Hello ASTU 100!
Long time no see! I hope you all had a great Christmas break filled with much needed quality time around family and friends, plenty of sleep, moments to reflect on our first term of university, and set new goals for the upcoming year.
However, as we took a pause from the hustle and bustle here at UBC, news from all over the world did not cease to appear on our media news feeds. Events such as the ongoing refugee crisis, terror attacks across the globe, Middle East relations, elections, and foreign policy decisions have stayed atop the sphere of popular media. With the notions of fear, trauma, security, xenophobia, and Islamophobia at its peak, I could not think of a better way to start off our second term in ASTU by reading Jonathan Safran Foer’s novel entitled Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close.
Through the ideas of 9/11 and American Exceptionalism brought to light in Foer’s novel, many bloggers challenged the exclusive narratives of trauma in 9/11, as well as the popular rhetoric which followed “the worst day ever”.
Questioning the uniqueness of the attacks on 9/11, Mariana is met with skepticism as she writes, “are the attacks of 9/11 actually exceptional? Terrorist attacks were happening and continue to happen now. People experience trauma all over the world.” Instead, she argues that, “events like these are not supposed to set borders between people…they can unite people and make them understand each other more.” What makes trauma a widely debated topic is in part due to its universality; everyone has been affected either directly or indirectly in some way, shape or form by a particular event. This segways us into Imaan’s blog. Here, she writes about her cousin Salima who was en route to the World Trade Center subway stop when the attacks occurred. “With the numerous painful memories that were caused from this day, everyone has their own story to tell…She told me it [was] the most chaotic and stressful situation she had ever been in. Moreover, the novel does an upright evaluation on the true emotions that are conveyed [on] 9/11.” Having my mom fly to New York on a very frequent basis, I have experienced and been told first-hand the direct changes in airport security, but also on the streets of Manhattan with new terror protocol, cameras on every block, and an increased police presence.
As we have discussed extensively in class, the role of ownership and agency of trauma through various contexts is a widely conversed topic. This brings me to Priya’s post, as she brings her another unique story of trauma to the table. “[This novel] took me back to the national trauma that I encountered as a citizen of India during the 26/11 Mumbai attacks…something that I witnessed not only on the television screen but from [a] few of my acquaintances who actually lost their loved ones in the attacks.”
Reverting back to 9/11 Exceptionalism, in my opinion the mere reason we have coined the attacks on the World Trade Centre that occurred on September 11, 2001 as “9/11” hints us towards a unique event in time, but also a new post-9/11 era, if you will. You never here the attacks n Mumbai referred to as “26/11” or the recent Paris attacks as XY and Z. How are events in the novel such as the fire bombings in Dresden, Hiroshima, and the Holocaust set apart from “the worst day ever”? These questions I will hope to delve further in on a another blog post. This post-9/11 era we live in comes with rash emotions, stereotypes, phobias, and irrational fear that are still embodied to this day.
In Foer’s use of Oskar as a metaphor for America post-9/11, Tzur furthers this claim in saying, “For Oskar the attack marks the worst day ever, his entire life is turned upside down and after the attacks Oskar exhibits some very odd feelings…[he] is scared of Muslims and people in turbens, suddenly elevators become places of fear.” Kaveel too expresses similar feelings during his youth where he admits, “I also recall experiencing anxiety when I saw a traditional Arab costume because being the young oblivious child I was, I associated it with terrorism.” A similar dialogue is expressed as Sania writes about a Yik Yak post she read regarding Islamophobia, in which the author wrote, “Canada was founded by Europeans and it should primarily belong to Europeans. Backwards desert religions have no place here.” This type of dialogue has seen a great resurgence as of late in both the private and public sectors. Even Republicans and Democrats are struggling to draw a finite line between freedom, security, racist, and extremist views.
As Oskar famously put it, “There was a lot of stuff that made me panicky, like…Arab people on the subway (even though I’m not racist)” (36).
The need for contextualization is pursued in Jacqueline’s blog where she expresses that, “on the other hand, stories of tragedy like terrorist attacks carry inherently political implications that must be contextualized in order to make broader policy decisions…when American’s were most fragile they were fed lies about how Arabs hate freedom and all things American like hot dogs and Fords.” Whether Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close promotes 9/11 Exceptionalism, I too, am torn between personal trauma and 9/11, moreover, perhaps they are not mutual exclusive? Further, Jacqueline concludes, “9/11 exceptionalism is dangerous in that it creates a culture that ignores the causes of attacks and creates a culture that is incapable of mourning without hatred and ignorance. When people are able to empathize with loss while gaining insight into the larger context in which the tragedy exists then they’re better equipped to exist in a post 9/11 or post trauma world.”
Just as I was about to submit this post to the class blog, a recent incident regarding speculations of the 3 Middle Eastern looking men who were conducting “suspicious activity” inside Pacific Centre Mall on the 14th of January. Personally, I feel as if this is a direct ripple effect of living in a post-9/11 world, especially as tensions begin to rise by the day. It seems as if more people nowadays carry their own “terrorist checklist” stored in their brain. When it comes to race, skin colour, sex, and religion, we are so quick to pull out our “checklist”, slab stereotypes and racist generalizations that divide us, rather than come together in reconciliation. Although I can completely understand police rationale behind VPD precautions, would we even be having this conversation if those 3 men were Caucasian? Perhaps, we will never know…
My dearest apologies for the duration of this blog, but this post and topic truly spoke to me on a personal level. Once again, I had such a blast reading all of your blogs and do regret not being able to mention many of them. However, do keep an eye out in the “comment sections” where I will further continue this dialogue!
Kind regards,
Nico Jimenez
Here are a couple links to news articles regarding the incident at Pacific Centre Mall: http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2016/01/vancouver-police-search-middle-eastern-men-pacific-centre-mall/ and http://bc.ctvnews.ca/suspicious-men-at-vancouver-mall-completely-innocent-vpd-1.2738807
Nicolo I thoroughly enjoyed your blog and I think you orchestrated all of our voices expertly. To me however the best part was when you brought in Jauquelines thoughts about how 9/11 exceptionalism decontextualize and removes the attacks from the reality that they occurred in. Personally as an American the attack was exceptional in the culture and local history, it shook an entire nation to it’s core, and it response we became narcissistic and lashed out. We became racist and violent just as Oskar did, not because it’s evil, but because it’s easy, it feels right. It’s easy to respond to violence with violence and racism, it happens during nearly every war. I feel sick when I think about the narratives that I was fed as a child about the attacks. If the U.S had put the attacks in context with other attacks and traumas going on in the world, I think we wouldn’t have as many problems in the middle east. That’s kinda the most sad and ironic part, the U.S became traumatized and then proceeded to unnecessarily traumatize and anger generations of people all over the middle east. Chris Erickson once said that the Bush’s administration set back international relations by several decades, particularly the response from the attacks during 9/11. Had the U.S created and spread narratives of the history of these terrorist attacks I don’t think they would’ve gone to war in the middle east. More importantly i think if the American public had more narratives about solidarity rather than individualism then we wouldn’t have immediately responded with narcissistic narratives. But again this topic is really hard to sort out in my own head because of how early I was imprinted with these ideas. Additionally if there was more of an emphasis on multiculturalism outside of European cultures I think the American public would’ve had more resistance to invading two middle eastern countries. But I’m not quite sure, tell me what you think.