![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
moral ambiguity and heroism and torture / dressed for a change
There's a discussion taking place in ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
chain_lightning's journal about the acceptance of the use of torture by "good guys" on TV. Apparently, torture as a legitimate method for getting one's way or obtaining information has been increasingly prevalent on network shows, specifically justified as an anti-terror or "for the good of the world" action. I don't watch any of the programs that others cited except for Battlestar Galactica, but even though it's not an example of an overt "saving the world" situation, I was surprised that the torture sequence on Lost wasn't mentioned. I had found it to be complex and interesting (and unnerving), so I did a brief recap of the scene with some discussion in her comments.
I'm copying my text here because I want to keep track of it. However, I would like to continue the conversation, either here or inchain_lightning's space. If you watch 24, especially, you probably want to go over there.
torture isn't so bad:Reading through, I was surprised that no one mentioned the torture sequence in Lost. Which means that I will...
Eighth episode, airing back in November. Four of the shows major characters were involved in the scene, and at the time it aired, their moral status was thus: Jack is a good guy - if anyone is the hero, it's Jack. Sayid is a good guy. Kate is known to have killed at least one person, but she is posited more toward the good than the bad. Sawyer is amoral and opportunistic, but his good/bad status is always up in the air.
Jack and Sayid believe that Sawyer is holding another character's life-saving medicine, but nothing they say will persuade him to hand it over. They decide, with many significant, solemn glances between them, that the situation requires extreme measures. As it happens, Sayid was in the Republican Guard back home in Iran, and thus is well-versed in the ways of torture. Sawyer is smacked around and tied to a tree, then Sayid forces bamboo spears beneath his fingernails. Although the insertion of the bamboo is not shown, it's a very graphic and chilling scene with a lot of screaming. Jack and Sayid look regretful, but they don't stop what they're doing. Kate shows up and protests their treatment of Sawyer. Sawyer finally says he'll tell Kate - and only Kate - where to find the medicine. Jack and Sayid leave Sawyer and Kate alone. Sawyer says that Kate must kiss him before he'll give her the information. Kate does kiss him, and it's not the peck expected, but a whimper-driven tongue fest. As it turns out, Sawyer has no idea where the medicine is, and withstood the torture out of pure cussedness.
So, we have good guys torturing an ambiguous guy, but feeling really bad about it. We have a known murderer serving as moral arbiter. Sayid, despite being a good guy, is someone who in RL would probably be considered an enemy of the entire nation. And although Jack (a doctor, as well as hero) doesn't actually stick bamboo under Sawyer's nails, he does watch (and wince) and approve of this treatment as both necessary and appropriate, given circumstances. The kiss between Kate and Sawyer occurs while he's still tied to a tree and smeared with blood. Although the carnality of the moment does "match" the intensity of the prior torture scene, that in itself is unsettling. Of course, ultimately it's all Sawyer's fault, since if he'd just said right away that he didn't have the medicine, he wouldn't have been tortured.
In the aftermath, Jack and Sayid are sorry and Sawyer is ultimately no more wary of them than he'd been before.
The characters on Lost are all morally ambiguous to a greater or lesser extent - just like real people. Rather than white, the heroes are decked out in shades of gray...as are the potential villains. The most pressing threat to their lives is an unknown/unseen monster that periodically comes crashing through the jungle, and perhaps it's the threat of this shadowy Other that keeps Sawyer allied with Jack and Sayid.
So, if we thought that Sawyer had WMDs and tortured him to find out where they were hidden, but it turned out that he never had any... Hmm. Sounds familiar. All of it does, actually.
As to whether I'm disturbed by seeing the torture on TV - yes, I am. However, I thought it was used effectively in Lost, and a parsing of the scene makes it seem equally likely that it could be read as either pro-war propaganda or the exact opposite. The heroes behaved drastically, even badly, and all for naught. In fact, an herbal remedy was found that effectively replaced the missing medicine, making the entire confrontation ultimately unnecessary.
I guess I can't come to any conclusion here. I'm just poking at the ideas with a stick.
On the one hand, I do like "heroes" becoming morally ambiguous. It makes them more interesting, more relatable, and more human. On the other, if the normalization of torture as a motif in popular entertainment either deliberately or inadvertently numbs an audience/the populace to extreme and inhumane tactics in the real world, that's not so much of the good. I don't know how much weight I'm willing to give a TV drama about a mysterious island in terms of shaping This Great Country's moral fiber or worldview, and in this instance I'm definitely more interested in the scene than I am ready to rail against its brief appearance on my TV screen.
~~~
Enough torture talk for the moment. I'm going on a walk with the dog and taking my camera. It's a beautiful day, the first one in quite some time. Besides, it's high time for me to change out of my pajamas.
chain_lightning's journal about the acceptance of the use of torture by "good guys" on TV. Apparently, torture as a legitimate method for getting one's way or obtaining information has been increasingly prevalent on network shows, specifically justified as an anti-terror or "for the good of the world" action. I don't watch any of the programs that others cited except for Battlestar Galactica, but even though it's not an example of an overt "saving the world" situation, I was surprised that the torture sequence on Lost wasn't mentioned. I had found it to be complex and interesting (and unnerving), so I did a brief recap of the scene with some discussion in her comments. I'm copying my text here because I want to keep track of it. However, I would like to continue the conversation, either here or in
chain_lightning's space. If you watch 24, especially, you probably want to go over there.torture isn't so bad:Reading through, I was surprised that no one mentioned the torture sequence in Lost. Which means that I will...
