in the Kent State tradition, took on street crowds in Boston a few years ago. Problem was, they had this nifty new bean bag shooting show stopper "guns". Unfortunately, one of the cops shot into the crowd, and hit a young woman right in the eye. The impact proved deadly. Her family sued, and won a settlement several years later. Normally, you cannot sue the cops for misconduct, as they are shielded by most governments and laws. In this case, her family sued the City of Boston. Nobody was ever criminally charged, but then, neither was the federal sniper who shot the woman with child, standing in her own home doorway, during that stand-off in the Idaho mountains with her Husband, a few years ago. Oh, and then there was the firebombing of both that guy David Koresh's compound in Texas a few years ago, not to mention the similar firebombing by Philadelphia police, and immolation with death of MOVE Organization folks trapped in that city block inferno. Video brings home the experience to the masses, because video is the new currency of culture in our modern age. Cops everywhere must beware of citizens with night vision, telescoping, digital handicams. I wish I had one filming, when I got beat up viciously and unnecessarily by Manchester, New Hampshire cops circa 1996. They are, once again, "Paramilitary." Stenciled mottos on cop squad cares, "We serve and protect" are simply empty prayers and wishful thinking. Cops everywhere are "off the rails" nowadays, because governments themselves are allowed to operate without restraint. Imagine, if it is true, as Chavez of Venezuela suggests, that the Iranian street protests are being fomented by Anglo-American (British/American) networks and operatives? As it is, American electioneering advisors and experts hire out around the world for elections such as this one in Iran. As with the American court system, when some hapless accused is found "Not Guilty" for a change, some people simply cannot accept the result willingly. Elections and Democracy are not all they are represented to be. I mean, for God's sake, just look at Florida! Twice! Or maybe, Minnesota. When if ever will the Senator from Minnesota take his seat?
Anyway I wouldn't want anyone to see me die that way.
Besides I think it is against the Geneva Convention to show these kind of movies.
Post a Comment