Once again, an individual has caused mass death and destruction, and sent a wave of fear circling the globe. Once again, people are lamenting the world’s ever-increasing insanity. And once again, a separate incident — specifically, the death of a celebrity — has occurred almost simultaneously, seeming to compete for attention with the larger event. Is it possible to step away from our reflex reactions? Can we make sense of any of it?
The murder of seventy-six people in Norway this past Friday has shocked us, because we never imagined it could happen there. That’s always what we think following one of these attacks. “Not there,” we say, even as the people living in those places cry, “Not here.”
By now we should have realized that these assaults have no right or appropriate place. They happen where and when someone, or some small group, decides they will happen. Terrorism is not new. The use of sudden and brutal violence has probably been around since humans first appeared. What is new is the explosive power available to anyone who wants it, and the tendency toward attacking large crowds that become inviting targets just because of their size. In centuries past, political leaders were assassinated or kidnapped because of the office they held. When Empress Elisabeth of Austria was stabbed to death by an Italian anarchist in 1898, many people were saddened, just as they were three years later when US President William McKinley was fatally shot. But neither incident would have caused the average citizen to think, “Uh oh. I could be next.”
Today, people are killed by the hundreds as they sit in their offices, in restaurants, or on buses. The murders are random and unpredictable. There is no answer to the inevitable question, “Why them?” The violence seems to be related to some cause, but there is often no connection between that cause and the victims. The terrorist decides, on a whim, who will die.
The day after the massacre in Oslo, a singer named Amy Winehouse was found dead in London after years of abusing herself with alcohol and drugs. Whether or not it was a suicide, Winehouse clearly hastened her own death. Troubled as she must have been, however, she had also been well on her way to a long and successful music career.
My instinctive response to Saturday’s development was, “Here we go again.” In our culture, news concerning a celebrity is somehow more important than just about anything else that may be happening. I remember watching CNN a few years ago, on the day an earthquake had struck central Italy, collapsing a school and killing twenty-six students and a teacher. The story got fifteen seconds of coverage, followed immediately by twenty minutes of discussion about Princess Diana’s butler and some items he was accused of stealing.
So what is it? Are our priorities that confused? Do we deem certain lives to be more important than others?
I’m not sure how to rank our priorities, but we do seem to place people on a scale of significance. A town hit by a tsunami nine thousand miles away doesn’t affect us as much as a similar disaster that happens nine hundred miles away. When we see a headline that reads, “Boat Sinks, 400 Dead,” we’re alarmed until we notice that it happened in North Korea, or southern Chile. Then we feel bad for a few seconds and go back to eating lunch.
The numbers also affect our response. Fifty thousand human beings buried under earthquake rubble is incomprehensible. We distance ourselves from such tragedy because we don’t know how to cope with it. We may pull out our checkbooks and send a donation, but that’s as close as we’ll get. A single death, especially that of a celebrity, is easier to relate to. We know Amy Winehouse’s name and what she looked like — and if you didn’t before, you do now. Seventy-six people in Norway are dead for no other reason than that they were in a spot their killer chose to attack. We don’t know their names, and even if we hear them tomorrow, we won’t remember them two weeks from now.
Were the deaths in Norway preventable? No. We can’t predict insane acts committed by someone whose previous behavior registers as normal. We might look back after the fact and say, “We should have seen this coming.” But in truth, we couldn’t have. A few people bent on destruction will always call the shots, because only they know what they have planned. Was the single death in London preventable? It’s impossible to know, especially before the actual cause has been determined. For some, life and death become equally appealing, and short of watching them around the clock, there’s no way to know what they’re doing. We’re stunned by both events, not because they’re so uncommon — unfortunately, they aren’t. But they represent yet another reminder that even as most of us try to elude death for as long as we can, others seem to pursue it for themselves, or work to inflict it on others. There appears to be no sense to make of any of it.
But here’s a thought I’ve been having. About a month ago, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge visited the small island province where I live. As in all of the other places they visited in Canada and the US, a huge crowd arrived hours early to catch a ten-second glimpse of the royal newlyweds. Picture it: thousands of people lining the streets to wave and applaud and hold signs and offer gifts to these two young people who, simply by virtue of their birth and relationship, are lavished with attention and love wherever they go. But how much attention and love can anyone absorb? Throw buckets of water on someone until they’re soaked and any subsequent buckets are pretty much wasted. Would it possibly do someone else more good to have a taste of that attention? What if, instead of celebrating the presence of two royal strangers, we all made a little more of an effort to celebrate the people we’re with all the time? Or the people we interact with at the grocery store or the bank? What if we spread the love around a little bit, instead of concentrating so much of it on people who are already getting more than their share? It won’t stop terrorism, and it may not save any individual from death. But it’s almost guaranteed to make someone’s life happier, at least for a moment.
If a few of them can cause so much heartache, couldn’t many of us cause just as much joy?
