Sureyyya Evren writes:
"Torture and Its Show"
Sureyyya Evren
It is a known fact that children unable to feel pain tend to die early and require an extra diligent care. Painlessness is not a gift but a disguised curse for them.
On the other hand, the painless adult is usually imagined as a fantasy, a super power. In some adventure novels and movies, we see characters who went through a certain operation with their nerve system so that they do not feel pain anymore, they usually find themselves in most dreadful tasks and because they are painless, it is not possible to torture them. Painlessness is introduced as a kind of superhuman peculiarity. But even in these stargazing of painless superhumans, painless person has a sufferer side; for example 'they' use him as a hit man, a homicide, always on the front line in most difficult tasks, and then 'they' throw him away. When he gets kidnapped, 'enemies' operate new techniques to find his weak point. In a way, you feel like his humanity has gone with his sense of pain. You can be insensitive to him, as much as you are afraid of him. It is difficult to feel pity for him, his senselessness and dehumanization makes him away from good and bad. Painless hero is like a robot-man, far away as an android –and wasn't this tragedy, one of the strong themes of Blade Runner?But because of this bizarreness, in a given society and time, the existence of a painless human can turn into a vaudeville show. A known example, lies in the story of Edward H. Gibson. He was born in Prague. When he was seven, he was struck in the skull with a lathing-hatchet. It stuck in so deeply that he ran home, about fifty yards, where his father removed it. He felt no discomfort at the time, he said, except for a headache lasting several days. Mostly, however, he lived a life immune from the normal electrochemical penalties that flesh is heir to.
He used to know what pain is until he was seven but he didn't feel pain after.
Just on the opposite side, we see an ordinary torture victim, who knows and remembers what it is not to feel pain but at that very moment being tortured.
Anyway, painless Gibson, tried to figure out what he can get from this ‘ability’ and he decided to take his unique place in the American entertainment industry, and soon marked his name in the history of American show world as The Human Pincushion, Edward H. Gibson. During the 1920’s, he spent almost two years on the American vaudeville stage. Twice each day, clad only in shorts, Gibson would walk on stage and ask a man in the audience to stick pins in him anywhere except the abdomen and groin. Some fifty or sixty pins –carefully sterilized- would be inserted up to their heads. Then, still in the presence of the audience, Gibson would methodically pull them out, one by one. This forgotten spectacle in the history of American entertainment lasted for some nineteen months.
The crucial point of his show was that there was no illusion. No gimmick, no trick. The absence of illusion in the show of painlessness, was not likely to win him many admirers.
Gibson marked the early stages of modern show business with a show where real torture is becoming a show with the participation of the audience.
Gibson, wanted to take it further, and as a special stunt Gibson planned a re-enactment of the Crucifixion. He prepared a rough cross and four gold-plated spikes with sharp points. On the appointed day, the Human Pincushion spread his arms against the wooden cross. A man with a sledgehammer drove the first spike through the palm of Gibson’s hand –at which point a woman in the audience fainted dead away.
May be this was his competition with his God as a painless human, or a bridge of pain, from being mortal to being prophet, and to God -or it was just the 'next step'.<
BR>Painless man Gibson, this strange ‘freak or outsider’, have been a show element in U.S. stages.
Also, the insensitivity to moral pain, have been considered as a kind of ‘abnormality’. And was used as a legitimating ground to many people and many societies for attacking others who are so barbaric that they do not have a sensibility for moral pain. With their incurable immoralities, 'others' deserve, even need an occupation.
But the civilisation theory of the modern Western world, set up a progressing scheme for this. And placed the shameless others in the lowest level, as backwards, old cultures without self-control. Many Eurocentric writers condemned their own past –medieval Europe-, native people and cultures outside Europe for not feeling enough shame and being primitive, undeveloped.
These were people who behave more publicly in things like nakedness, sexuality, urinating and such. People of medieval Europe or people of 'uncivilized societies', were found childish with this perspective. Norbert Elias, suggested that emotional structure and conscious of these uncivilized people are childish because they are repeating the processes civilized people passed before in history. According to this linear speculation, the truth of civilized societies was the truth of uncivilized societies which have not been realized yet.