Eighth episode, airing back in November. Four of the shows major characters were involved in the scene, and at the time it aired, their moral status was thus: Jack is a good guy - if anyone is the hero, it's Jack. Sayid is a good guy. Kate is known to have killed at least one person, but she is posited more toward the good than the bad. Sawyer is amoral and opportunistic, but his good/bad status is always up in the air.
Jack and Sayid believe that Sawyer is holding another character's life-saving medicine, but nothing they say will persuade him to hand it over. They decide, with many significant, solemn glances between them, that the situation requires extreme measures. As it happens, Sayid was in the Republican Guard back home in Iran, and thus is well-versed in the ways of torture. Sawyer is smacked around and tied to a tree, then Sayid forces bamboo spears beneath his fingernails. Although the insertion of the bamboo is not shown, it's a very graphic and chilling scene with a lot of screaming. Jack and Sayid look regretful, but they don't stop what they're doing. Kate shows up and protests their treatment of Sawyer. Sawyer finally says he'll tell Kate - and only Kate - where to find the medicine. Jack and Sayid leave Sawyer and Kate alone. Sawyer says that Kate must kiss him before he'll give her the information. Kate does kiss him, and it's not the peck expected, but a whimper-driven tongue fest. As it turns out, Sawyer has no idea where the medicine is, and withstood the torture out of pure cussedness.
So, we have good guys torturing an ambiguous guy, but feeling really bad about it. We have a known murderer serving as moral arbiter. Sayid, despite being a good guy, is someone who in RL would probably be considered an enemy of the entire nation. And although Jack (a doctor, as well as hero) doesn't actually stick bamboo under Sawyer's nails, he does watch (and wince) and approve of this treatment as both necessary and appropriate, given circumstances. The kiss between Kate and Sawyer occurs while he's still tied to a tree and smeared with blood. Although the carnality of the moment does "match" the intensity of the prior torture scene, that in itself is unsettling. Of course, ultimately it's all Sawyer's fault, since if he'd just said right away that he didn't have the medicine, he wouldn't have been tortured.
In the aftermath, Jack and Sayid are sorry and Sawyer is ultimately no more wary of them than he'd been before.
The characters on Lost are all morally ambiguous to a greater or lesser extent - just like real people. Rather than white, the heroes are decked out in shades of gray...as are the potential villains. The most pressing threat to their lives is an unknown/unseen monster that periodically comes crashing through the jungle, and perhaps it's the threat of this shadowy Other that keeps Sawyer allied with Jack and Sayid.
So, if we thought that Sawyer had WMDs and tortured him to find out where they were hidden, but it turned out that he never had any... Hmm. Sounds familiar. All of it does, actually.
As to whether I'm disturbed by seeing the torture on TV - yes, I am. However, I thought it was used effectively in Lost, and a parsing of the scene makes it seem equally likely that it could be read as either pro-war propaganda or the exact opposite. The heroes behaved drastically, even badly, and all for naught. In fact, an herbal remedy was found that effectively replaced the missing medicine, making the entire confrontation ultimately unnecessary.
I guess I can't come to any conclusion here. I'm just poking at the ideas with a stick.
On the one hand, I do like "heroes" becoming morally ambiguous. It makes them more interesting, more relatable, and more human. On the other, if the normalization of torture as a motif in popular entertainment either deliberately or inadvertently numbs an audience/the populace to extreme and inhumane tactics in the real world, that's not so much of the good. I don't know how much weight I'm willing to give a TV drama about a mysterious island in terms of shaping This Great Country's moral fiber or worldview, and in this instance I'm definitely more interested in the scene than I am ready to rail against its brief appearance on my TV screen.
~~~
Enough torture talk for the moment. I'm going on a walk with the dog and taking my camera. It's a beautiful day, the first one in quite some time. Besides, it's high time for me to change out of my pajamas.
no subject
no subject
And yeah, I think we are probably in agreement as well (I worried about my muddled way of communicating my thoughts on this matter too).
And, to be honest, my original response was half-way inspired by a comment elsewhere that implied that these shows would desensitize americans to torture and make it that much easier to do it. Part of me thinks that it might make it more acceptable to reveal that we do it by having it depicted on tv, but I don't think it will result in people being actually any more or less likely to perform torture.
This makes a lot of sense. A characteristic of our society is that we like to pretend that we aren't ever the agents of evil, so whenever wrongdoing by the "good guys" is exposed there's often a "shoot the messenger" type of reaction. Shows like BSG, which allow the viewer to see the heroes in an ambiguous light, can help make a less black and white and more truthful view of the world acceptable. Now that's probably still muddled. *g* In short, I see what you are saying and I agree.