Melissa
July 27, 2011
Beautifully written. I love the idea: let’s spread the love.
LikeLike
bronxboy55
July 28, 2011
Thank you, Melissa. I think as long as we don’t get carried away with the unworkable notion that everyone has to love everyone else, we can at least make things a little better. The attempt alone would make a difference.
LikeLike
Snoring Dog Studio
July 27, 2011
Last words, in the form of a question … Eloquently said, Charles. We may not be able to prevent the insane actions of the few. Let’s try to hang onto the fact that the majority of fanatics just use their tongues to do evil. It seems to me the media feeds us a regular diet directing us whom to feel sorry for, who should get our rage and disgust. And a great deal of us act in a Pavlovian manner to oblige them. I don’t know how we stop that, but it is worth heeding your words to offer those close to us our attention and respect. Who knows? The little kindness and attention paid to a lonely or troubled soul might just prevent a tragedy.
LikeLike
bronxboy55
July 28, 2011
I wonder how many millions of people have been killed, just in the past hundred years, by other people who didn’t even know why they were doing such a hideous thing. Hatred gets passed from one generation to the next as part of a culture’s traditions. Members of religious sects kill one another, just because they always have. And now we’ve arrived at the point where people are blown up or shot, and there’s no clear goal in mind — not even a pretense of actually accomplishing anything. It’s pure anger, not much different from the pressure created by magma building up under the ground. You’re right, SDS: much of it is fed to us, and we mindlessly eat it up. As souldipper says below, if we’re going to change things, it has to start with each of us.
LikeLike
Melinda
July 27, 2011
I agree on the spread the love around. The tragedy of the youth camp…just shocking and horrible. I immediately tried to picture a mom wondering if her child is alive and just can’t begin to fathom going through that…and all so senseless. Amy Winehouse…as unshocking as it was..is sad considering she really was trying to clean herself up. If anything maybe this will show kids that looked up to her that with drugs… it can all disappear in an instant with one bad choice. I don’t judge why someone would turn to substance abuse without walking a day in their shoes because you just never know what is really happening in their lives. To stay clean she would obviously have had to give up music. Could you make that choice to save your life but give up the most important thing to you? A question to ponder…that would be tough. I think it is easier for people to focus on her because…we don’t know about those poor kids that lost their lives. If they did a story on one of the kid’s life and we knew more about who they were…that puts it on another level of understanding and more personal. I think that is why tragedy that is closer gets more attention. We can visualize it better. Hopefully that made sense. 🙂
LikeLike
bronxboy55
July 28, 2011
I think you’re right, Melinda: it’s easier to focus on one person and take in a lot of related information than it would be to learn a little about many different people. Maybe that’s why our society is so obsessed with celebrities. About the connection between drugs and music, I’ve never really understood that. And is it even valid? There have been many rock stars who have fallen into serious addiction, and there’s a long list who have died from an overdose. At the same time, there may be an even greater number of successful musicians who aren’t involved in drugs and alcohol — it’s just that those stories aren’t newsworthy. Maybe the industry as a whole needs to decide the image isn’t worth the loss, and do more to protect its members.
LikeLike
Carl D'Agostino
July 27, 2011
Proves 160,000 troops in Afghanistan don’t make anyone any safer in any part of the world. Being there under this supposition is a lie. We are there to extend and maintain America’s military empire around the world.
LikeLike
bronxboy55
July 29, 2011
Military strength doesn’t guarantee anyone’s safety, Carl. Julius Caesar found that out the hard way, as did JFK, and a bunch of people in between.
LikeLike
Lenore Diane
July 27, 2011
Excellent piece, Charles.
This afternoon I watched a reality crime show, “The First 48”. The show follows police detectives as they try to solve murders. The episode I watched today revolved around a man shot while outside his apartment smoking a cigarette. The police caught the individuals involved in the crime. Sadly, the criminals merely picked this particular guy – because he was outside and alone. More sadly, the man who died remains a John Doe. He was an immigrant from Honduras, though no one knew his name, and his driver’s license was forged.
My point in sharing the above is the fact that one need not look overseas to find terrorism. I find myself angered with the fact that situations outside our borders (regardless of the border) make the news, while thousands of people die in our own ‘backyard’ every year.
The deaths caused by hurricanes, earthquakes, tsunamis, mudslides, etc. Gut wrenching. And with the internet, the world is so small. With the world so small, we see it all. Every tragic incident. What are we to do? Because while those things make the news – the random crimes in the neighborhoods get little to no attention. Yet a life lost is a life lost – and someone hurts as a result.
Ozzy Osborn’s song Crazy Train includes the lyrics, “The media sells it, and you live the role.” We drive the media; in turn, the media drives us. The media took the attention away from Norway – and switched it to Amy Winehouse. Add social media to the mix, and our attention span decreases, while our desensitization increases.
