Agunya, 15 (On the right), teaches his little brother Mumbri, 13 (On the left) how to load and aim a semi-automatic weapon after finding their entire family slaughtered by an Angolan terrorist group. “Eu quero matar cada governante Angolano que vejo…” I want to kill every Angolan official I see. Mumbri’s life changed forever after this moment…

Experiencing the annihilation of loved ones changes you in all aspects of life. The feelings of hatred, ignorance, sadness, and reminiscing all brewed together is a recipe for disaster in the streets of Chicago and in the battlefields of Angola. To experience the same tragedy Agunya and Mumbri have and not want to retaliate with the same force or more, takes a very noble and conscientious being. German psychological scientist, Mario Gollwitzer conducted a study where people were partnered up with another person anonymously in different rooms. The partners were asked a series of trivia questions and for every question they got right, they’d win tickets. At the end, the scientist divided the tickets up evenly but told partner #1 that that partner #2 opted to take all of the tickets. The scientist gave the partner #1 the chance to either opt to take all the tickets or split them after finding out what partner #2 decided to do. 60% decided they wanted all of the tickets because partner #2 wasn’t planning on sharing. That same 60% decided to write  notes to their anonymous partners all with smart comments like “You didn’t want to split the tickets so I’m be selfish back and take all of the tickets for myself.” This experiment showed that when people feel unappreciated, retaliation  is a very technique used as an attempt to restore that feeling of appreciation. Agunya and Mumbri suffer from a feeling not being valued. The fact that their family was slaughtered and no one answered for it will evoke this feeling. So as a result of this, the two brothers are on the hunt to retaliate with the same amount or more force to restore that feeling of mattering. Retaliating also provides them with the opportunity to make the Angolans feel the pain that they feel or worst; which is also a desired goal.

Experiencing the annihilation of loved ones changes you in all aspects of life. This change is physical, emotional and most of all mental. The feelings of hatred, ignorance, sadness, and reminiscing all brewed together is a recipe for disaster in the streets of Chicago and in the battlefields of Angola. Martin Luther King once said “As I have walked among the desperate, rejected, and angry young men, I have told them that Molotov cocktails and rifles would not solve their problems. I have tried to offer them my deepest compassion while maintaining my conviction that social change comes most meaningfully through nonviolent action. But they asked, and rightfully so, “What about war?” They asked if our own nation wasn’t using massive doses of violence to solve its problems, to bring about the changes it wanted. Their questions hit home, and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today: my own government. For the sake of those boys, for the sake of this government, for the sake of the hundreds of thousands trembling under our violence, I cannot be silent.” This quote addresses the most important reason people become numb to violence in mass numbers. To know that policeman and soldiers are awarded medals like distinguished shooters badge, and expert rifleman badges on a consistent basis for honestly killing people brings a sort of positive vibe to violence as a whole. So for a kid in Chicago to murder someone who sells drugs in his neighborhood and be prosecuted for it, is really hypocritical. He eliminated someone that was a threat to the well-being of his community. Isn’t that the same thing soldiers do and police officers do? Yes it is.

I focused on war literature for this paper. I wanted to explore the different facets of war literature and also the importance of war literature. During the research process I read a couple of interesting articles that really informed and shaped my opinion on the importance of war literature. The peer review process was especially helpful for this essay because I was initially unsure of what I wanted my larger idea to be. It was difficult to find a specific focus for this essay but I am proud of the final result.

Two children stand in front of a tank. The eldest, a girl a of about nine or ten with short black hair, carries her little brother, who cannot be more than three years old, on her back and they both look directly at the camera. They seem to be standing in a hot desert so they both wear loose light clothing. The tank seems to be going the same direction in which they are walking. We can picture this war scene clearly in our minds through this description in words. Even though we can never truly understand what it’s like to be in the midst of a war unless we have actually experienced it, words, stories, and pictures can help us begin to understand. In his essay titled, “The Extremes of Conflict in Literature: Violence, Homicide, and War”, Joseph Carroll says:

Literature depicts such emotions, evokes them, and makes them available to readers, who experience them vicariously.

To help others understand the horrible truth of war, authors like Tim O’Brien, Kurt Vonnegut, and Ernest Hemingway write novels about the subject. Like Carroll says, this literature allows readers to experience emotions that they’d never have the opportunity to experience otherwise. In experiencing those feelings they begin to understand the emotions of those who have been involved in war.  They begin to understand what it is like to know that at any second you could die and they begin to understand what loss of human life really means. The literature of war not only aims to foster understanding of war, it also attempts to argue for peace. Kate Scheel, a professor of English studies writes:

War literature…warns against pursuing armed conflict, exposes its atrocities, and argues for peace. It records the acts of war with as much accuracy as is possible, and it memorializes the dead. It is voyeuristic, exploitative, and sadistic; it is also tender, selfless, and comforting. It is gleeful and angry; inflammatory and cathartic; propagandist, passionate, and clinical. It is funny and sad.