Shame, could only be seen in a very high level of culture. Suppressing sexual compulsions, do not exist in human nature and are gained by progressed culture .
This theory is used in legitimating colonisational practices and slavery, saying that they were the purpose was to civilize the shameless. These shameless foreigners were representing a very early stage of human progress with their primitive body politics lacking self-control. And occupation was without any debate a good way to guide them for learning to get shamed and to self-control.
Baghdad, the city of harems and fantasies of Arabian nights, was a target of this approach many times before.
But this time, as the prison abuse events in Abu Ghraib pointed, the notion of shame threshold, is used on the opposite way of legitimization.
It is the same way, because we witness same occupation politics, same linear scheme, same “follow me, I am a champion!” sticker; but today, the meaning of getting ashamed works the other way around.
Some U.S. consultants analyzing Iraq and Arabs come to the conclusion that Arabians are too much conservative in sexuality. Sexuality, and especially homophobia were their vulnerable aspects. They decided to use these weak points in interrogations. And concentrated on humiliating scenes with a sexual character. With the torture fantasies applied in Abu Ghraib, U.S. forces created nearly a one-to-one harmony with pornographic images. Peeing scene, woman holding the leash of a man, underwear on a face for smelling, a group of naked men on each other, were familiar sex (and also porn) possibilities for a civilized citizen.
Now, the scale was upside down; shamelessness or lack of self-control was not among symptoms of primitiveness. Instead, extreme shame, and overcontrol, were read as symptoms of primitiveness. U.S. soldiers, say at that specific scene of holding the leash, were not humiliating Iraqi detainees just by holding the leash, but also by implying that they are backward primitives who do not understand from contemporary sex and who can get too much hurt because of simple sexual acts. In a way, an obvious sign of primitiveness was seen in not being able to create a harmony with the new shame culture of post-sexual revolution societies.
There used to be an illusionary, orientalist image of 'harems' of Baghdad, four wives one man, fantastic orgies and baths for joy and satisfaction, women who volunteer for being sex slaves, lazy and always hard men, power relations used just for having a high time, a dazzling picture of these uncivilized people. Later, thanks to the Western modernization, they, although with very slow steps, but at least managed partly, to start to get civilized. Modernization showed the way of one man one wife, the way of modern everyday life, inalienable women rights. And instead of sex addicted leisure times, a working culture was imposed with an orderly sexual life. More control, more shame, more civilisation.
But today, Baghdad, is found uncivilized again. And this time, because of feeling too much shame. Iraqi people, or Afghans, those less civilized, or non-civilized, are never able to guess the contemporary shame levels of civilization that they must adapt, never able to guess how much shame they should feel. And this is another point showing that they have a long way in front, for getting civilized...
While the 'civilized world' is creating chances for people who want used women underwear on their faces, while man to man and woman to woman marriages are spreading and taboos are getting down everywhere, while all the behaviours which were once condemned for being pagan are being embraced, while gender identities are mixing, and boundaries are disappearing, while sadomasochist alternatives are getting detailed, more common and open, and create their institutions, and while every fetish is getting its deserved rights, this 'uncivilized world' in Iraq is living sexuality like it was a disease to cure –completely as wanted before from them. Their extreme sexual sensitivity becomes an open sign of their uncivilized character -and there the abuse starts.
In the 'civilised world', the only sexual daemons are sexual acts that violate human rights –like the abuse of children. A sexual difference do not become a target because it is not normal anymore, it can only be a target if it is against human rights.
But, who is human anyway?
Of course, tortured Iraqi prisoners and others, are not accused of not taking pleasure from these torturing acts, because they were not volunteering. Still, it is like everything is designed to throw to their faces that sexuality is a too touchy layer for them, and they have a primitive homophobia.
So, during torture, they do not only experience pain, they are also told that they are too barbaric to be a masochist!