I’m sorry. I’ll be quiet now. Well, I’ll be quiet after I share good news – turning a spotlight of love to a non-media promoted celebrity …. my 18yr old niece. Today, she completes her 2,100 mile hike along the Appalachian Trail. She made the journey alone.
LikeLike
bronxboy55
July 29, 2011
“Yet a life lost is a life lost – and someone hurts as a result.”
That sums it up, Lenore. I’ve often had that thought while watching movies in which the climax involves something horrendous, like a thirty-vehicle crash. Our eyes are glued to the screen as we hope that, no matter what, the hero is all right. If he climbs out of his car, the dozens of other people who must have been hurt or killed just don’t matter. In fact, their deaths provide that extra contrast we need to feel all the more overjoyed by his survival.
About that happy news: Thank you for this latest update. Please congratulate Adventure Girl for me — and don’t forget the Ben & Jerry’s.
LikeLike
slightlyignorant
July 27, 2011
This is an absolutely fantastic article. I’m so glad I started reading your blog.
Living in Israel, I’ve seen a lot of this kind of skewed media response to different tragedies. One Israeli soldier being kidnapped gets twenty minutes coverage, whereas the death of dozens of Palestinians in the Gaza strip gets five minutes, all of which seem to have an air of “they had it coming.” Is the Israeli soldier’s life unimportant? No, it’s very important. But so are Palestinians’ lives.
Amy Winehouse’s life was important, but no more or less important than the dozens of deaths in Oslo.
I agree completely that larger numbers of dead turn into statistics, whereas the deaths of one or two people with faces who we can see and recognize seems to be something we can understand. Why this is, I have no idea, but it’s a universal truth, I suppose.
LikeLike
bronxboy55
July 29, 2011
I think you’re right. It really bothers me when I see news stories about missing children, and it’s always the adorable, blue-eyed little girls who spark the nationwide search and are profiled on the evening talk shows. Aren’t all missing kids worth the same attention and effort? Or does even tragedy require a certain appeal?
LikeLike
She's a Maineiac
July 27, 2011
“If a few of them can cause so much heartache, couldn’t many of us cause just as much joy?”
Well said. I do believe we can cause as much joy. There are plenty of people out there who are doing that very thing every single day–quietly and with tremendous amounts of love and courage. It just doesn’t make the news. So sad how twisted our society is and that we crave tragedy/celebrity for entertainment. It just multiplies the negativity.
LikeLike
bronxboy55
July 29, 2011
Thank you for the reminder, Darla. Betty Londergan’s blog What Gives 365 profiled hundreds of such people last year. All are doing good and helpful things for others, without publicity and massive funding. They’re definitely out there — but you have to go looking for them.
http://whatgives365.wordpress.com/
LikeLike
Linda Paul
July 27, 2011
“By now we should have realized that these assaults have no right or appropriate place.”
I am no longer shocked by these insanities…or at least I try not to be. I do think, though, that the closer to home that an event like this strikes, the more we feel the impact.
For example, I just learned of the suicide death of a local Olympica athlete. I feel far more devastated by this event than I do about Ms. Winehouse. I know this fellow’s mother. I know virtually nothing about this popular singer.
Tragedy is tragedy no matter where it strikes and who it strikes down. You are absolutely right about spreading the love here and now, where we can and where it really matters.
Thanks for a great and thoughtful post.
LikeLike
bronxboy55
July 29, 2011
“Thoughtful” is exactly the word that comes to my mind when I think about you, Linda. Thanks, as always, for a great response.
LikeLike
Jac
July 27, 2011
I think that those people who lined the streets to see the royal couple were hoping, in some way, that the couple would notice THEM. In their minds, this would make them famous and loved. I think it’s sad. I totally agree about “seeing” and paying attention to, those around us. I try to treat everyone I meet as a royal, because in my worldview, they are every bit as important to the world as the rich and famous. Maybe if more people felt loved and cherished, they wouldn’t develop the mindset of a murderer, terrorist or rapist. Maybe if more people felt loved and cherished, they wouldn’t fall into self-destructive behaviors like abusing drugs or alcohol.
There isn’t a whole heck of a lot that we can do to rid the world of evil (only God can) but we sure can make those around us feel like they are unique and priceless.
LikeLike
bronxboy55
July 30, 2011
Well said, Jac. And there seems to be a consensus about what you’re saying, at least among the small group of people who have commented here. The question is, do we each quietly begin (or continue) to behave in the ways you describe? Or is there something we can do that would be even more effective?
LikeLike
souldipper
July 27, 2011
Yes, yes, a thousand times yes! *Does a dance around the office chair – delighted that Charles wrote about GETTING IT.*
Peace is not out there. Why are we waiting for someone else to do something about peace? It lies within the heart of each one of us. It is up to us to let it out. It is up to us each moment and movement. It does not begin when wars end. It begins with every ME in the world.
It’s so simple that people think only simple people say it.