Good war literature forces us to experience the emotion of war and inspires us to believe that there are other options. Good war literature exposes the truth and explains to us why it is necessary to find alternatives to violence. It reveals the atrocities that occur during war and it reminds us why human life is something to be valued and cherished.

War literature creates a complex relationship between author and reader. Because of the subject readers expect a certain degree of truthfulness in war literature. In this case we expect truthfulness to mean reality; we expect that everything that the author writes actually happened. As readers we expect honesty and loyalty. In The Things They Carried, by Tim O’Brien, we are led to believe that the story and all the characters are real but halfway through the book O’Brien reveals that all the stories and characters are fictitious. Through that experience we learn that truthfulness doesn’t have to mean reality. O’Brien states:

A thing may happen and be a total lie; another thing may not happen and be truer than the truth.

Meaning that even though something doesn’t actually happen it doesn’t mean it’s not true. What is more important when it comes to the truth is the emotion and sentiment behind it. So, even though we feel betrayed when we learn that the events in The Things They Carried did not actually happen our relationship with the author eventually emerges stronger at the end of the book when we come to the realization that when it comes to truth we need to look beyond the surface, look past the superficial details, and examine the things that really matter. War literature reminds us that life, death, and emotion are more important than small, insignificant details.

War literature is necessary. Not only because it helps civilians understand war but also because it helps soldiers deal with their experiences. Soldiers need to be able to express themselves somehow and they need to be able to write the truth of what they experience. Soldiers need to know that somebody cares enough to read their stories and maybe even take action. War literature is one of the most important methods for understanding war and violence. Candid accounts of what really happens during war through novels explain exactly what happens during war and also deliver these explanations in a medium that is accessible and interesting to most people. War literature needs to be something that everybody is familiar with. It’s easy to ignore violence and human weakness. We need war literature to remind us of all the problems in the world. We need it to inspire us to action and to hold us accountable for the needless loss of life that war brings. War literature is essential to any push for anti war mentality.  It is the proof that war is evil. If we ever want to live in a society that does not depend of war, militarism, and violence as solutions we must ensure that everyone reads and understands war literature so they understand the truth of war.

Scheel, Kate. "Violence and the Literature of War." N.p., Spring 2004. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

Carroll, Joseph. "The Extremes of Conflict in Literature: Violence, Homicide, and War." The Extremes of Conflict in Literature: Violence, Homicide, and War. N.p., 22 Mar. 2012. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

O'Brien, Tim. The Things They Carried: A Work of Fiction. New York: Broadway, 1998. Print.

A lot of research went into writing this essay. After reading 'The Things They Carry', I wanted to explore the deeper meaning of pain and the way each and every person experiences it. It was hard to find the perfect resources for my essay, but I ended up finding two perfect interviews, and a great image reflecting my words. I spent a long time trying to word my thoughts in a way people would understand, and although it was a challenge, I was able to use suggestion from my peers to write a piece I am proud of. I made sure not just to discuss the single meaning of pain, but the general meaning, so basically every single type of pain, whether it be physical, emotional, mental, etc..

Imagine being surrounded by an entire army, pointing all their guns at you. Unarmed civilians also surround you, fearing their lives, but knowing that they can’t back down because it’s a sign of weakness. One man steps up, knowing that there could be consequences, he decides to make peace between the army and the civilians, so he steps up, and all the guns are pointed at him, not you, yet you still fear. He places flowers in the gun, and no one makes a move or a sound, as if the man was now surrounded by the dead. He shows no signs of stopping, and as his bouquet of flowers becomes one single flower, you realize that it wasn’t fear of death you were feeling, it was fear of tyranny, and this man had just proven to you and everyone else there, the hypocrisy of pain and violence. One might think the previous statement was created to get them thinking of a somewhat realistic situation to better explain the healing of pain. It is anything but fictional, it’s an image of truth. The truth may be dreadful and uncomfortable, but this image expresses the tenderness of pain and its remedy. This is an image of life, a life put through violence and war, yet effectively reacts to a situation with the power of silence and influence.

