Via Tyla'75 @ Flickr.
Everyone’s been talking about the Neda video that’s been making the rounds lately. I shan’t post it here, for reasons that will rapidly become clear, but you can find it easily enough if you Google around. I have no strong opinion as to whether one “must” watch it, which you’ll find most of the breathless commentary accompanying the video urges everyone to do. I firmly believe that if it has not yet occurred to you that what is happening on the ground in Iran is really happening to real people, it is unclear to me that this would knock you out of your complacency.
But I don’t condemn anyone for posting and distributing it. Kate Harding sums my position up in this Broadsheet post quite beautifully. (Tami’s post at Racialicious is also great on this subject, pointing out that the way this video gets talked about is so different from the way videos of American/white suffering are treated.)
My teeth have nonetheless been set on edge throughout this construction of a martyr by Tweet and camera phone. It’s not that I question the authenticity of the video, or the tragedy of the situation. It’s that when you make a person into a martyr, even when you declare them a hero, you are replacing them with an idea of who they are and what they did.
We know that Neda was a philosophy student, and that she was possibly engaged. Beyond that, what we know mostly about her is that she was standing on a street at the wrong time on the wrong day and was shot. We know that her death is shocking to us when we watch it. Thus the vast majority of what we know about her from this incident are not things we know about her, per se; they are things we know about us.
And in that little maneuver, in that small erasure of the person because she’s more useful to us when her existence proves a point, you can undermine the entire point of anti-oppression work. Either human beings are human beings, or they are ciphers for grand ideas. And when someone is demoted to the status of stand-in for Progress or Democracy or Liberation, however laudable those goals might be, I don’t think you can call what you are doing anti-oppressive work.
My position here feels somewhat hypocritical. I may dislike martyr narratives, but I certainly have heroes. I’m far too addicted to the pull of a good story to leave them behind entirely. But what I try to keep in mind is that my heroes were and are just human beings. Like me, they were at the best of times perhaps half-aware of what they want and need and have to do. We have to stop feeling that any of us – and I do mean any of us – is more deserving of full human status in order to make sure that none of us get less than that.
So when Ta-Nehisi reminds me that the FBI taped MLK, Jr. yelling “I’m not a Negro tonight!” mid-coitus, I temper my disappointment with a reminder that these are the things we need to know if we are going to work towards a world where we are more fully human. When Dworkin says something that stops me in my tracks, I try not to let my adulation in other contexts get the best of me, but I also try not to let disappointment discard both baby and bathwater. And when I fuck up (and oh I can fuck up hard, at the best of times) I remind myself that everyone who has ever been interested in ending oppression has ended up stepping in it – and that the important part is not to give up in the name of some unattainable claim to perfection that I have constructed for someone else.
What bothers me about it is the same thing that is bothering me about most of the commentary in American press on Iran right now — it’s ALL ABOUT US. Um, actually, it has NOTHING to do with us as Americans. It’s not about whether the deaths of Iranians are “real” to us (would that make a difference in our behavior somehow?) and it’s not about whether Obama makes some statement about Iran. I think you are right that the framing of the video just reaffirms our national narcissism, rather than defeating it.
The other thing I feel kind of complicated about Neda becoming “the face of the revolution” is that she wasn’t a revolutionary. I realize that her lack of political activism and “innocence” make her even more of a martyr and prove the corruptness of the Iranian military/paramilitary system, but I still think it erases the many reformers who have been putting their lives at risk for years for political reform.
aaaaand could i say reform one more time?
Neda went from really real human to symbol pretty swiftly, didn’t she? What makes me gag is the fragile Americans, sitting comfortably at their laptops in their comfortable surroundings, going on and on about how traumatized they were by the video of Neda’s death. Oh they had nightmares! all weekend but they’re super glad they watched because now they truly understand what’s happening in Iran.
Sarah — I also think that that reaction is based on many Americans never having seen someone die suddenly in real time. What is traumatizing is the basic human fact of death, not the political element at all (I suspect).
On the other hand, when I am feeling more generous, perhaps the American response to the video is a result of the story (who knows how true?) that Neda’s father approved the making and release of the video and wanted people from all over the world to see it. Maybe for us here, who can do nothing to affect or support Iranian reformers, being asked to watch the video is the first thing we can do to participate and be in solidarity — we were invited to.
I think the cipher thing is huge–the first time I saw a link to it (not watching that, thankyouverymuch), there was a line about how she was the father’s daughter, everyone’s daughter, etc. Part of it is the “it could happen to anyone” piece, but the rest is that we know so little about her that we can paint whatever attributes onto her that we please.