LikeLike
bronxboy55
July 30, 2011
I agree, Amy. But I think we also need to become less tolerant of war and violence. They seem to be an accepted part of our culture, and as long as the body count isn’t too high and the incidence of crime hasn’t increased too much, we think we’re doing all right.
LikeLike
souldipper
August 14, 2011
Thankfully, Mother Theresa shone a light when she explained that she would not attend an Anti-War rally, but would certainly support a Pro-Peace one. That’s the subtle, but profound influence that our poor ol’ planet needs.
I find Avaaz uses effective strategies. Through electronic petitions we have influenced decisions and instigated some positive results. Partly, it’s because some leaders are actually sensitive to the fact that people all over the world are aware of what they are doing. Partly it’s due to actions such as putting pressure on our Canadian Government to extend oil sanctions on Syria. Which it has agreed to do.
Apathy needs to be healed, not have it’s behind spanked while it’s head is in the sand.
LikeLike
Priya
July 28, 2011
It is raining again outside. Unfortunately, like all the other times, its significance will be lost to most experiencing it. Some will grumble about the inconvenience it brings, most will have no time for it.
We spend most of our lives in a state of being “stoned”, Charles — in a state no better than a stone. The Amy Winehouses, Anders Breiviks, Catherine Middletons and Diana Spencers around us are just means for an escape from terrible realities that haunt our lives — indeed, they or the things that happen to them are good opportunities to say to ourselves “Gosh, I am better!” I suppose that is why most journals and newspapers are filled with the unnecessary – because the unnecessary is in demand.
But then, I digress.
The world, as we knew it a while back, is crumbling. And there is no denying that. Yesterday, my husband and I were talking about how there is at least one new story everyday in the news about minds enslaved by madness. The dams are breaking everyday, the so-called safe havens are getting inundated with the cloistered, hitherto hidden stresses of such a strange world we’ve created.
Yet, there is hope.
And you have pointed it out so well. The only hope that’s left in the world is, as Amy says, with every ME’s initiative to recognise the peace that lives inside the heart. There is no other solution.
LikeLike
Priya
July 28, 2011
Well, after all my ranting above, I realised there is a link I could’ve given you that expresses it more succinctly.
http://partialview.wordpress.com/?attachment_id=193
LikeLike
bronxboy55
July 30, 2011
Some things deserve elaboration and repetition, Priya, and I think this is one of them. Your philosophy is just what we need — a strong dose of reality and clear vision, accompanied by an undying sense of hope. And the post whose link you provided is a perfectly succinct reminder of this. Will we wake up in time?
LikeLike
magsx2
July 28, 2011
Hi,
Very well written and well thought out. What happened in Norway, nobody could of predicted. You can never predict or know what a person like this is going to do, and my heart and prayers go out to all the Family’s and Friends of the victims. Such a very, very sad day indeed.
My heart also goes out to those children that escaped this horrific nightmare they went through, and I really hope that they are never too scared to leave home again, and can get on with their lives as best they can. Also those people that escaped the bombing, a terrible event to have to go through.
“If a few of them can cause so much heartache, couldn’t many of us cause just as much joy?”
Very well said and yes I believe this to be true.
LikeLike
bronxboy55
July 30, 2011
No matter how positive we try to be, you have to know there will likely be another such event — or something equally horrible — in the near future. And for what? These acts accomplish nothing. That’s what makes me think terrorism isn’t really about anything — it’s just an excuse for violent people to behave violently.
LikeLike
ALIVE aLwaYz
July 28, 2011
What happened in Norway was something quite unexpected, that place ranked high in every happiness chart there is!
Another hit star died, there’s nothing new to that but still hanging in there, for the cause is still unknown.
You’re right, there’s no way to predict things of this nature, some people are indeed pets to their adamant thoughts and unapproved approaches. It’s high time we understand what matters, one cannot prioritize what news channels prioritize, they are doing business and for sure, a widely recognized celebrity is sure to generate more viewership than a sunken boat in some small town.
Our participation indeed is limited to some donations, may be primarily because we aren’t there, our understanding of a tragedy is quite dependent on whether we have faced it. Tell a tsunami survivor and he might relate but to others it’s just another 100 people who they did not know.
LikeLike
bronxboy55
July 30, 2011
Your points are well stated. There’s so much suffering going on every minute of every day, we see and hear about only a small sliver of it. You have to wonder how the media decide which sliver to report.
Thanks for the comment.
LikeLike
Val
July 28, 2011
“We know Amy Winehouse’s name and what she looked like — and if you didn’t before, you do now. Seventy-six people in Norway are dead for no other reason than that they were in a spot their killer chose to attack. We don’t know their names, and even if we hear them tomorrow, we won’t remember them two weeks from now.”
I think this is the main thing, Charles – that we don’t know their names, so to many people they aren’t ‘real people’. And Amy Winehouse who was a ‘celebrity’ was known. People often attach themselves in some way to people online (and it’s actually not just to the very well known, you must have experienced this to a degree yourself since you’ve been blogging, I know I have: people know your name, your style and therefore think after reading just a few posts that they know you in person.)