Healing of agony can be conceived through an action, a memory, a statement, an image, or in better terms, it can be formulated in different ways, but as stated by Veena Das, a theoretician and ethnographer, there are two things that all healing has in common. “The notion of healing carried two ideas: the idea of endurance, and the idea of the capacity to establish a particular relationship to death….” One has to be willing to accept the pain they suffer to be able to alleviate the pain. In this way, not only is their acceptance, but realization that the pain will never go away, but awareness that mending pain is much stronger than any kind of pain itself.  “But I was very struck by the ways in which pain does write itself enduringly on people’s lives. It was not about a thunderous voice of pain, but about the manners in which pain was woven into the patterns of life.” You have to be open to all pain, to the consequences, or else healing will never happen, and only pain would ever exist. The thing is though, that without pain, life would be nothing. We would never experience reality, and we’d be selfish because without pain, we would get everything we wanted and thought we deserved. Pain draws a fairly clear line between selfishness and selflessness.

There is a single word that can bring terror and pain to many in an instant, a word so powerful that the meaning is pointless because it is nothing compared to the suffering and suffocation one is already in from just hearing the word. War...the word is war. As clearly stated by author Chris Hedges, “Yes. I think for those who are in combat, it very swiftly can become an addiction. War is its own subculture. It can create a landscape of the grotesque that is, perhaps, unlike anything else created by human beings.” Experiencing war in any way is a very difficult and uncomfortable experience that no one should go through. For soldiers, it’s as though war is a separate world, a separate language, or a separate life. Once in a war, you can never get out, even if the war is officially over. You become so intimate with it, that you can never forget about it. The horror will always be in your dreams, and the pain will always be crawling up your spine, and to your head, where you always remember every dreadful moment. War is something so unique and spectacular, that it is almost a mystery to the human race. We still explore war and it’s many characteristics, that is why war still exists and will never go away. There’s no meaning of war yet because we still don’t understand it, and there will never be one single clear definition. It’s existed for hundreds of years, yet it’s still something new and fresh that is somewhat unknown to our race.

A life with no pain, is a life not lived to the fullest. We suffer and always find a way to blame someone, yet the only one to blame should be ourselves, for not allowing leeway for reflecting on the good. Pain is different for everyone. Some might experience it through violence or war, and others might experience it from love, or hate, or even just life itself. Healing is a reflection of pain, and that is what needs to be understood to be able to live on, not move on, but to live your actual life, the life you grew up living. We must understand the difference between all pain, whether physical, mental, or emotional. As human beings, we have the right to express our pain, our anger, and our fight to healing. As human beings, we have the right to live.

WORK CITED

"Listening to Voices. An Interview with Veena Das." Interview by Kim Turcot DiFruscia. 2010. Web. 15 Mar. 2016. <http://www.alterites.ca/vol7no1/pdf/71_TurcotDiFruscia_Das_2010.pdf>

Truth is a fact or something stated that is accepted as true. A story is an account of past events in someone’s life. The truth can’t always be true and a story can’t always be true. Technology can help us support stories and the truth but even technology doesn’t show hundred percent of the story. What is the actually difference between the truth and the story?

For example from witness.org, "What WITNESS does is create, support, and sustain a global network of people who use video as their tool, as their weapon. This network reminds us that we are not a single voice; we are not alone." Another example is “WITNESS identifies ways for citizens to capture and preserve footage to improve its chances of it being used in the courtroom. Through tools, training, and advocacy efforts, we aim to help activists capture and use video as evidentiary material.” Another example was “The WITNESS Media Lab is dedicated to addressing the challenges of sourcing, verifying, and contextualizing eyewitness video to advance its use as a powerful tool for human rights documentation and advocacy. Visit the Lab for curated footage, analysis, cases studies, and resources.” The last example is “WITNESS responds to crisis situations around the globe by providing on the ground trainings, coordinating with local citizens and organizations, and making online resources available in multiple languages. Our aim is to help human rights defenders film more safely and effectively in dangerous and unpredictable environments.”

Technology can sometimes be usefully by showing video evidence of what happened during an incident. Other times technology isn’t as useful. It wouldn't be useful in a situation where it only shows one or a single part of video footage of an incident. Video footage doesn’t always tell the full story or the truth. That’s why technology including cameras outside in the streets or in stores shows some evidence but don’t at the same time.

Here is a young African American male. This young African American male is about 17 years old. He is taking a picture and looking directly into the camera. He has a white hoodie on top of his head. His name is Trayvon Martin. As Trayvon looks into this picture his eyes look like he has fear and innocence in them. Martin facial expression makes him seem like he is a little bit angry or upset about something.