I mean, if it gets non-Iranians to pay attention, I guess it’s not all bad. I’m not sure if she would’ve chosen this for herself though, which also makes me a bit… squicky. I mean, if I get shot, I politely request in advance that you don’t put me dying on youtube, no matter what the circumstances of the shooting are.
But, Danger, were Americans really not paying attention? With all the news coverage and twitters and whatever else? I feel likeanyone who saw the Neda video was also following the news, at least a little. I think sometimes we try to make “consciousness raising” do more work than it can. It reminds me of some genocide campaigns where it is like, “Never Again.” But what practically can ordinary Americans do to affect change in say Sudan? I think the truth of American impotence and the counter productive nature of many of our even well intentioned interventions are hard for a lot of Americans to accept — this is what I mean about “it’s all about us.” I have to credit Obama for keeping his mouth shut. I’ve been disappointed by his domestic work in a lot of ways but I have to give him props for being savvy internationally. I can’t help but think a President Biden or a President Clinton would have been unable to resist the temptation to grandstand on this one.
At this point I almost resent being asked to pay so much attention to the Iran situation when there is literally NOTHING I can (or should) do about it. The Iranian election controversy is not like the situation in Darfur, for example, which should have received more attention and could have been improved by donating money to various aid groups. With respect to Iran, I feel like all the news coverage is prompting some Americans to feel like “something must be done!” But that’s not really true, from what I can tell. So at this point I’m kind of ready to stop hearing about it. We have major problems at home that deserve more news coverage and whose outcomes the American voters could potentially affect, so let’s get back to domestic issues, shall we?
It feels weird to be thinking this way, as I’m not usually one to call for more focus on America. But the Iran situation seems like an odd choice for 24-7 news coverage in that it doesn’t–and shouldn’t–involve the U.S. at all. Of course I think it’s useful for Americans to know what’s going on there, but the coverage is really beginning to feel excessive.
Kivrin, I don’t mind the coverage and certainly think Americans should be paying attention. But I agree with you that the expectation that there should be some response from us is crazy and silly and kind of neo-con.
@Kirvin: But it DOES involve the US. Anything that creates havoc or a major change in government in that region is vitally important to US interests, especially when it involves the biggest player in that region. This election and popular uprising could signal the kind of lasting change that will make a huge difference throughout the world.
And bearing witness to human rights abuses and to other people’s bravery–and, yes, even their martyrdom–is important, and it is actually DOING something, IMO.
@BeckySharper: From what I’ve read, Moussavi isn’t actually that different from Ahmadinejad in terms of policy with respect to the United States. So the election results, rigged or not, don’t matter that much in terms of the United States’ relationship with Iran. But I feel like the U.S. news coverage is implying Moussavi was the chance to change our relationship with Iran–ergo, Americans should have a vested interest in seeing this so-called reform candidate elected–and that’s just not the case. (Again, this is just based on what I’ve been reading–could be wrong.) So Americans are getting all worked up over an election that probably wouldn’t make a difference in our relationship with Iran anyway…and that seems silly.
And I hear what you’re saying re: bearing witness to human rights abuses, but I still don’t feel like that constitutes “doing something.” It just makes me feel helpless.
Still, it’s good that Americans know what’s going on — I just find it odd that we’re paying so much attention to Iran when we usually go out of our way to avoid dealing with human rights abuses (even the ones perpetrated in our own prisons).
@Kivrin: That’s kind of the way I felt about Sotomayor. I thought, “Okay, I like her, she’s going to pass confirmation, done deal.” Maybe it served a purporse by making the Republicans look like twits (their clownery apparently has helped their approval among Latinos drop down to 8% from 40% during the apex of the Bush term). All the commentary seemed pointless after a while.
What seems like overexposure to you regarding Iran might just be lagtime. Nothing really big and new has happened in a few days. Cable news and most papers missed the boat during the beginning of the unrest, got super invested by last Saturday and are now cashing out as the uprising settles to a simmer, kind of like a trader selling stock whose price is falling. Iran’s still valuable enough for the front page, but just barely. And health care is a story that will be there tomorrow.
I feel you on the Mousavi impression. His recount got shot down Monday and I doubt he’ll lead an uprising, so my interest in him is waning. The Economist’s site today had a good summary pointing out that the Khaminei/Rafsanjani showdown is really the power struggle to keep an eye on.