At the end, masochism requires an environment of mutual freedom, where mutual wills can join for pleasure.
In the classical novel of Leopold von Sacher-Masoch, Venus in Furs, main characters Wanda and Severin, desire to live their master-slave fantasies to the end in a foreign land. They were worried that they will not be able to live them as they want in their hometown. So Severin (slave) offers Wanda to go to a country where slavery still exists, to the orient, to Turkey. This journey to East for living slavery freely, sounds nice to Wanda at first. But then she changes her mind and rejects to sign the contract in Istanbul. “No,” she says, “I have thought things over. What special value would there be in owning a slave where everyone owns slaves. What I want is to have a slave, I alone, Here in our civilized sober, Philistine world, and a slave who submits helplessly to my power solely on account of my beauty and personality, not because of law, of property rights, or compulsions. This attracts me."
On the other hand, sexual humiliation during torture is not a new fact and overseas torture activities of U.S. forces is not first seen in Iraq. Also, U.S. forces were not the first to bring torture to Middle East. Abu Ghraib, once a torture centre of Saddam, now, shows its loyalty to the continuity of power, by hosting new torturers.
What is new, is the amount of torture images circulating. The show of torture is more striking than the torture itself. Designed scenes and angles are striking, the distribution of these moments so widely is new, to add them into the general visual flow in media is compelling -2 million hits for an actual political torture is startling...
The torture and abuse images coming from Abu Ghraib, brought the subject of how these photos were presented and how this presentation can be analyzed as a show and as a politics.
Now, the shameless person, is the torturer showmen and showwomen...
For the ‘civilized world’, may be these events were showing some problematic applications and misbehaviour. Were they the real target of this torture show? Who knows? But the ‘uncivilized world’ has reasons to feel as a more likely candidate for being the target of these images.
And the same show, reveals that, (I mean I took this similarity from another flowing news story on the subject) some torture methods used in Iraq were similar with some methods in a CIA handbook on coercive interrogation methods, produced 40 years ago during the Vietnam War. And that manual says: "The threat of pain is a far more effective interrogation tool than actually inflicting pain."
Now the threat, is becoming a part of the show, becoming torture victims with whom the torturer will construct the show.
We can say that, Abu Ghraib photographs, were not photographs showing the utmost horrible torture applications. We are talking from geographies that saw systematical torture in the very recent past; we are looking at these photographs as people living in such places where torture is well alive. To have a relative, friend or a neighbour who was tortured, is not an exceptional situation. People who would feel threatened with such photographs grew up with more terrifying torture stories. Neither Abu Ghraib nor Guantanamo, can demand an important place in the Great World Torture Map. U.S. forces know that they know what is worse, they have applied it several times, like many other states and armies do, but additionally, U.S. forces have even gave courses on the subject to many torturers of the 'uncivilized world'.
But these were only true, if there were no photographs no videos.
Remember the first images that came from Abu Ghraib.
A torture scene where Lynndie R. England was playing her role with enthusiasm, were one of the first Abu Ghraib images we came across. We were expecting to see images where occupier male soldiers are raping women, as we know it happens in most of the wars.
(Small examples of these kinds of ‘cliché’ rape images from Iraq which can be found on the internet, are probably existing in archives, as authorities also imply, but even if they exist, they don't have a big role in the show because they are ‘clichés’.)
England’s photos were one of the first images we received. A woman, England, with a cigarette in her mouth, showing genital organs of naked ‘native’ man, whose faces are hidden in sand bags.
Yes that’s all she does, she is only showing –still, the photo gives such a torture feeling.
However, the gesture of her hands, reminds a machine gun holding position. We are witnessing a woman occupier, showing captured naked penises with a gesture of shooting them with a machine gun –at the same time, her hand gestures, and her way of standing where her left foot is in front, and the way she is slightly leaning on to naked penises, reminds me a more common scene, where a showmen is presenting a new guest to the show. Applause. Applause. Till our palms explode...
