Thursday November 17, 2011
This One’s From Damascus With Dignity
Occasionally I catch a whiff of a stranger’s jasmine scented perfume on the commuter train, or as I am weaving my way through a crowded street and I am brought back to my humble district of Damascus, Midan. I am able to recall with a fierce vividness the jasmine vines that push their way through the crumbling facades, just as I am able to recall the texture of the walls of my grandmother’s building as I trace my fingers along them making my way to her door. That simple scent can send me into a whirlwind of memories. Memories, that I cling to so dearly for they serve as artifacts establishing a previous experience as a truth.
It has been only a couple of months since I returned from Damascus to my suburban home in New York, yet I already feel these artifacts slipping away; the layers of my mind becoming increasingly hard to excavate. The inability to bridge my current life to the one I have returned from has given my memories a fuzzy quality. I try and conjure up the intensity and passion that I felt while in Damascus, but no amount of al-Jazeera reports can allow me to relive the experience of watching a revolution unfold.
There is a tangible presence to oppression. It is felt in the air, a sort of thickness similar to that of a humid summer day. It is a discomfort visible on the faces of strangers on the street. A common tension, acting as a force binding the lay people together. Yet oppression was not alone in imposing its suffocating presence on the streets of Damascus. Hand-in-hand with oppression came a boiling frustration. I was asked time and time again upon my return whether I was afraid to have been in Syria during such a brutal period. The truth is, fear becomes an irrelevant emotion in the face of oppression, swept aside to allow frustration and anger to take precedence.
While oppression is far from foreign to the people of Damascus, civil disobedience and the possibility of change remained, until recently, an unchartered territory. For decades Syrians have been subjected to a ruling regime built on terror, fake smiles, and empty promises. I have visited Damascus numerous times, and each trip has been marked by a different form of political and social injustice ranging from Internet restrictions to a relative thrown into jail. Despite, the never-ending complaints and struggles discussed behind closed doors, rarely did anyone dare to speak out against the regime. The threat of the dreaded “mukhabarat” that lurk at every corner was far too great. However, on this trip I witnessed the breaking point. No longer are those with a shard of consciousness willing to stand by silently in the face of injustice.
It seems that everyone from international leaders to political analysts are obsessed with pinning down this very “breaking point”; the point that triggered the phenomena now known as the “Arab Spring.” While this uprising can be attributed to devastating economic conditions, oppressive regimes, and the lack of the most basic human rights, the roots of this movement sink straight to the core of human nature. When traced to it’s most basic cause I believe it is the very denial of self-dignity that pushed Arab activists, young and old, to finally join together to send the message loud and clear: “khalas – enough is enough.” The need for self-dignity is more basic than most other human needs and to deny it to a people is to dehumanize them in the process.
When a group of children from a small town named Deraa were captured and tortured for writing a popular Tunisian revolutionary slogan in a public space, the people of Deraa were effectively denied their self-dignity. When their requests for swift action and justice were not only ignored, but also were mocked, they were further dehumanized. In the process of disregarding the people of Deraa, the Assad regime created an aura of despair so strong that they no longer felt they had anything to lose. Heads inflated with rage and feet restless for freedom they were lured out into the unprotected streets and sparked a fire that spread rapidly with the coming weeks throughout Syria. The necessary change became the moment and the excitement of the unknown could not be quelled.
I arrived in Damascus just as the fire of the revolution was starting to spread. I spent the summer listening in on secret meetings, peaking behind draperies to watch innocent men beaten with electric rods, and laughing to the absurd propaganda dished out by the government. I listened to the sound of teargas bombs ignite over lunchtime meals and obliged when I was demanded to show personal identification at randomly placed checkpoints. I saw what they saw, heard what they heard, and felt what they felt. I agonized with their troubles, cursed the government, and worried when a family member got placed behind bars. I got into heated debates with supporters of the Assad regime and became increasingly sad with the division they were causing within Damascus. For two months I was a full-fledged Syrian.