IMO the feeling of helplessness 100% means you need to “do something.” We can’t sit here and hem and haw and wring our hands about how sad it is over there and what a shame just because we aren’t sure what to do about it and doubt that we can do anything about it. Our capacity is only limited by our unwillingness to act, whether that be through choice or perceived helplessness. You can do something, you just have to ask how.
@Kirvin: I don’t think Moussavi’s the Barack Obama of Iran, but he’s a hell of a lot better than what they’ve got now. Moussavi’s a reformer, and he’s pro-women’s rights. He’s also not an insane Holocaust-denying saber rattler who’s trying to start a war with Israel which the US would get dragged into.
As for bearing witness, I’d argue that at the end of the day, it’s the one thing that we know we CAN do. And when you have entire societies and governments denying abuses, whether it’s the Holocaust or the Armenian genocide or a political crackdown like Tiananmen Square, bearing witness after the fact is enormously valuable.
Becky I actually agree with you and I think that bearing witness is really the point of the Neda video — and it should be enough to bear witness, not to make it mean all kinds of other things that it doesn’t.
Marigold — I understand the impulse to act but acting is not always helpful to the acted upon. What do you suggest Americans can or should do to support Iranian reformers?
As an Iranian, I feel a little compelled to put my 2 cents in. The reason the fraudulent election is getting so much press and thus the general feeling that “something must be done”, is that if and only if there is a regime change, the entire geopolitical relationship between US/Israel/Iran will change. Most likely for the better.
The reason, Neda has become the face of uprising is that the level brutality in the response to the uprising is simply outrageous. I tend to forget what it means to be shut down violently and imprisoned for wanting/asking for your civil rights, because I have lived here for 18 years. But before then, the horrific stories of political prisoners and dissidents going missing and turning up in mass graves years later was a daily occurrence. Yes, in grand scheme of things maybe Americans can influence the Darfur cause by writing to their representatives in congress, etc but Iran is a different game solely because of oil.
not totally on topic, I just wanted to say how awesome you all are that you can have such an intilligent discussion without anyone getting all pissed or feeling bullied. Kind of restores my faith in the interwebs.
I wish I could spout off a list of things to do. I have not and cannot claim to understand the complexities of this issue. But I agree that it isn’t like reading an article about malaria, buying 50 bed nets, sending them across the globe and thinking you’ve done your part. For me, the first thing I want to do is educate myself. I’m lucky to have an acquaintance who is from Iran and whose family is still there. I think I will start by asking her how she feels about what is going on, if she thinks that the reformers are looking for “help” beyond the barrage of press, and if so what she thinks that might mean. While I certainly don’t expect her to speak for all Iranians, I think talking to her is a good place to start.
I’d also like someone to explain a bit more what they believe “bearing witness” to mean, both now as events unfold and in later years. I’m having trouble moving beyond the romanticized notion of sitting with my grandkids and telling them I remember when suchandsuch happened in Iran, the way my parents tell me they remember where they were when JFK was shot. Yes, it passes a piece of history on so that those involved are not forgotten, but beyond that? How does it help those who are there now and in the future? I would like to understand it a bit better, thanks!
The LA Times article paints a better picture of who the woman was as a person.
It’s that when you make a person into a martyr, even when you declare them a hero, you are replacing them with an idea of who they are and what they did.
Which is preferable to total obscurity.
At least, to me.
I hope I am not completely forgotten, but its one of those things that haunts me about death. It’s the reason I took my grandmother’s name for my blog/online persona. The good work people do is soon forgotten and the desire to martyr someone (meant as: view their life in this fashion) is the counter-desire to commemorate someone for that work, realizing we simply cannot commemorate every single person who participated in righteous causes.
@ImTheMarigold: “I’d also like someone to explain a bit more what they believe “bearing witness” to mean, both now as events unfold and in later years.”
It means making sure that when, for example, national leaders and state-run media–or Mel Gibson’s dad–say “oh, there were only a few Jews killed in the Holocaust”, there are witnesses and children of witnesses and videotape of witnesses who can all refute that claim. Or as another example, in Turkey it’s actually a crime to refer to the Armenian genocide as “genocide” and essentially anyone who mentions it in a book, an essay, a movie, etc. risks imprisonment. If there weren’t people speaking out–especially outside of Turkey–the memory of that crime and those victims would be lost, and the genocide would be complete.
Bearing witness means people need to speak up loudly and repeatedly, in the media, in history books, with their children, with people in their communities and say “this is what happened. this is the truth.” It’s no coincidence that authoritarian regimes cut off free speech and communication. They know the power of bearing witness.
