This blog is in response to the recent reading and class discussion surrounding Judith Butler’s, thought provoking, book, “Frames of War: When is Life Grievable?” In this blog, I intended to explore what I found most intriguing about Butler’s work- the precariousness of us all.

Is there a shared oneness in us all, as in, us humans? Is there a binding factor that brings us together? Are we simply just one? These are some of the questions I asked while reading Butlers work. I must start, though, on a more basic level, by asking what is she really trying to say?

It appears, that Butlers work is motivated by the inhumanity of war. Essentially she asks, who is to be the judge of one life is being better or worse then the next? Her rebuttal seems to argue that the frameworks which shapes are lives such as the media, structure the lens we see through. In effect, our knowledge and understanding of the world, is not our own organic creation. According to Butler, it is moulded by the media. From an Orwellian stance, the media is The Party, and we- Winston- are more or less forced to buy into a system, or perhaps, a perspective. Therefore, are ability to even value a life as better or worse, derives from how others lives appear on the media.

{Please forgive me for making seem as if the media is the only frame in our lives that structures our perspectives, there are many more, I simply don’t have the time to discuss them all.}

Butler’s belief, from my understanding, is that there is a unifying factor that brings all of us humans together; be it the mere fact that we are from the same species or something more abstract- we are all, according to Butler- the same. Therefore regardless of how the frames shape our role in the tragedy as either the victim or the saviour, tragedy dooms us all. My pain is your pain appears to be the overarching theme in Butler’s piece. This seems to be her reason for not valuing one life over the next.

In theory, Butler work should resolve many of the problems we have in this world. Yet, in practice, her work is futile. Butler devalues the differences we have in society, and instead, attempts to form solidarity by placing emphasis on what makes us human. Herein lies the problem, we must celebrate what makes us different and learn how make these differences live in harmony with each. Not push our differences aside to fetishize over our sole similarity.

I commend Butler for attempting to end the violence and tragedy we have in this world by placing emphasis on our so called precariousness, or oneness.  She offers a unique perspective that sadly cannot be applied to the real world, however.  In some regards there is a shared oneness in us all, yet in my opinion, our similarities will not quell violence and acts as such, it is the celebration of our differences that will.