Yet it is only now, months after my brief dance with the Arab Spring, that I am able to reflect upon the severity of the conditions I experienced. A conception of “normal life” was birthed in my time there that made it not only possible to function, but to hold on to the hope of a changed future. I discovered the resilience of humanity and its capability to perceive despite the harshest of conditions. To date over 3,500 Syrian civilians have been murder in this crusade for freedom and justice and hundreds more have been imprisoned and tortured. Despite this, Syrian activists continue to push for the return of their right to dignity. It is a simple right so inherent that we in the Western World tend to overlook it or take it for granted. It is high time that the democratized world reflects on their fragmented and contorted perception of justice and freedom. To stand idly and watch history unfold is a crime in itself, both to ourselves and humanity as a whole.
Friday July 29, 2011
This One’s the Story of Your/My/His/Her/Their Life
Let’s face it our generation didn’t grow stale, we were raised stale. We were taught to dream, but never to criticize or to take criticism and as a result true change, true awe-inspiring, life-altering change has only ever existed in our imaginations. We were raised merely with the illusion of freedom; trapped within the cages of societal expectations and gross-produced modern culture before we could count to three. How could we be expected to face the revolt, the road, the sea, the fight, the true adventure? Or to handle the fierceness of nature, the harshness of destiny? We cannot even be bothered to react to the most basic elements of daily life, preferring instead to sweep them into the far corners of our minds. The world rages on around us, but we are always stuck on what-could-have-been when we should be thinking of what could be.
I think about this all after I hang up the phone and I wish I could be less disappointed. No matter, for as long as I can remember I have been devastated by my own expectations.
Saturday June 11, 2011
Conquering Death in the Twenty-First Century
The twenty-first century has ushered in an age of scientific certainty. Scientists today have unraveled some of nature’s most complex secrets. Yet, man is innately arrogant. The more he knows, the more he is unwilling to accept what he can never know for sure. Consequently, the valley between what is known and unknown grows wider as humans continuously reject what they may never find out. If the human mind, with all of its greatness and complexities, cannot fathom it, surely it must not exist. This attitude is unfortunately prevalent in many areas of human life, but none more so than the final stage of human life: death. Every human life has a termination point, whether it is in infancy or in old age. Despite this accepted fact of life, on a personal level the vast majority of individuals in the Western world continue to battle with this statement. Death has become the taboo subject that the developed world refuses to discuss openly (Brown). This mentality of fear, silence, and overall rejection of death can be attributed of modern advances in technology and medicine. Modern technology and medicine has fostered an obsession with prolonging life for as long as possible, rather than allow individuals to ease into a natural death. There is a vast misconception that to die a “natural” death means to die at an extremely old age, after a long life undisturbed by catastrophic, life-threatening events. Yet, in previous millennia, death struck the majority of individuals either in childhood or what society today would consider a relatively young age. Life was short and death was quick (Brown). Aging individuals were scarce as was the “grey area” between life and death that is prevalent in modern times (Brown). Diseases and epidemics took a heavy toll on lives and there was hardly a family in existence that had not experienced a death at an early age (Kubler-Ross). In short death was no stranger. It was a natural part of life that although was not welcome, was accepted. Individuals died in their homes surrounded by their children, friends, and family (Kubler-Ross). There was little to no preparations to undergo when a loved one had died. Disease and scars were not hidden by makeup and individuals were not embalmed (Kubler-Ross). This represented the overall acceptance of death society held (Kubler-Ross). Mourning was a shared, community event (Kubler-Ross). Thus, the concept of death “was natural, integrated, and expected” (West). The picture painted by descriptions of death in past centuries could not be farther from today’s realities. But, before one examine the harshness of death in modern society, one must first understand that the fear of death is not a new phenomena. When examining ancient cultures, one will find that almost all held death to be distasteful to mankind (Kubler-Ross). Tombstones were originally used with the intent of keeping evil spirits in the ground after one had passed away (Kubler-Ross). Native American’s shot arrows in the air for the same reason when a member of their clan had died (Kubler-Ross). The Ancient Hebrews handled a dead body with great caution as it was viewed as impure (Kubler-Ross). The face of death has not changed. Rather, it is the way humans react and cope with death and the dying that has been grossly transformed (Kubler-Ross). The days when a person was allowed to die with peace and dignity in his own home are long gone (Kubler-Ross). Today death is more gruesome, lonelier, more mechanical, and more dehumanized than it ever was before (Kubler-Ross). Hand in hand with the new face of death comes a profound psychological dilemma that arguable society as a whole is suffering from. Modern science and technology are not only putting matters of faith into question, but also the entire existence of mankind (Brown). Modern science has given rise to technology and warfare that no human is capable of protecting themselves against. Elizabeth Kubler-Ross details this idea in her book On Death and Dying: With rapid technological advancements and new scientific achievements men have been able to develop not only new skills but also new weapons of mass destruction which increases