I am always willing to expand my point of view, and question definitions and the impact they can have. My first post on violence was off the cuff and shifting as I wrote. But thinking further on it, and reading the follow ups, it seems the definition is becoming to broad, and instead of pulling lesser cruelties in to a more serious meaning, (hopefully making them less acceptable) the horror and pain of violence is being spread too thin. If physically hurting you is given the same name and weight as threatening to break that stupid CD if you play it again! (as in ochast's school sign) it may not be that the threat to hurt your stuff is made less desirable, but that ripping your hair out to get at it, is equivocated to no worse than breaking a coffee cup... And as an adult, by all means insult my worth and dignity, but punching me in the face is a whole different game. The defining element of violence indeed seems to rests with the subjects willingness... I can't see words as violent in and of themselves (except maybe for the extremely vulnerable). They can be incredibly cruel, cause long term damage, and even incite, what? more violence? worse violence? what will we call REAL bone breaking violence now?.. Surgery to me is (ideally) selective, necessary, minimized destruction with a clear cut (ok, pun intended), positive goal (sounds like the war on terror). I think alot of valuable, potent words are being supplanted needlessly... The good that can result from pain I'll leave for the future.
|