Categories
Mediawatch

Guernica revisited

The other day I was browsing the news on my phone when I came across an item about a series of bombings around Irak and Afghanistan. I remember thinking how this kind of news has become so frequent as to become almost unnoticeable. My first idea of news is in the early eighties when the bulletins would be dotted with IRA bombings, kidnappings and hijacks. Post 9/11 terrorism had not come into being yet and you still had the tangible feeling of people losing their lives – of humans engaged in suffering and misery inflicted upon them by lesser beings – but by humans nonetheless. The Habibiya bombings were just a flicker on the news ticker. By the time the full information was gathered thirty-one people had lost their lives in a series of bombings in the Middle East and many more were injured.

Sports bulletins were not stopped, nation’s leaders were not rushing to express their condolences with the victims of these attacks or solidarity with a nation that was once again pregnant with mourning relatives. Most of all, the item barely made it to the top of news bulletins or front pages across the world.

Then came Boston.

Comparisons are odious and this is not intended to compare for there is no comparison that holds ground with the suffering and misery inflicted by loss of life or grievous injury. An injured human is an injured human – whether he is running a marathon, watching a marathon, on a boat in the middle of the Mediterranean or shopping in a market near Tikrit. A dead human is a dead human – whatever the cause of death may be and no matter if the death was caused in the name of some ‘greater cause’ or due to mere madness.

But the Boston marathon lies in the heart of a United States that still tries to be a melting pot of sorts. People from all over the world aggregated to the town of freedom and tea parties to celebrate life in a sporting fashion. Some twisted minds who deserve the worst of Dante’s circles in hell planned and plotted for bombs to explode at the moment when the largest number of runners are crossing the line. It’s ugly. It’s vile. And the world yelled “Enough” in angry indignation. Which is all good for the par. Every one of these dead runners or spectators (three at the moment of typing) and every one of the persons who had to have their limb amputated, must be mourned and showered with all the compassion and help they may need.

They must be helped because we are human and because we like to believe that our kind is capable of thinking as a society that cares. In equal measure must the perpetrators be found and eradicated. Yes. Eradicated.

But Boston also showed the two-faced approach to emotions. Almost daily the world observes tragedies such as what happened in that fair American city. Yet while Boston will enjoy more than its fair share of attention, events such as the bombings in Irak get relegated to second, third or even nth place. This is not a competition mind you, nobody would vie for top billing on the tragedy headlines. It does say much about our perception of the world. For much as I would like to give the news conglomerates and journalists (as well as their customers and clients – the reader, viewer and listener) the benefit of the doubt you do get a nagging feeling that some lives are more important than others.

If not more important, then more relevant to others. The onlooker at a marathon is not as distant as the “oriental” at a souk who gets blown to smithereens while buying her vegetables for the daily pot. The message that this sends out is that these people are “different”. That very message of difference that we had all nixed when Huntington came around with his clash of civilisations business. It could not happen we thought. We are all human and humans and their rights are universal.

The irony of the Boston attacks was that they occurred during a marathon. The concept of a marathon began after the battle of Marathon in 490 BC after the united city states on the peninsula beat the invading Persians at Marathon (with Pheidippides running the distance to Athens to announce victory). The battle itself would have been seen as a clash between two great civilisations – the lords of the earth versus an association of free states. The temptation to succumb to this kind of rhetoric might be great but in the end it is humankind that suffers – not democracies or authoritarian regimes – but the man in the street… jogging, shopping or simply minding his own business.

Every so often we get a new version of Guernica painted directly onto the canvas of our collective memories. We are reminded once again of the pain and suffering that a human can and will inflict on another human. We are reminded of the ugliness of our nature and of the fine line that divides this exalted race of ours from animal-like behaviour and of what a struggle it is to be and remain “civilised”.

May their souls rest in peace and may the victims of humankind everywhere be vindicated by what will hopefully be an increased awareness about ourselves and who we really are.

 

Facebook Comments Box

2 replies on “Guernica revisited”

I think people generally associate Iraq and Afghanistan with war zones and so are not as surprised to hear of civilian deaths, while western cities are considered safe, so when tragedy strikes the shock value is higher. It’s just a mixture of shock and being able to relate to people in Boston finishing a marathon or people watching the batman premier as opposed to people in places like Tikrit which seem distant, exotic and generally different.

Of course the value of the life is the same but since bombings in the middle east are so regular people tend to become desensitised to the headlines.

Comments are closed.