If we knew the names and something about the people who died in Norway, things would be different. Ditto people who die in wars – any wars, all over the world. That’s why there are monuments to the deadwith engraved names? To turn the dead back into the people, the individuals they were.
Good post, Charles – a subject that needs to be talked about.
LikeLike
bronxboy55
July 30, 2011
I agree, Val. The Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington is a powerful monument because it reminds us that the men and women who were killed in that war had names — and families and friends who grieve for them.
LikeLike
Earth Ocean Sky Redux
July 28, 2011
Life for me is all about hope. Hope that I never have to experience the horrors that the Norwegians just went through. Hope that those in the limelight find a way to cope with celebrity without falling prey to life’s demons. Hope that the love I feel for my family never ebbs. Hope that friends around me who are having woes find peace. Emily Dickinson says it best:
Hope” is the thing with feathers
Hope is the thing with feathers –
That perches in the soul –
And sings the tune without the words –
And never stops – at all –
And sweetest – in the Gale – is heard –
And sore must be the storm –
That could abash the little Bird
That kept so many warm –
I’ve heard it in the chillest land –
And on the strangest Sea –
Yet – never – in Extremity,
It asked a crumb – of me.
Emily Dickinson, Hope is the Thing with Feathers from The Complete Poems of Emily Dickinson
LikeLike
bronxboy55
July 30, 2011
Emily Dickinson’s poem does say it very well, EOS. But then, so did you. Your words convey a real concern for others, and that’s what we need.
LikeLike
Allan Douglas
July 28, 2011
A very thought provoking post, Charles. There was a time when worries about ICBMs and large cities being “first strike” missle targets caused Marie and I to want very much to move to a less populated area. And we did, but not (solely) for that reason. I wonder if being in a large crowd now triggers those same feelings in people, “a terrorist could take out a lot of people here today.” It gives one pause for thought as these things become more common and are so unpredictable.
I very much like your closing thoughts, though, especially, “What if, instead of celebrating the presence of two royal strangers, we all made a little more of an effort to celebrate the people we’re with all the time? ” Applause, applause!
LikeLike
bronxboy55
July 30, 2011
I remember the anxiety surrounding the World Series in 2001, and then the Super Bowl a few months later. Both events are symbols of American culture, and seemed likely targets for subsequent attacks. And that’s part of terrorism’s power: it can put people through an emotional wringer and cause a lot of extra expense in terms of work, money, and time — all without doing a thing.
LikeLike
Jess Witkins
July 28, 2011
What a well written thought provoking post Charles. I was so saddened to learn about the shootings in Norway. I understand why so many of us all feel our priorities are off track. Another blog I read on the killings asked the question why the media placed so much attention on the killer, by sharing things like his journal entries? Doesn’t it give him infamy and attention that should be given to the potential of the victim’s lives. As a community, why do we rally around the gory details and insight of the killer versus the support the families of the victims and celebrate their lives as much as we can? Isn’t it interesting? I don’t know the answer, but I’m glad we’re talking about it. Thank you for posting this.
LikeLike
bronxboy55
August 1, 2011
I suppose we could give ourselves the benefit of the doubt and claim we pay so much attention to the killers because we need to understand what motivated them, in order to prevent future tragedies. If that’s the case, we don’t seem to have made much progress.
LikeLike
Margaret Reyes Dempsey
July 28, 2011
“What if, instead of celebrating the presence of two royal strangers, we all made a little more of an effort to celebrate the people we’re with all the time? Or the people we interact with at the grocery store or the bank?”
I was having similar thoughts the other day while I was walking. It was early in the morning, I was tired, and I didn’t want to be working out. But then someone flashed a big smile and shouted “beautiful day.” It perked me up and reminded me of other times when I was running, ready to drop dead, and someone’s greeting gave me the extra energy I needed to continue on. I now make an effort to greet everyone that crosses my path when I’m out exercising, in an attempt to pay the “perk” forward. This was a big step for me as a New Yorker since I wasn’t accustomed to greeting people on the street.
I’ve also noticed the improvement in mood when a cashier or sales person goes a step beyond the standard grunt and actually tries to provide service with a smile. Once again, if more of us were reciprocating, the people behind us in line would have a better experience as well. We truly are potential generators of positive energy. I think sometimes we don’t realize the power we possess.
LikeLike
bronxboy55
August 1, 2011
I’ve worked for companies in which everyone’s mood each day seemed to be determined by the boss’s mood. Imagine a hundred employees going home after a miserable day and spreading that feeling to their spouses, parents, or children, and then the ripple effect from there. Again, an individual causing a lot of suffering. If everyone at least tried to adopt your attitude, Margaret, we could begin to get the snowball rolling the other way.