Technology was a big key in the Trayvon Martin case. Trayvon Martin was walking back from the store going back to his location when George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watchman, claims Trayvon had his hoodie on and was high. He called 9/11 and said something about African American being high walking around in the rain and he thought Trayvon was up to something. The cops told him not to follow Trayvon but he followed Trayvon anyways and then claimed they began arguing and then started fighting. After, he claimed Trayvon tried to grab his gun and then he pulled out his gun and shot Trayvon Martin in the chest.

CNN website gave us the whole story and everything with details including phone calls, maps, and more. CNN stated “The same analysis also didn't reach conclusions as to whether Zimmerman used a racial epithet to describe Martin on his own 911 call, as some have alleged. Martin's family have said they believe Zimmerman, a white Hispanic, profiled the African-American teen.” Another example is Zimmerman's voice, meanwhile, comes through on a 911 call he made around that time, telling a dispatcher about "a real suspicious guy." "This guy looks like he's up to no good, or he's on drugs or something. It's raining, and he's just walking around." Another example is “The dispatcher asked Zimmerman, who'd called 911 at least four times previously for other incidents, if he was following the person. He replies, We don't need you to do that," the dispatcher responded. But Zimmerman followed him anyway.” Last quote is “Federal civil rights charges are difficult to press, let alone get convictions for. In its press release about the decision, the lack of charges against Zimmerman are said to be a result of being unable to meet the standard of proving that the "defendant knew his acts were unlawful, and committed those acts in open defiance of the law. DOJ officials said they would have had to have proven that Zimmerman approached Martin in a threatening manner before the fatal shooting because of Martin's race.”

Technology helped us know where Trayvon was coming from and all the extra details. He don’t know if George Zimmerman shot him because he was a young African American male with a hoodie on. Even the police calls when George Zimmerman called the cops of him talking to them that part even helped the case out by the cell phones. We don’t know if this was the full story or if it was even the full truth. George Zimmerman got charged for murder that he committed. Then later on they released him because they didn’t have a whole lot of evidence to charge him with murder. People till this day still talk about this case because this wasn’t right and they let a guilty man let go.

Technology was also a big key in the Kevin Garner case. Kevin Garner was 43 African American male. Kevin Garner was a front of a store. A fight broke out with two other males. New York City Police put him in a chokehold and slamming his head to the pavement. He keep telling them he couldn’t breathe but they didn’t listen at all. He continued to choke him. They claim he was selling untaxed cigarette which is illegal. There is still a question if he was selling cigarettes or not? The police say yes and some of the witness say no. People say the police are saying yes because they would have a reason to arrest him and by killing him that they don’t get in trouble.. After all this talk the police officers were never charged. Technology played a role in this case, it didn’t give us the outcome that we wanted but in our heads we know the truth.

Simple Justice gave us the whole story with updates and a full video of what happen with police and Garner asking them multiple times to stop. Simple Justice stated “New York City police officers killed a man Thursday after he had broken up a fight between two other men, insisting on placing him in a chokehold and slamming his head to the pavement, piling on top of him as he gasped for air and as he continually told the cops he couldn’t breathe.” Another example from the website is “I can’t breathe! I can’t breathe!” Eric Garner, 43, repeatedly screamed after at least five NYPD officers took him down in front of a Tompkinsville beauty supply store when he resisted being handcuffed.” The website also stated “The entire incident was caught on video from a witness who kept telling the cops that the man had not committed a crime.” Another example is “Within moments Garner, a married father of six children with two grandchildren, ceased struggling and appeared to become unconscious as police called paramedics to the scene. An angry crowd gathered, some recording with smartphones.” They stated “He referred to police rules that forbid chokeholds and define them as including “any pressure to the throat or windpipe, which may prevent or hinder breathing or reduce intake of air.”

Technology helped us by giving us a clear view. It had recorded full video from witness smartphones of police going over to Kevin Garner getting choked up and getting over abused by officers. The smartphone video also helped us by giving us a story about what happen. It also had the part when Garner pleading to the cops that he couldn’t breathe at all. Did the officer do this because his skin color?

What is the difference between “story” and “truth”? Race, technology, story and truth all comes together as one big topic. By using technology like cell phones videos, store camera videos, police officer body camera videos, cop car dash cameras videos, we can actually see what is happening than someone saying their side of the story and some of the truth and not the full truth. With the world advancing we can catch the little stuff now and now days everyone records everything and anything. We can catch abuse from officer or any abuse or anything now days just because of the improvement of technology. We can catch on video racist acts happening to any skin color by another person. We can use the video to help us in court or anything to watch what happen but sometimes we don’t get the full video of what actually happen and the full thing. We can capture moments of the video but we probably wouldn’t get the full video.

