Should Neda Be An Icon?

Is Turning Neda Into An Icon The Answer?

Posted by: Amelia McDonell-Parry Filed in: news
9:00AM, Tuesday June 23rd 2009

Yesterday we posted about Neda, the Iranian woman who was gunned down during protests in Tehran this weekend. Her brutal death was caught on camera and posted on YouTube, and many websites, including The Frisky, have posted it. She’s been deemed the “face” of the opposition movement in Iran, particularly representative of the women who have been at the forefront of the protests against the results of the corrupt presidential election. But some are wondering if Neda’s martrydom is appropriate and just.

One blogger wrote:

“...to flatten her death down into a two-dimensional message on a placard is to reduce her life too. Making this woman into a symbol takes away from the complexity of her human experience and in an odd way overlays meaning on to a fundamentally senseless act.”

And our own Leonora Epstein responded on her blog:

“My concern is that she’s becoming a YouTube phenomenon/icon whose intrigue at heart may be about the issues in Iran, but more superficially, is about gross human curiosity of what it’s like to see someone die. Those videos were on YouTube yesterday, and I hope they’re removed. Keeping them up is not to emblematize a symbol courage, but to reduces Neda to a horror film-like molecule of entertainment.”

Over at Double X, writers Susannah Breslin (who also writes for The Frisky), Meghan O’Rourke, and Dana Stevens are also debating the issue, with Breslin and Stevens agreeing that the Neda video is essentially a snuff film and that her youth and beauty are particularly eye-catching to people who have flocked to see it on YouTube. Writes Breslin:

“This isn’t to diminish the content of it. It is a horrifying, saddening, frantic look at a woman dying in the street. But I don’t think that’s exactly what we’re talking about here. We’re talking about the something else the video becomes when its focus and attendant narrative take on the qualities of martyr and myth. The video becomes something else altogether, something that, more often than not, is more about us than the subject itself…. It reminds me a bit of the character of Laura Palmer from ‘Twin Peaks,’ a dead girl whom everybody fetishized, in death more so than in life.”

There is a tiny problem with making Neda a martyr for Iranian freedom—according to her family, she was not political and at the moment of her death had decided to get out of her car to get fresh air. She was casualty of being in the wrong place, at the wrong time. Who knows whether she would have become an activist or not; her life ended before she, or us, could find out. Is it right that her death is playing out on our laptop screens for a cause she, personally, was not involved in? Or does that matter, since her death came as the result of her country’s unjust circumstances? And do we need to watch her die in order to get, at least a little more, what the Iranian opposition is fighting for? Or does it cheapen our understanding, much the way Nicholas Sarkozy has shown his to be, by proposing a ban on burqas in France? I’m not sure of the answers, but I thought all of this made for thoughtful discussion, one I’m sad we have to have, but also happy we can have in this country and on The Frisky. Looking forward to hearing your thoughts.

[BrokenBottleBoy]
[Twentysomething Tales]
[Double X: Is the “Neda” Video a Snuff Movie?]
[Double X: Of Course the Neda Video Is a Snuff Movie]
[Double X: On Watching Neda’s Death]

comments

Leonora
wrote on June 23 2009 @ 09:22 am: [report]

Right. The fact that Neda wasn’t a zealous political activist proves that the “face of the Iranian revolution/martyrdom” could have been anyone. The quick labeling is a reflection of latent desires to continue to follow an overall dramatic story, and, in the worst cases, an excuse to incite more anger. The way she died was horrible, undignified, random, and unfair, and unfortunately her image as a beautiful, normal woman, coupled with the fact that she was caught on tape, was a recipe to capture fascination. And with the Internet these days, fascination all to quickly turns into commodification.

Leonora
wrote on June 23 2009 @ 09:26 am: [report]

I might also add, that I watched that video (I couldn’t get through the whole thing). It at first was an innocent instinct to click a buzzed-about link, but then turned into a test of what it would feel like to watch a real death. (Answer: made me feel nauseous and uncomfortable.) I’m not happy to admit this. I’m concerned about the conflict in Iran, but I didn’t watch that video to participate in a political dialogue or to inform myself as a supporter or the conflict.

thesirensong
wrote on June 23 2009 @ 09:37 am: [report]

I didn’t watch the link - the closest I’ve come to watching an actual death is on CSI and I prefer it to be a bit sensationalized so I can comfort myself that it’s not real. But I see what Leonora is saying because I was really tempted.

But Western society aside, if the opposition is making her a martyr, then it’s because they need a martyr. Even if she wasn’t a political activist, she was an innocent person gunned down at the hands of a bad regime. That IS something to rally around - that’s a solid reason to force change, and even if she’s not a proper martyr, she’s certainly a symbol of that reason.

Most of Western society doesn’t remember what it’s like to fight oppression - we women can say we still are but the fact of the matter is that the brunt of the work has already been done for us. But throughout history, martyrs have been held up as a symbol of what people are fighting for, and they’ve given people the boost they needed to keep fighting what seemed like a losing battle.

They’re not necessarily dehumanized, either - I have a book all about the lives of Christian martyrs, what brought them to that point and what happened to them. So as long as we remember her story, she can be a symbol and a human, and that may not be a bad thing - certainly not for the people fighting behind her.

DancerNinja
wrote on June 23 2009 @ 11:56 am: [report]

One could argue that the fact she was killed in cold blood, not in defense and not in response to her (non)demonstrating, makes her an even stronger symbol of the tyranny of the government and the lengths they are willing to go to instill power over their people through fear.

Erin G
wrote on June 23 2009 @ 11:56 am: [report]

But hadn’t she participated before in silent protests? She wasn’t a zealous political activist, but she certainly did have a position on the issues. To say she wasn’t “political” seems to say she didn’t care…

Username:
Password:
	Auto-login on future visits Show my name in the online users list
	register \| forgotten password