LikeLike
Margie
July 28, 2011
As a civilization we constantly seek people who can teach us how to be better. In the past we called these people heroes. Most cultures today can’t name any wonderful heroes doing great and good things. At best they have celebrities – athletes and entertainers mostly – who become the people the public aspires to be like. Are there no real heroes anymore, or are we just not looking for them?
If we want to break out of this mold, WE have to BE the media that finds and celebrates all the real heroes among us. We have to turn our backs on the people and events that don’t deserve the publicity they get.
LikeLike
Snoring Dog Studio
July 28, 2011
Margie – that was a wonderful comment. So beautifully said. It’s a request that we all should be able to get behind.
LikeLike
bronxboy55
August 1, 2011
I agree. It’s interesting that most of the people we now look up to live in forty-room mansions behind walls and gates — we worship them and they hide from us. You’re right, Margie. Maybe the real heroes have been scared off, and we all need to step in and fill the gap.
LikeLike
writerwoman61
July 28, 2011
I love this post, Charles! So many horrible things are happening in the world today…most of them are something I can’t do anything about! I choose to help the folks I interact with in my own life…they appreciate it, and it makes me feel good!
Wendy
LikeLike
bronxboy55
August 1, 2011
But what you’re doing seems to be the only answer, Wendy. Individually, it seems like so little; collectively, it can change a lot of things for the better.
LikeLike
shoreacres
July 29, 2011
One thread that seems to connect the Royals, Amy Winehouse and the Norwegian intent on murder and mayhem is our media-saturated society. When Andy Warhol said in ’68 that “in the future, everyone will be famous for fifteen minutes”, he surely couldn’t have envisioned the ferociousness of the paparazzi, the 24/7 news cycle or the banal twitterings of people who seem to fear no one will remember they exist if bulletins about their broccoli-buying or book reading aren’t published on an hourly basis. And I suspect he would have seriously underestimated the effect of a constant barrage of – well, whatever it is – streaming out over the airwaves and the web.
We live in a world where it’s increasingly difficult to separate fantasy from reality – and the beauty of what you suggest is that real connections with real people may be just what is needed to pull us back into real life.
LikeLike
bronxboy55
August 1, 2011
We may have to hit bottom first, Linda, before we realize where we’ve been and begin to head in the other direction. The flaw in this theory, for me, is that I thought we hit bottom a long time ago.
LikeLike
An Idealist Thinker
July 29, 2011
Now I know why I subscribed to your blog.
And I am glad that I did.
Look forward to reading more from you.
LikeLike
bronxboy55
August 1, 2011
Thanks for the comment, AIT. I recently visited your blog, too, and liked what I read. Your writing is honest and sincere.
http://anidealistthinker.wordpress.com/
LikeLike
An Idealist Thinker
August 4, 2011
Thanks again for the vote of confidence, Charles. As much I would like to think that i am here just for me, a thumbs up from serious bloggers like you does mean a lot.
Earlier, I didn’t have anything new to say to your post that hadn’t already been said in all the comments here. But yesterday, i read something in the newspaper that i felt deserved a mention here.
‘No one can terrorise a whole nation, unless we are all his accomplices’ – Edward R. Murrow
I thought this sentence captures the essence of what everyone is saying here.. about spreading the love, not fear. Though, I admit i was a bit cynical after the recent blasts in Bombay/ Mumbai (India) when the media reported how everyone was back to work the very next day. Nowhere was there a dip in attendance, not the offices, schools or colleges. I kept wondering why can’t they take the time to mourn, take the time to feel like this was not right (because it wasn’t), take the time to do something that would make sure it doesn’t happen again. Then i saw a man (on his way to work) being interviewed the day after the blasts and he said, ‘If the terrorists’ plan was to strike fear into our hearts and make us stop living our lives, then they have failed.’ (Behind him, i saw children walking by themselves to school. Even though i couldn’t imagine letting my 5-year old do that.)
Then suddenly, all these quotes & visuals connected in my head. The terrorists succeed only if WE let them. In our minds.
( Of course, its easier said than done. Since i was the first one to jump up and call all my relatives in bombay to find out if they are safe. And then proceeded to tell them to stay put indoors for as long as they could.. transferred my fear onto them. )
LikeLike
bronxboy55
August 8, 2011
When I read that quote about “the terrorists’ plan,” I again had the distinct feeling that they have no plan. I don’t believe anymore that the killing and destruction are attempts to accomplish anything. I think these people just like to do what they’re doing, and are hiding behind the flimsy excuse that they’re seeking justice, or something equally noble. If they truly had a plan, they would have seen a long time ago that it isn’t working, and would have begun to modify it.
LikeLike
An Idealist Thinker
August 9, 2011
Maybe they don’t have a plan.
Then again, maybe they have modified it.. not the plan, the goal. ( from whatever it was before to generating fear…. speculating! )
LikeLike
cooperstownersincanada
July 29, 2011
A very moving piece, Charles, and I agree with the message. Thanks for writing this.
