If suddenly the media had started displaying pictures of nooses before the Jena 6 incident, many different people and cultures may have received it differently. It is hard to make an educated guess how one would analyze a picture that could convey several different meanings, without knowing what the individual has been exposed to. Personally even before the Jena 6, I viewed nooses as a negative image that mainly connected with the slavery period in America, because that’s what I have been exposed to for so many years in the media and in textbooks. Therefore, I certainly understand the argument from the organizer of the protest when he stated, "Now when you turn on the TV, you see nooses hanging everywhere. And it all started in Jena." Yes, I agree the recent media flare up and hate messages with the nooses started in Jena but that particular hate message from the nooses started way before then. The Jena 6 incident only brought the image to the forefront for several citizens to relive again, and for many to experience first hand for the first time.
Lippmann stated in his proposal that, "Pictures have always been the surest way of conveying an idea .... But the idea conveyed is not fully our own until we have identified ourselves with some aspect of the picture." His proposal clearly suggests that the protest organizer’s argument is valid. When one turns on the TV now and see nooses hanging everywhere, for majority of the public who is knowledgeable about the incident, they are going to instantly connect that image with Jena 6. Same goes for others who were indirectly affected by the incident. Regardless that one was exposed to this indecent behavior against their will or not, he or she can now identify themselves with some aspect of the picture, in which before hand they may have drawn ideas from previous knowledge they were depicted about the image.
The students who hung the nooses may not have necessarily intended to actually try to use the nooses. Hypothetically, they could have just been trying to intimidate the other students or make them feel inferior so that they would not sit under the tree again. They probably didn’t expect a physical reaction, but the fact that the victims did take it to a physical level indicates that the aspect of the image they identified themselves with was hate related and offensive. The immediate take over from the media of the incident allowed others to identify themselves with pictures in the same manner. Therefore; yes, "Now when you turn on the TV, you see nooses hanging everywhere….” Yes it did start in Jena.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
If those who used the noose as a symbol of intimidation did not actually intend to harm others, might it also be true that those at whom the image was directed didn't actually imagine themselves being harmed? If that is true, where does the image's power lie? That is, if I don't believe you'll actually carry out the threat suggested by the image, why should I be intimidated?
I see your point. I was thinking more along the lines that it was a cowardly effort to intimidate others by the students who hung the noose. I do not think they would have actually been bold enough to physically approach the victims or try to start a physical altercation with them. The victims may or may not figured that those who hung the noose would physically attack them, but they clearly saw it as a threat which led them to take defense. I feel that the image is powerful in the manner that it not only caused an uproar in the town of Jena, but it affected people across the nation.
Post a Comment