the fear of a violent catastrophic death. Man has to defend himself psychologically in many ways against this increased fear of death and increased inability to foresee and protect himself against it. Psychologically he can deny the reality of his own death for a while…If denial is no longer possible, we attempt to master death by challenging it…If a whole nation, a whole society suffers from such a fear and denial of death, it has to use defenses which can only be destructive. Wars, riots, and increasing numbers of murders and other crimes may be indicators of our decreasing ability to face death with acceptance and dignity. (28) Man can no longer defend himself against the physical world, yet he can protect himself psychologically by denying his mortality (Kubler-Ross) for as long as possible. What is further intriguing about the rise of this culture of denial is that the average life expectancy is higher today than ever before. At a peak of 78 years and an average increase of two years every decade (Brown), one would imagine that the human race would be relieved to have more time at their disposal to enjoy life. Paradoxical as it may seem, this is not the case. The higher the average life expectancy climbs, the more people irrationally fear death and consequently efforts are increased to further prolong life. If the current trends persist a person born today could be expected to have an average life expectancy of 100 years (Brown). At first glance this seems like a medical breakthrough, however when examined closely this mounting life expectancy could very well be a nightmare for humanity as a whole Modern medicine has blurred the line between life and death as aging and dying are slowly merging into one process (Brown). Death is currently followed by an average of ten years of chronic illness (Brown). The diseases that were once considered fatal and preyed on the young and middle aged have now successfully been conquered (Kubler-Ross), allowing the developed world’s population to grow increasingly older and older. The “extremely old” make up the fastest growing portion of the developed world’s population (Brown). The UK Government Actuary’s Department reports that the UK population of over 65 is expected to triple from 4.6 million to 15.5 million by 2074. With the proportion of elderly continuously increasing mankind faces comes a number of difficulties that have never before been faced by mankind (Brown). One of the major problems associated with aging is the rise of neurodegenerative conditions that never existed before our modern times. Demntia is rampant and currently 46% of the American population over the age of 85 suffers from some form of dementia (Brown). At this rate a person born today has a one in three chance of dying with dementia (Brown). The rate of dementia in the US population already has negative consequences on American society and the prospect of an influx of this percentage is frightening. Currently the American health care system is buckling under the needs of America’s elderly, as they are kept barely alive for sometime with the use of feeding tubes, machinery and expensive procedures (Times). Imagine added on to that, having to provide constant, one-to-one personal care for millions of demented or disabled. This would surely have severe economic consequences (Brown), that would affect the cost of health care for Americans of all ages. Since modern medicine and science is aiming to keep the elderly barely alive for decades (Brown), dying would become a sort of long term investment that a person must save up their whole lives to afford. Furthermore expecting to die at a point where a person does not remember their whole life has social and psychological consequences. It creates a loss of faith and hope (Brown). Those already suffering with dementia suffer from a loss of trust towards others creating a severe break in societal interactions (Brown). A second problem modern technology and science has created is the dehumanization of medical care. Historically medicine was the art of caring for and showing compassion towards those who were ill or dying (West). Yet today health care is impersonal and bureaucratic, with the death of a patient as a sign of weakness and defeat (West). The goal of medicine is no longer to care for a patient and diminish their suffering, but to prolong life for as long as possible (Kubler-Ross). Modern science has made death more gruesome in many ways, more lonely, and more mechanical (Kubler-Ross). There is no longer a naturalness or tameness to dying (West) and it is as if the “mechanical death” has won over natural death in the West (Illich). People are left vulnerable and isolated; surrounded by machines in intensive care units rather than loved ones. It is no wonder that people dread their death in Western society. It is no longer a peaceful passage into an unknown realm, but rather it is being left to rot away in some foreign hospital corner. Death and aging are the defining problems of the twenty-first century (Brown). Yet, nowhere in the developed world does a government have death, dying, and dementia on their political agenda (Brown). Governments must work to restructure their health care infrastructure so medical science is once again a nurturing, personal science that treats each individual like a human. It is like Elisabeth Kubler-Ross states: If we could teach our students the value of science and technology simultaneously with the art and science of the inter-human relationships, of human and total-patient care, it would be real progress. If science and technology are not to be misused to increase destructiveness, prolonging life rather than making it more human, if they could go hand in hand with freeing more time rather than less for the individual person-to-person contacts, that we could speak of a great society. (31) We must learn to care for our dead in a humanistic form to allow individuals to face death rationally. The fear of death is a real and natural feeling. Yet it is not natural for us to avoid this subject, to push it back into the corners of hospitals, and deny that we will ever reach that stage. Only by accepting death as a part of the cycle of life can we conquer this fear and learn to live life to the fullest.
