To See or not To See?
Political expediency it may have been, but Barack Obama's decision not to release photographs of Osama Bin Laden's body is a welcome act of national self-censorship that constitutes a significantly counter-cultural move.
Ever since news of the al-Qaeda leader's killing broke, there has been an inevitable drip-feed of ever more graphic images through the media to the viewing public. Iconic portraits of Bin Laden first gave way to stills of the compound and the abandoned American helicopter, and then to video footage from within the house, including the heavily bloodstained bedroom where Bin Laden was shot dead.
The media are eager to capture such images because it is the image that stimulates and sustains public interest in the story, whether on television or online. It's the ever-present promise of new pictures that keeps us enthralled. The Internet and a growing superfluity of high-definition, touch-screen devices are constantly reinforcing the lesson television first taught us: seeing is believing. Naturally enough, the corollary is also true: in the absence of images there is doubt, or outright disbelief.
So it is that some believe the US should release photographs of Bin Laden's corpse by way of providing conclusive proof of his death. Nevertheless, the president has decreed that these very graphic images will not be seen. They have been censored on the grounds that their publication would constitute a threat to US national security. I, for one, am inclined to agree with his decision.
Doubtless, national and political self-interest influenced Obama's decision, but perhaps we should allow for the possibility that so also did a genuine concern for the global greater good. Since the eye is 'the lamp of the body' (Matthew 6:22), and just one look can kill the divine image-bearing people we were made to be (Matthew 5:27-29), we all need to consider carefully the imagery to which we expose ourselves, and to which we expose others. Is it not in all our interests to look on that which will enhance our humanity, and to look away from that which will diminish it?
For proof of the compelling power images can exercise over hearts and minds, look no further than those who, having been inundated this past decade with the traumatic images of 9/11, and of the face of the man behind that atrocity, took to the streets this week to celebrate his killing.
Even in our visual age, there are things we really don't need to see. Trust me.
Nigel Hopper
Comments
Some very helpful and stimulating thoughts in your post, Alastair - thank you for taking the time to contribute them. Nigel
To argue that the withholding of pictures of the body of Bin Laden is a counter-cultural move is to isolate one small element of these events from their wider context. The unlawful revenge killing and execution of Bin Laden by US forces in the heart of another sovereign state, without that state's authorisation, sets a worrying precedent. Other states to have used this approach are the Israeli state, and before them by the Soviet Union. The US is not in good company. A genuinely counter-cultural move by Barack Obama would require him to abandon the myth of redemptive violence, and to adopt a wholly different engagement to the Arab and Muslim world (especially in Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan from) than that take by his predecessors. Despite signs of such rhetoric in the past, too many of the Obama administration's actions continue the pattern of his predecessors. Withholding the images of Bin Laden's body is a calculated political act. Certainly we don't need to see it. But there is nothing counter-cultural about what has been done.
One of the reasons the demand for additional visual or tangible proof has increased in our culture certainly is the ambiguity or downright untrustworthiness of official government information. In this country (The Netherlands) being caught in a lie, was sufficient for any government official to be forced out of office. Now lying is just admitted in passing, and ministers stay in place. In Hebrew, the word dabar described both the word and the deed, the idea being that the there should not be a discrepancy between the things we day and the things we do. As a Christian I strive to be a person who can be trusted at his word - and to give others the same privilege. Confidence grows when people learn that a simple promise is enought to get a thing done. Interestingly I have noticed that people who do not keep promises often need stronger words to make other believe them, and all sort of written contracts to secure them. I love situations in which it is not even necessary to write down what you have agreed (without being phobic about recording things for good order and to remember them properly)
This article makes a most interesting and important point. For many people, visual images have an immense and lasting effect, which continues well after the image has apparently faded and been forgotten. By looking at images which corrupt we introduce into ourselves a spiritual virus. In contrast, there are images (combined with actions) which have a purifying effect, which also lasts. I suggest that baptism, especially by immersion, and Holy Communion are such images. I would also include the wedding of Prince William and Catherine Middleton.
Date:
2011-05-08 16:31:46
Author:
Tony Dean