Work cited used:

• "NYPD Kills Eric Garner on Video (Update)." Simple Justice. 2014. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

• "Human Rights Campaigns & Projects from WITNESS." WITNESS. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

• CNN. Cable News Network. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

In this unit, we were going over how violence is incorporated in today's society. From all of our discussions, I decided to write about if we, as human beings, could live in a utopia, which is an absence of violence. My goal was to look towards the future and empower individuals. I use the stories of people who have been involved in wars in order to show how these violent situations can destroy the innocence of people and it starts with ourselves to have a utopia.

The world is a tree. It stands with strong roots built throughout the evolution of humans. In addition to building roots, human beings are the bark and stem of this tree. We have made societies that help make a strong system in order to exist in a world together. At the top half of this tree, the leaves are made up of the individual people of the world. The world is one big tree, but from the very beginning, this tree was always destined to have an ugly side. The side that is always shown is the side where it looks like every single person is able to receive the necessities and every person connected to the tree faces no type of traumatizing events.

This idea of the world being a tree is is presented in the above picture. The picture is made of  hands. It is a representation of the world and the countries that make up the world. There are seven bigger hands in the back of the smaller hands. This could be a representation of the 7 continents of the world. The entire picture is of hands, making it show humans make up everything given to us in this world. Throughout the history of the world, humans have found a way to adapt to certain situations and environments and this has helped us evolve overtime. The picture shows that everyone is born with an acceptance of every person no matter who they are and where they are from and this allows us to build a strong rooted tree, or just a strong society.

The idea of a world in which everyone happy and nobody experiences pain is something that would be ideal, but could we, as human beings, live in a society rooted in nonviolence? The real question is could human beings live in a utopia? The simple answer is no. The evolution of human beings has had tremendous bloodshed and with that bloodshed, people have held ideas that keep them from accepting others. This is just the unfortunate truth as to why humans couldn’t live in a utopia. But how does violence make a society unable to be in harmony?

In many instances through history, when a problem between two countries, groups, or people occurs, violence is the first solution often looked upon. As defined by Google, violence is behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something. When applied to conflicts between countries, these acts of violence lead to war. War is somethings that has heavily influenced the reason why humans beings wouldn’t be able to live in a utopia. For instance, Michael Abbatello joined the Marines and after coming home, he describes how his whole mindset changed. “Something is changed. You know, you feel down to your spirit. You know that you’re different now. You know, we don’t really have a consciousness of our own spirit until it’s wounded, and then it needs help” (PBS 2010). Micheal Abbatello is a real life example of of how war can destroy a person. When someone is placed into a very raw situation, such as war, the mindset of a perfect world is destroyed. As a result, as the idea of a peaceful world is destroyed and the world becomes a dog eat dog place.

In addition to Micheal Abbatello, many other people who are in war, whether they are civilians or soldiers, end up having their minds, morals, and outlook changed to a more negative perspective. Veterans came to our school and one of them named John Graham stated that “ war is easy to start, but hard to finish”. This is something that is true because no human being is born with an understanding on misery. Humans are born in an innocent state and this mindset is ruined because nothing in war is innocent.

Even though human beings could not live in the utopia anytime soon, there is still hope for the distant generations to live in a utopia. Right now, the world has a lot of violence penetrating the everyday lives and minds of innocent people. From the Syrian refugee crisis to the police brutality in the United States, violence in today's society is so prevalent that the current generation on the verge of living more into a dystopian society. However, the answer of how can this change lies within each individual. As Scilla Elworthy states, “It’s my response, my attitude towards oppression that I have control over… And what I need to do is to develop self-knowledge” (Fighting with Nonviolence, April 2012). This self knowledge is the realization that violent acts like war happen when humans let emotion overtake their thoughts and actions. In a situation,  Elworthy states, “That means I need to know how I tick, when I collapse, where my formidable points are, where my weaker points are. When do I give in? What will I stand up for?”. By being in control of our emotions, humans are in control of the world.

So the world tree that is in a wiltering state is able to stand upright once more again if people are aware of the power their emotions have in this world. “The only thing you can do is get up, make a cup of tea, and sit with that fear…...and anger is like gasoline and if you throw it around and someone lights a match, you have an inferno”. Controlling emotions is a major key in order for the world tree to go back into its original state: a utopia.

Works Cited:

• Elworthy, Scilla. "Fighting with Nonviolence." TED. Apr. 2012. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

• Severson, Lucky. "Moral Wounds of War." PBS. PBS, 28 May 2010. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

• Gregory, Sam. "Images of Horror: Whose Roles and What Responsibilities? - WITNESS Blog." WITNESS Blog. 2014. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.