Sure, but Becky, last I checked, Iranians seemed perfectly capable of bearing their own witness this time around, with Twitter and YouTube thrown in to grow the audience. Here, beyond merely knowing that someone is dead – and in fact, many people are – the bearing witness accomplishes very little except to lull the subject into a sense of complacency: “I’ve felt bad, so I’ve done what I can.”
@PilgrimSoul: Bearing witness is a worldwide phenomenon, not just an Iranian one.
If it weren’t for the foreign media and the internet (which is not Iranian) running those photos and video clips, a lot of what’s happening would go unseen, both within Iran and throughout the world. And, interestingly, a lot of what’s getting through via Twitter and Facebook is made possible by dedicated IT-savvy expats who are helping keep to poke holes in the regime-imposed firewalls so the images can get out of Iran.
Becky: I am not saying they should not broadcast things on the internet. What I am saying is that the urge to be self-congratulatory about this whole thing is to be resisted.
@PilgrimSoul: I don’t think there’s anything self-congratulatory about bearing witness, at least, not what we’ve been talking about in this thread. There’s relatively little I can do materially to help protesters in Iran. I can, however, be aware and speak up about it on my end of things. I have free speech, and I can use it.
I’m not saying we should go “oh, I’m bearing witness, that makes me a good person” and pat pat our own backs. I’m just saying that witnessing a movement and honoring people’s struggles by doing so is a valid and worthwhile response.
Okay, Becky, I’m just confused, because no one ever claimed it wasn’t.
@PSoul: You said to me: “What I am saying is that the urge to be self-congratulatory about this whole thing is to be resisted.” And I’m saying is that you’re right and that there’s nothing self-congratulatory about what I’m advocating.
@Becky: I thought PSoul wasn’t addressing you, but the massive amount of self-absorbed people who are being self-congratulatory for watching this.
Making men and women into better or worse than they are is a longstanding human tradition, but we only really find the value and greatness in ourselves when we realize that all of the heroes and villains of the world are simply human beings. (Course, we also find the fear, violence and psychopaths this way.)
Personally, I had no desire to watch it, but when it was presented to me on a news program I didn’t stop watching. I’ve just seen enough death on documentaries that I know it is unpleasant to witness, though I think necessary.
And before I start sounding too self-absorbed, I’ll exit with someone else’s words:
It’s my estimation that every man ever got a statue made of him was one kind of sommbitch or another. Ain’t about you, Jayne. It’s about what they need.
Martyr narratives are to be distrusted not so much because they tend to make one self-congratulatory, but because they often cause the reader/viewer/witness to unconsciously identify with the aggression that did the martyr in. We do that because a lot of aggression is so horrifying that we cannot witness it without internalizing the violence, and identifying with it to some extent.
When I saw the Neda video, I felt I was being trauma bonded–that is, I was so horrified that I was internalizing the violence that killed her. I knew it was happening, first, because I am writing a book about trauma bonding, I’m studying it, and I know how it works. The give-away was the fact that I was getting so angry I felt like just whacking somebody out to get even. I had a few fantasies about beating the hell out of oppressors/fascists/thugs. But when you have those kinds of fantasies, the bad guys are still inside you afterwards.
So I spent the day writing a poem about Neda, to break the effect of the trauma (or near-trauma) I’d had when I saw the video. It had overwhelmed my defenses and taken residence in my gut.
I beat the aggression that I’d internalized, and got out of the cycle of violence by working on the poem all day. I didn’t get any work done on my book, but I got the hate out of my innards, at least mostly so.
I honored Neda. And I did it for me. I don’t want her death to be part of any cycle, or violence or anything else. That’s the dangerous part of the cycle of aggression we’re stuck in. And for me, on this day, it damn well worked.
Okay, here’s the poem.
Neda
Voice of the Divine
stay with us
stay with us
Make us hear you
Help us hear you.
Your blood, our blood.
Sweet remembrances of friends, family
live forever in laughter.
Laughter is the prayer of children
who live without fear.
Hear them.
Hear them.
Always with us,
dear Neda!
Okay, it’s not great, but it got the stink of the oppressor our of my body. I kept thinking about Neda as my daughter. I have a Muslim daughter, and if my kid died that way, I don’t think I could take it.
SoulPilgrim is my real user-name, by the way. I’ll use another if it’s too close to yours. Thanks for bringing up a sensitive and important topic.
@aspiringexpatriate, offtopic, thanks for offering up the Joss Whedonism. always appreciated.
[...] post on Racialicious and “Pilgrim Soul” at Pursuit of Happyness both challenge readers to ask if using Soltani as a martyr is right. I also [...]