Torture, took its place in the show world of 21st century with these photos, and smoothly joined entertainment industry.
The women torturer of the 'civilized country with inalienable women rights, is showing us uncivilized penises she captured, smiling, possibly, accompanying a melody. Whatever, this is a fascinating show. A show that threat many many people. And its function is not telling the terrifying dimensions of torture in Iraq and the general torment. –it's the opposite; it is telling how all the show in world is a torture. How all these television entertainment shows, competitions, stages, meaningless clappings do contain a torture.
The show in torture is showing the torture in show.
Of course, it is possible to ask; how can we consume a torture show in history and today?
The consuming of torture is many times also taken as a stage of torture process. Sometimes you hear the screamings of other victims while you are waiting for your torture, and these are direct messages making you hear the torture your brother/sister/companion is experiencing. In the Inquisition, one of the first institutions that resemble torture, different stages were designed for braking resistance. In some applications, the first stage was to threat the victim with possible torture. As it is known by torturers of our times, threat itself can give the wanted result. The Inquisition, could pass to another stage if verbal threat itself was not enough, and the victim could be taken to the dungeon of torture room, and torture materials were shown like an exhibition. These dark places were creating fear, horror, and hopelessness. Showing the startling torture materials and torturers was the second phase of torture.
Not only implying pain, the potential and threat of it are also part of the torture. The existence and knowledge of the torture place is itself a torture.
Same materials and tools used by Inquisition to show and torture, after hundreds of years, were for example, exhibited in a “torture exhibition”. And this exhibition travelled through Europe. In its presentation it says: “Shown in many historical and prestigious venues all over Europe, in Tokyo, in Argentina and Mexico, the exhibit has always raised the interest of millions of visitors and the press, not only for its great visual impact, but also for its clear message against the violation of human rights.”
However, it is not necessary to come to such a conclusion. Usually, opposition groups display torture, for to bring the dirty and ugly face of the pseudo democratic regime out into the open.
On the other hand, exposition of torture and victims of torture has been a part of torture process for its social humiliating potential and pain threat and terrorizing power. It really depends on how it is presented and perceived.
‘Exposition boards’ were an old method used in many places from England to China as a punishment. It is based on locking the victim in some wooden board with his head and arms and sometimes legs put into holes in the board. Exposition board locks victims in this position and then expose in the streets or exhibits in a certain square, and sometimes the sin or guilt of the victim is written on the board also.
Can we say that, in Iraq, they made an update, and this 'exposition board' left its place to taking photographs? Using more complicated agents and a more complicated media than a simple wooden board.
Statements of Abu Ghraib detainees tell us that they remember being endlessly photographed as a kind of torture.
The attacking side of photography, the shooting aspect, has been analyzed or criticized many times before. But in Abu Ghraib case, we can take a step forward, and when we list the types of prison abuse carried out in Iraq, we should add “taking photographs” to the list.
Beating, bastinado, locking up in small spaces, applying cold, holding in different painful positions, raping, leaving hungry and waterless, making to eat shit or drink urine, and now, ‘taking photographs’ especially in undesired positions.
When we look at some of the statements provided by Abu Ghraib detainees, we see the important role of photographs easily. The two most common abuses they witness can be categorized as: beating and everybody taking photographs of everything.
One detainee says they told him to stroke his penis in front of Ms. Maya, an American female soldier. Guards were “laughing, taking pictures.”
"They came with two boys naked, and they were cuffed together face to face and Grainer was beating them, and a group of guards were watching and taking pictures from top and bottom. And there was three female soldiers laughing at the prisoners."
Their statements give detailed pictures of how guards ordered them to masturbate for example, and then took pictures, to bend over, like dogs (and homosexuals may be they thought) and took pictures, how they were put into special sex positions and posed for them. “They were taking of pictures of everything they did to me.” One victim on his knees in front of another victim, both masturbating. "Like they were in a porno movie". And the power of “watching” was used, like just watching and laughing, making them watch each other naked. Making a father and son watch each other naked. “They removed all my clothes down to naked for seven days and they were bringing a group of people to watch me naked.” Sometimes directly saying pose like homosexuals, and then taking photographs. Most of the “abuse” was posing for some photographs unwillingly.