LikeLike
bronxboy55
August 1, 2011
There’s no escaping this stuff, Kevin. Even the world of baseball, once a way to escape the pain of real life, is tinged with tragedy on a regular basis.
LikeLike
Marie
July 29, 2011
Quite timely, very well said, and so important for more people to read and take to heart. Thank you.
And couldn’t you consider submitting a thoughtful and thought-provoking piece like this to The New York Times or another influential outlet read by thousands of people? Your message is important enough to make available to the rest of the world.
LikeLike
bronxboy55
August 1, 2011
Thank you for saying so, Marie. I’m sure this topic has been well covered. My fear is that I’ll be expressing the same ideas after the next catastrophe — with little or no action (on my part) in between. Without a real change in behavior, the words are useless.
LikeLike
Marie
August 5, 2011
Point 1: Well covered or not, the topic bears repeating, and your take on it just might be what an editor needs in his/her publication the day he/she reads it.
Point 2: I think I understand your fear, but I suspect you may be discounting your power to move others to action. So I have two suggestions to alleviate that fear: find some action to take that will lead to a change in your behavior, or recognize that having expressed these sentiments–thereby encouraging others to act lovingly, as you have done here–is itself the action you’ve already taken.
If you come up with another reason [read: “excuse” : > ) ] for not sending out this or an essay like this, I will simply tell you that it is your duty to humanity to give people the chance to reflect on your thoughts on this topic. So there!
LikeLike
Jessica Sieghart
August 1, 2011
I think there’s several reasons. As terrible as it sounds, it’s “easier” to focus on the death of a celebrity. I doubt anyone really worshipped Amy Winehouse, but as an individual, she is identifiable, we already know about her life, her struggles, etc and we also know “why” she’s gone. When you are familiar with someone, it’s more personal. It’s almost impossible to reconcile why these mass murderers do what they do and why someone would just go into a place and start shooting. The horror is almost inconceivable and when the victims are faceless and nameless to us, I think it’s just easier (or maybe even necessary for continued survival and living) to focus more toward the things we can comprehend. It sounds bad, but I think if the mind didn’t do this, we’d all be housebound in fear.
LikeLike
bronxboy55
August 3, 2011
I might be mistaken, Jessica, but I think you once mentioned that one of the more infamous serial killers of recent years lived just a few blocks from you. Did you know any of his victims? If so, what was it like to read and hear so many details about the murderer, while the people he murdered were treated as little more than statistics? Is there a better way to handle such horrible events? (If you’d prefer to answer these questions with a blog post or column, I think you’d have a lot of interested readers.) (And if I completely imagined that whole serial killer memory, then never mind.)
http://mortongrove.patch.com/users/jessica-sieghart
LikeLike
icedteawithlemon
August 2, 2011
This one tugged at my heartstrings. Of all the posts you’ve written, this may have to be deemed my favorite (and it has some very tough competition). Thank you for so beautifully expressing a sentiment that I so firmly believe in–spreadin’ the love. I will try to do my part.
LikeLike
bronxboy55
August 3, 2011
I’m glad you liked the post, Iced Tea. But something tells me you’ve been doing your part all along.
LikeLike
Damyanti
August 3, 2011
An inspiring piece, one that seems especially relevant now that I’ve begun a correspondence with a group of kids I’ve never met. We exchange words, pictures, colors. They come from a background where a lot of those things are in short supply. I agree with you…let’s spread the love.
LikeLike
bronxboy55
August 3, 2011
Wherever those kids are, they’re lucky to have connected with someone like you. I’m sure you’re helping to change their world, probably in ways you don’t even know about.
LikeLike
Ray Colon
August 3, 2011
Hi Charles,
There are always those who use tragedies such as what happened in Norway to forward a political point of view. “See, this is the result of right-wing extremism,” is how it usually goes. But you’re right, we cannot see this type of violence coming with any certainty. Terrorists have it over on us, and they always will. The randomness of the attacks are an integral part of the terror package. But terrorists are not the only ones who gain their strength from it as is evident by laws like the Patriot Act which strips away rights and passed easily, in large part, because of the same fear you speak of.
I don’t understand the fascination that so many have with celebrities. I’m a fan of many things, but there’s a big difference between going to the ballpark or to the movies to be entertained and the crowd gathering that occurs from a royal visit. Perhaps it’s all part of the escapism for some, but I can’t relate. I don’t even follow celebrities on Twitter. I don’t know why anyone does. Instead, I get a better sense of connectedness from following people who I can interact with, as opposed to using it as just another way to be exposed to celebrity commercials.
I agree that we should lavish those around us with attention. I recently mentioned someone on my blog, and even if that mention does not garner any additional views of her writing, she was thrilled. I felt great too.
A celebrity wouldn’t have cared less.
Ray
LikeLike
bronxboy55
August 8, 2011
Thank you, Ray. It’s always great to meet someone who thinks against the grain. I bet the people around you appreciate it, too.