Sunday April 17, 2011
The Americanization of Mental Illness»>
Wednesday March 16, 2011
Tumblr, Guilt Culture, and Eating Disorders
A long while back, two friends and I got into a heated dispute over whether or not the fashion industry is contributing to the current epidemic rates of eating disorders.
The summary of the dispute is as follows:
Him: Yes.
Me: Fashion is crucial to cultural development.
Her: Eating disorders have been around since prehistoric times.
Him: All girls are crazy.
The truth is, all of these statements are correct. Our current mass media, not just the fashion industry, does propagate images of waif-like women. Fashion is crucial to cultural development and one of the easiest modes of self-expression. And the bottom line is, eating disorders are more than often biological in nature and have always been around.
While I was going to let the case rest, as this is a multi-faceted problem with more than one angle, cause, and solution, I have recently come across a network of shocking and appalling tumblrs that essentially serve as pro-ana blogs. It is generally agreed upon that eating disorders are some of the only contagious mental illnesses. If this is the case than they are spreading through tumblr like the plague. Fourteen, fifteen, sixteen year olds posting pictures of their bones? Eighteen, nineteen, twenty-something year olds rationalizing the culture of starvation? It is a little more than sickening.
This poses a new twist to the ongoing phenomenon, and draws light to the fact that this is not a problem of the individual, but one of society as a whole. So then, what is wrong with society? Why is it serving as the perfect breeding ground for such a twisted outlook on life? Where did we collectively go wrong? My answer: we are a culture of guilt.
Anthropologists categorize traditional and modern societies as either shame-based or guilt-based cultures. Shame is an outward mechanism. In shame cultures, one fears being shamed by their elders, families, or tribes and consequently dishonoring them. Decisions are made consciously as to not cause damage or disrespect the collective whole. In shame cultures, society as a whole is valued over the individual.
Guilt on the other hand is an inward mechanism. In guilt-based cultures one internalizes his or her actions, whether consciously or subconsciously, until they have sought out a way to relieve themselves of a feeling of discomfort. The world ‘guilt’ comes from the German word for debt, so it is almost as if you are indebted to yourself to rectify your ‘wrong-doings.’ Yet with no moral authority to answer to, man is left on his own to be his harshest critic. In guilt-based cultures the individual is prioritized over society, so one is encouraged to do whatever is necessary to relieve himself or herself of what is internalized.
As a culture of guilt, we are able to use tumblr as a portal to express the internalized. By the nature of tumblr being an online blogging space, there is a degree of separation that allows one to transform something that is inward into something that is outward. By doing so, a temporary relief of sorts is achieved. Yet, it is also due to this degree of separation that the root of the problem remains. The temporary feeling of relief is sought after again and again, until it essentially becomes an addiction.
Well here I am to provide you with a reality check: Tumblr is not the path to your self-salvation. Agree or disagree, just keep your disease off my dashboard.