It is also strange that they wanted detainees to stroke their penises so frequently, like they are playing in porn scenes but also masturbating like they were watching one, like they were consuming one. (Reminds me “masturbation” works of Gillian Wearing.)
And homophobia is used frequently as an abuse. Man on man, naked, wearing women's underwear, rose colour with flowers, red women's underwear, writing things on their asses and photographing.
And then, this systematic photographing of everything ended with publishing them everywhere.
It goes so that, torture victims are like some players, some unlucky walk-ons, and real torture is these photographs, the target is not to reach some information but to produce these photos.
We will see if this torture of photographing will continue or just stay in Abu Ghraib, or will it turn into a general policy?
These show tortures, designed for exhibiting, this new trend, may be the new torture concept for Iraq, or generally Middle East, or the so-called 'clash of civilizations'. This concept can be transferred, and transformed into a global torture concept.
But we, receivers of these images, how do we ‘consume’ them? How can you consume a Torture show?
-interactive (Islamic penalty of throwing stones to death, burning collective fire in witch burnings, and every kind of lynch)
-with appetite (with applauds, curiosity, cheering, excitement, the feel of watching an 'event', like watching TV, by watching TV, as Doctor Geddes said, during the execution of a group of various punishments, in Madrid in 1682, by Inquisition: “there was no such a big show in Madrid for years, the citizens are waiting the event like they are waiting a festival and big entertainment with impatience.”
-with fear, taking it as a warning, anxiously,
-without willing, under force, as a part of the torture, being forced to watch torture applied on friends, lovers, relatives etc.
-with anger, looking for a guilty person
-with a supermarket basket, from the shelves,
-fast, silently
-with conscience, compassion, by “feeling shame”
You can add more ways…
But what was the result of publishing all these photographs and consuming them, what were the effects? Did it have any effect on the consciences of people in different parts of the world?
Many reactions to Abu Ghraib photos were showing an ‘official conscience’. A torturer for someone else was an officer of the other, and the torturer of this latter was the officer of the other. There was also an 'official opposition coincidence' which only use these kinds of photographs.
And there is new 'totalitarian coincidence' ruling, which didn't get hurt when 500,000 Iraqi children died because of embargo, or today with these images. And it is not only Mr. Bush who has it…
After the events, when Zizek said, “And the fact that the case turned into a public scandal that put the U.S. administration on the defensive is a positive sign. In a really “totalitarian” regime, the case would simply be hushed up. (In the same way, the fact that U.S. forces did not find weapons of mass destruction is a positive sign: A truly “totalitarian” power would have done what cops usually do—plant drugs and then “discover” the evidence of crime.)” he was taking these “defensive positions” as democratic signs...
However, the confessions of U.S. forces saying that they couldn’t find any weapons of mass destruction, could also be read as bad signs; why should a ruling power will have to ‘plant drugs’ when it is also possible to confess that there are no drugs but still give the punishment for ‘having drugs’?
Can’t this be considered as an evidence of a more advanced totalitarianism? May be this is not a “really totalitarian regime", but it is “another totalitarian regime". We can’t assume that U.S. administration do not know that same message would be understood differently in different places. It can be understood as a defence in somewhere but it can be understood as an attack in somewhere else. Confession of the power can be a good sign but also a bad sign.
While occupying forces are easily killing people without feeling the need to make much explanations, while they are able to bomb a wedding party to add another small massacre to the history of the region, and feel that it is enough to make explanations like “bad people can also give party” they are likely to realize a new totalitarian regime where they do not run after a control on every little detail and aspect of life like it happens in a 'really totalitarian regime', but they are implying an eclectic totalitarian regime where values are temporary and formed according to their places in international interests.
And introducing uncivilized slave penises, was the show time, of this regime…
