Professor Russ Burgos (a MAJOR high school crush of mine) teaches at UCLA and has posted on his blog Splunge! a piece on "Globalization: Language, Identity & Politics." In this brief essay he discusses the concept used as a title for this post - Waving The Bloody Shirt - and it makes for some very interesting reading. I have posted some questions to him on this concept, however, and my mind continues to mull this whole thing over.
I believe Russ is making the point in particular about how governments use this to define and steer national myths in order to further a specific political agenda, but I am thinking about the many ways that this tool is used by one group or individual to essentially manipulate a larger group. I say "manipulate" meaning to mold and shape, a more judgment neutral definition, not the word as it is often used indicating a selfish or negative action.
For example, after reading his article I questioned him on the relationship between BSW ("bloody shirt waving") and propaganda. For it seems to me that BSW is always propaganda, but propaganda is not always BSW. Once again, I use the term propaganda here in a more judgment neutral manner. As such, I brought up the film Milk. Here we have a well done fictionalized biopic of an important figure to the GLBT community who was assassinated as his star was rising. The murderer got off with a light sentence due to the infamous Twinkie defense.
I readily admit to being strongly influenced by Marxist literary theory and do not believe that art can exist outside of the politics of the society in which it was created and so in it's own way this film is a form of propaganda for the GLBT cause. As Harvey Milk was martyred for the cause of equality, I also believe this film is a form of BSW. Russ doesn't agree and I am looking forward to more comments on his blog so I have a better handle on this term and how he is using it. That disagreement over Milk, however, is not my point.
Culturally how have we "Waved The Bloody Shirt?" How, for example, have the images of the twin towers and their dead been used? I think about the recently murdered British soldiers and constable in Northern Ireland. It appears that BSW may be occurring there, but certainly not in the way the assassins intended. The surprising unity from both sides standing against a return to the BSW of the past and against the murders, uniting in support of peace. Imagine -- martyrs to peace in Northern Ireland.
Finally, what about the image I put at the top of this post? In what ways have we "Waived This Bloody Shirt?" Clearly much of the antisemitism of the past 2000 years relied heavily on BSW. When the victims of political violence are identified first and foremost by their creed does this become BSW? For example, when we read reports of the treatment of a group of Christians in any of the world's hot spots where religion is playing a role in the conflict. What if their creed is the main reason for their victimization?
It seems to me that somewhere in all this is how we get lost in eye-for-an-eye thinking over turn-the-other-cheek thinking and that is to lose sight (no pun intended) of a key tenet of our Christian faith. It is to reject or turn away from Christ's teaching and revert to an Old Testament angry God kind of thinking. Yet, BSW is a natural behavior to resort to as humans who are grieving. Perhaps this is Russ's point, it is when governments, political or theological, resort to BSW that we need to become wary.
I believe Russ is making the point in particular about how governments use this to define and steer national myths in order to further a specific political agenda, but I am thinking about the many ways that this tool is used by one group or individual to essentially manipulate a larger group. I say "manipulate" meaning to mold and shape, a more judgment neutral definition, not the word as it is often used indicating a selfish or negative action.
For example, after reading his article I questioned him on the relationship between BSW ("bloody shirt waving") and propaganda. For it seems to me that BSW is always propaganda, but propaganda is not always BSW. Once again, I use the term propaganda here in a more judgment neutral manner. As such, I brought up the film Milk. Here we have a well done fictionalized biopic of an important figure to the GLBT community who was assassinated as his star was rising. The murderer got off with a light sentence due to the infamous Twinkie defense.
I readily admit to being strongly influenced by Marxist literary theory and do not believe that art can exist outside of the politics of the society in which it was created and so in it's own way this film is a form of propaganda for the GLBT cause. As Harvey Milk was martyred for the cause of equality, I also believe this film is a form of BSW. Russ doesn't agree and I am looking forward to more comments on his blog so I have a better handle on this term and how he is using it. That disagreement over Milk, however, is not my point.
Culturally how have we "Waved The Bloody Shirt?" How, for example, have the images of the twin towers and their dead been used? I think about the recently murdered British soldiers and constable in Northern Ireland. It appears that BSW may be occurring there, but certainly not in the way the assassins intended. The surprising unity from both sides standing against a return to the BSW of the past and against the murders, uniting in support of peace. Imagine -- martyrs to peace in Northern Ireland.
Finally, what about the image I put at the top of this post? In what ways have we "Waived This Bloody Shirt?" Clearly much of the antisemitism of the past 2000 years relied heavily on BSW. When the victims of political violence are identified first and foremost by their creed does this become BSW? For example, when we read reports of the treatment of a group of Christians in any of the world's hot spots where religion is playing a role in the conflict. What if their creed is the main reason for their victimization?
It seems to me that somewhere in all this is how we get lost in eye-for-an-eye thinking over turn-the-other-cheek thinking and that is to lose sight (no pun intended) of a key tenet of our Christian faith. It is to reject or turn away from Christ's teaching and revert to an Old Testament angry God kind of thinking. Yet, BSW is a natural behavior to resort to as humans who are grieving. Perhaps this is Russ's point, it is when governments, political or theological, resort to BSW that we need to become wary.
5 comments:
Hmm. "MAJOR crush"? I rate not only the adjective, "major," but all caps no less? Holy smoke!
Well thanks for that -- precisely the kind of ego boost I'm desperately in need of these days. Though I haven't decided to switch to the "other team," if ever I do you'll be the first to know!
Anyway, enough silliness -- I'm glad you found some takeaways in the Bloody Shirt thread. It was percolating for a long time.
The question of what is or isn't a Bloody Shirt is a good one; I encourage you to keep exploring it. Off the top of my head I wouldn't classify the Shroud of Turin as a Bloody Shirt -- religious iconography generally isn't -- but perhaps some of the more glorious martyrdoms. "Onward Christian Soldiers" is a borderline Bloody Shirt song.
Keep working it. Let me know what you figure out.
OMG! ::smiling sheepishly:: didn't realize u returned the favor and visited my humble abode. Yes, it was major - beauty and brains - what more can I say - glad to give u a boost if you're in need of one, Russ. I think your blog is well worth reading and chewing over. Keep it up.
By the way, I friend of mine here in Marquette was adopted as an infant from a mother in Turkey and he won't go back for fear of being conscripted either! I thought perhaps he was exaggerating then I read the same info at your place.
The decisive piece there would whether or not his U.S. passport says "place of birth Turkey." If so, he's a Turk and will be required to do military service, unless he buys an exemption which would require 2 months of military service (usually light duty in western Turkey) and something like a $15,000 indemnity.
Well, he's smart then to stay away. Oh, I knew the Shroud of Turin has hardly been used as a bloody shirt but I'm so damn tired of bloody crucifixes...
Yeah, that's an interesting one. In churches in Spain I have observed they are particularly keen on Quentin Tarantino-like crucifix displays. Real agony-of-the-cross stuff. That's probably a kind of bloody shirt. They symbolic power of the cross to a Christian ought, in a sense, to be independent of the agonies of the Christ -- one of the criticisms, you'll recall, of Mel Gibson's picture.
Post a Comment