Print

Print


From:
       Kathy Agar <[log in to unmask]>

2:07 PM


The dominant images for me were not the shots of the building per se, but of the
solitary, vulnerable, charred bodies flying from their upper stories.  Nothing
metaphorical about that, or maybe I am too literal.  They seemed to "stand for"
only themselves, and that was more than enough horror for a lifetime.

May I say that I am not necessarily out of sympathy with many of Lakoff's
political
views.  But I find his essay a blatant manipulation of a theroretical approach
to
serve specific, preconceived political notions.  It is amnesiac in its ability
to
filter out Bush's and Guiliani's persistence in referring to the rescue workers
as
"the heroes."  It adopts the view of a monolithic "government" that speaks
through
Bush, when we have a secretary of state who is continually talking about the
need
for cautious diplomacy and the complexity of Western/Middle Eastern relations,
including the various elements involved in fundamentalist Islamic sects.  It
assumes that the martyrs of Islam are the product of poverty and capitalist
indifference when many of them are well educated and well off.

If we must resist the false dichotomy between western/ victim/good  and
eastern/perpetrator/evil, so must we resist the dichotomy of liberal
Democrat/good
and conservative Republican/bad.

This conflict has been characterized by many different methaphors and epithets.
The press has chosen a few to repeat over and over, so as to valorize a them
over
the rest.  Every time I see "America's New War"  flit across the CNN screen, I
feel
manipulated.   We do have to resist that sort of manipulation, but it isn't
coming
from a single source, including government leaders.  And supposd scholarly
analysis.

Kathy Agar




Norman Holland wrote:

> From:
>         George Lakoff <[log in to unmask]>
>
> Fri 1:43 AM
>
> Dear PSYARTers and colleagues,
>
> The attached is George Lakoff's essay on the images and metaphors current in the
> present crisis.  His essay on the metaphors for the Gulf War was reputedly the
> web site with the most visits ever.
>