As I read Cohen’s essay on Monster Culture, I was very interested in how Cohen successfully delineates a number of notable events in history and describes a monster of that time period. After seeing his examples of monsters throughout history and reflecting back on the sample essays use of the terrorist as a monster, it seems undeniable that monsters play a key role in society.
Looking back on the last few days of the election and its exciting conclusion, I began to wonder if there was a monster to be found in this historic time in our nation. My mind automatically drifted back to the controversial cover of the New Yorker. I remember the time surrounding that publication, on in which all the misconceptions that Obama is a Muslim seemed true and legitimate. I also linked it to the fact that days before the election, 60% of Texans were under the impression that Obama was a Muslim. In the end it didn’t prevent him from winning, but it did help spur these misconceptions.
As for a solid monster figure, I couldn’t really come up with one. Though the campaign was lengthy and filled with epithets and recurring characters like Joe Six Pack and Joe the Plumber that were meant to represent the average American, I couldn’t find one figure that constituted a monster the way Cohen describes it. One thing that did strike me was the significance and large role that terrorism continues to play. National security was still a top issue in this election and the candidates did use vague phrases like “take them out” to calm the nations fears on a national security strike.
My question for you then is: Is the monster of the Terrorist still alive in our society today as it was eight years ago? Were there any monsters that played a major part in this election? How do monsters shape elections and outcomes? Finally, how do covers like the New Yorker help legitimize monsters, misconceptions, and ignorance?
6 comments:
I don't know if the New Yorker cover legitimized these misconceptions as much as it mocked their inanity. But at any rate, it certainly confirmed the presence of the monstrous terrorist figure as an ever-present player in American consciousness. No matter how ludicrous are such suggestions as that Michelle Obama employs a "terrorist fist jab," people's thought processes can be distorted by the invocation of the monster by those interests that can benefit by creating one. Monsters not only affect major societal events such as elections, but, as recent events have shown us, they can become the most important factors. The abstract concept of "the terrorist" and its supposed potential to do harm to the American people was a huge reason that John "Soft on Terrorism" Kerry lost the 2004 election. An equally difficult-to-define and large-scale concept could be given some credit for Obama's recent victory. The monster does indeed dwell on the border of existing and understanding, and it is this uncertainty that makes the monster such a potentially useful political tool. Monsters simplify and excite, making them perfect input for a modern media that often prefers to give its audience dumbed-down representations (such as Joe the Plumber).
The Terrorist monster is certainly still alive. Besides health care and the economy, the War in Iraq and the war on terrorism were major concerns. For much of the time McCain had an edge, but interestingly, by the end of the campaigns polls showed McCain and Obama as even. Still, I know several people who voted for McCain because they thought that Obama would not be aggressive enough militarily and that if he were elected we would surely see a rise in terrorism and Israel would be done for.
To answer your first question, I would have to say that the monster of the Terrorist is definitely alive today and it played a huge part in the elections. A small, often overlooked example of this "monster culture" appeared during the primaries when a photograph of Barack Obama wearing a traditional headdress was published as "evidence" for his Muslim beliefs. For argument sake, let's ignore the ridiculousness of the claim and look at why it affected voters. In an ideal world, one free of the "Terrorist monster," this "evidence" would have had no weight. It wouldn't have matter if Obama was Muslim. But, subconsciously or consciously for some, the concept of being Muslim means terror. This is a perfect depiction of the monster at work.
Other monsters played major parts as Hilary Clinton was mocked for "feminist intentions" and then dismissed as a joke when she broke down crying at a primary conference. Although humorous, parodies and cartoons about Clinton and Obama spoke volumes about the public fear of breaking social norms and electing a progressive president. People feared a candidate that existed on the "gates of difference."
Covers like that on the New Yorker are the prime median for this monster culture. Regardless of what we would like to believe, human beings are often simple in their perception and reaction. Without even knowing it, we react positively or negatively to the images and sounds that our surrounding present. The media plays a large role in deceptively shaping the minds of the US, and building the monsters that often blind us from reality.
Besides the Terrorists/Islamic Extremists/Islamofascists/whatever else Bill O'Reilly's calling them now, there were not any monsters on this campaign trail like those described by Cohen. Certainly the sample essay does a great job of identifying and describing the terrorist monster and how it follows Cohen's theories, so much so that there's not much left to talk about on that monster. The only other monsters left are Sexism and Racism.
Far from Cohen's embodied monsters, Sexism and Racism were the only other sources of fear in this election. During my senior year of high school, I had the pleasure of listening to various classmates complain about the consequences of having a female president, or high likelihood of the assassination of a black president. To say I was appalled, flabbergasted, distraught, or any combination of the three would be the understatement of the year. These are obviously the same people who believed and still believe that Hilary is the devil reincarnated and Obama is a Muslim terrorist in league with Osama Bin Laden. (If these people having the right to vote does not scare you, then you have a stronger heart and mind than I do.)
Both monsters are born of a ludicrous fear of any slight deviation from the norm. Thankfully this fear persists in a small segment of our nation, but it cannot be ignored. You cannot simply escape from its victims as I have tried because they will persist indefinitely in your mind. Instead we must educate and prove to them that the four horsemen are not coming by anytime soon.
I wanted to take a moment to answer this post, despite the fact that it's a few months after, the issue still resonates with out country today.
I think now more than ever, with a world still faced with al Qaeda and other known terrorist groups seeking to undermine democracy and freedom, people are still hammered to fear the prospect of another attack on the United States or even elsewhere. With the most recent attacks in Mumbai however, the dynamic has drastically changed. What the Mumbai terrorists tried to accomplish was intimidate and instill fear in not only the Indian population but any and all Western tourists in that country at the time. We know that Americans and British nationals were specifically targeted by the terrorists. By personifying the "monster" that everyone fears, people will be afraid to even leave the States, fearing for their lives in foreign countries because they are simply American citizens. I would argue however that we cannot give in to this dynamic. We cannot allow ourselves to live in such fear and terror, for to do so is allow our enemies unchecked victory. We can overcome these "monsters" and we are capable of living in a world without such fear.
Post a Comment