LikeLike
Betty Londergan
August 3, 2011
Wow — SO many comments, Charles!! Congratulations on that!! (and I’m thrilled at the shout-out for my blog in your response, too — thanks!!) I love the way you write and how you manage to take current events and through your thoughtfulness and compassion, bring them into coherent perspective — and offer a ray of optimism, too.I specially enjoyed the image of Will & Kate as soaked to the skin & brim in love and admiration — and your suggestion that we spread some of that love around.
Oddly, I think that fame (or garnering the impassioned love of others through no fault of your own) must be quite a curse — although in our reality TV world, it seems everybody is striving for it. But if there is one thing my project last year taught me is that it is truly those who give who receive… blessings heaped up, pressed down, and flowing over. And letting more love loose in the world is really the only antidote to evil, of which we seem to have an unending supply. Violence and hatred can be utterly random (remember the D.C. sniper??) but love is personal and intentional … oooh, I feel like it’s the 60s again!
LikeLike
bronxboy55
August 8, 2011
I remember the DC sniper all too well, Betty. Imagine a bunch of people out there randomly shooting goodness at others. But then, you don’t have to imagine it — you spent a year telling us about that very thing.
LikeLike
Amiable Amiable
August 7, 2011
As Kevin said, a very moving piece.
You can imagine how saddened I was about the news from Norway. What angers me now is the amount of attention that Breivik will receive and bask in. Sickening. I would like to think that Casey Anthony isn’t basking in her attention – until the book is written or the movie is made, but it all falls into the same media sensationalism category.
Whether it’s something as horrific as either of these examples, or a natural disaster as the earthquake in Italy, people become desensitized by media saturation. “We may pull out our checkbooks and send a donation, but that’s as close as we’ll get.” Well said, Charles. Or we may shake our heads about Amy Winehouse for the sake of seeming in the loop, but that’s the extent of it. How many of those people shaking their heads could really care or do something about the actual problem – drug addiction? Which leads me to … hang in there, this comment might make sense eventually …
“If a few of them can cause so much heartache, couldn’t many of us cause just as much joy?” This makes me think that, while I don’t dismiss charitable giving at all (I’m pursuing a career in fundraising and support several non-profit organizations!), as a volunteer (DC Central Kitchen, Big Brothers/Big Sisters, The Fresh Air Fund), there is nothing like the joy on the face of a person in need connecting with a volunteer who cares about them; nor the joy on a volunteer’s face who is making that personal connection with someone less fortunate. Couldn’t the hours some people invested in watching Casey Anthony’s trial, for example, have been better spent personally making a difference in the life of someone in their community who was far more deserving of attention? So, what am I trying to say? I guess that volunteering in our own backyards is one way to spread the joy.
Kind of rambling here. I guess that’s a result of trying to make sense out of these things. (And I was going to try to write a brief comment for once!)
LikeLike
bronxboy55
August 8, 2011
You’re right, AA. We could all do so much good with just a fraction of the time we waste on empty pursuits and pointless curiosity about celebrities. I’d like to hear more about your new career.
I thought about you right after hearing of this lunacy in Norway. As we’ve had to keep saying so many times over the past decade, it can happen anywhere.
LikeLike
Brown Sugar Britches
August 15, 2011
love it, Charles.
LikeLike
bronxboy55
August 16, 2011
Welcome back, Tanisha. And thank you for the comment. Your opinion means a lot.
LikeLike
lovesripening
October 16, 2011
I think we don’t realize at times the extent to which we are desensitized to the plight of others. I grew up in NYC and still live there. I even lived in the Bronx for a bit, and there is an unspoken of code that unless its you (of one of your family or friends) being hurt or cursed at or mistreated to keep one head straight into one’s own business.
I think this is partly based in our history as a country where the many immigrants group who came stayed clustered together for the sake of familiarity and protection from the antagonism of the locals.
I think we have become set in the antediluvian view of us versus them. Which also goes back to our nations history as seen in the genocide of the Natives, the institutionalization of slavery among other things. We lose ourselves in the rhetoric we are feed through media outlets. I remember the sense of fraternity and togetherness on 9/11 of people of all cultures. Then I remember innocents Muslims and Arabs being beaten up because they had become “them” this enemy of ours.
I think I will stop there. Great post though really nice writing style
Dave
LikeLike
bronxboy55
October 20, 2011
I think people get overwhelmed with the sheer number of problems and at some point decide they just can’t do anything about them. I think the trick is to shrink our focus. Instead of trying to take in the whole world, the whole country, or even the whole city, we should try to deal with just our immediate environment. There’s usually more than enough there that needs attention. Thanks for the comment, Dave.
LikeLike
perspectivesandprejudices
October 18, 2011
I loved the last few lines and the idea of spreading the joy 🙂
LikeLike
bronxboy55
October 20, 2011
It may be easier said than done, just because so many of us would have to form new habits. But after that, who knows?
LikeLike