This week in ASTU we started to explore the first chapter of Judith Butler’s book, “Frames of War: When is Life Grievable?”. Butler’s writing is not the easiest to analyze; however, once her argument becomes more clear she points out very thought-provoking philosophical questions. One of her main questions surrounded how the everyday ‘framing’ of our lives influence how we perceive the value of others lives as well as our own. This ‘frame’ consists of one’s location, media, or anything that has the capacity to affects one’s perspective. She states that although all actions of violence can be morally questionable, some prove to be more impactful than others because “what we feel is in part conditioned by how we interpret the world around us” (Butler, 41). An example Butler uses is the actions of the U.S. following 9/11, and the ways in which sending troops to the Middle East was collectively justified by many Americans. Unfortunately, Butler’s question can be applied to many violent and destructive events happening around the world even today, such as the migrant crisis.
In my experience, the stories that catch the most empathy from the public are those that seem the most relatable. These would be the traumatic events that invoke people to say “that could have been me”, and provide feelings of vulnerability and fear. However, it is difficult to relate to people who aren’t often, or properly, represented in our daily ‘frames’. Being presented with insufficient or inaccurate information about a certain group makes it easier for people to detach themselves from that group, and in turn make them more vulnerable to wrongful accusations and blame. Further, when groups of people who are associated with certain lifestyles of war and violence as a result of their location in the world are killed, their lives gain much less of the public’s attention. And I believe for this reason, certain destroyed lives become more hard hitting than others. Possessing this frame of mind that casts certain individuals as a part of “we”, and others as “them”, is dangerous, because it creates divisions among people. Evidently, people are all different from each other, but these differences should not be used as justification for hate or blame like they often are. To counteract this frame of mind which has become almost ingrained into Western media and news outlets, Butler proposes that before speculating about a certain event or trauma, we should possess a “dislocation of perspective” (47). Butler’s proposition is spot on because once you become aware of the frames attached with your location, you are left with the factors that unite all human beings: precariousness and vulnerability. So, before criticizing refugees by associating them with stereotypes associated with their countries of origin, it is important to realize that the more appropriate response would be to see them as ordinary families in need of help.
Thanks for reading!
Works Cited:
Butler, Judith. Frames of War: When Is Life Grievable? London: Verso, 2009. Print.