pacifism

[Terrance]

Mark Wright AIA wrote:
> 
> Howdy
> --- Terrance <lycidas2 at earthlink.net> wrote:
> in part
> 
> > But yesterday I had the opportunity to view the WTC art work of
> > children
> > here.
> > I think the world must see this art as often as they have seen the
> > Hollywood / Tube
> > pornography shots of the planes and the collapse of the towers.
> 
> It was the act which is obscene, not the representation of the act. 

The acts were acts of terror.  They were crafted to instill intense,
overpowering fear. 
This is what they have done. These were violence acts,  committed to 
threaten the USA and it allies by a group of terrorists who planned to
and did to intimidate the USA and coerce it to 
change its policies. The acts have intimidated and terrorized an entire
population. They were motivated by military or political objectives. 

As acts of terror they are offensive to accepted standards of decency or
modesty. Indeed, I can not quarrel with your insisting that they were
obscene. 

The Networks  have not committed acts of terror, and are in no way 
responsible for these criminal acts. 

They  have been inciting the  public with photos and film clips that
have been sharpened, intensified, magnified, edited and enhanced. And
the constant, incessant, use of these images, are.  I think,  offensive
and repulsive to the senses. I'm not going to argue freedom of the press
or definitions of pornography, but I think it is clear that 
there certain networks are acting irresponsibly. 



 I do think we would agree that all of us make ourselves aware of the
> distortions inherent in the repetitive representation and their
> linkages with other images.  Images such as those of little children
> holding hands, and of their artwork stuck on fences, for instance.

Right. 

> 
> > Kids have a need to express themselves and they are, in their art,
> > poems, drawings on the sidewalks, in the street, in their
> > performances,
> > the toys and remembrances they carry around. This should be seen by
> > the
> > world. There is so much these kids can teach us.
> 
> Negative. There is much we must teach these children.  This is a
> typical, and typically pernicious, romantic inversion of the kind of
> adult/child relationship that pervades and debases our culture.

I disagree, Teaching is two way street, we teach, we learn. 
I'm not a romantic, idealist, or naive, I know the difference between
what kids can teach adults and what adults may teach children. 


> 
> > I don't think it's time to point fingers, as the one of children
> > said,
> > "it's time to hold hands."
> 
> But it is perfectly plain where the finger should point: at the men who
> ran three planes into three buildings, and a fourth into the ground.
> It is a morally reprehensible act to refuse to acknowledge this. 


I agree. I was suggesting that the victims should not point fingers at
each other. 


 It
> may be time for the children (who were targets of these men as well) to
> hold hands with one another. It is time, please, for adults to act
> their age.
> 
> Mark

I was speaking metaphorically, but I don't think holding hands has much
to do with age or acting one's age.