*The Blood of the Victim: Revolution in Syria and the Birth of the
Image-Event*



Text by Jon Rich

You can find the full original article at:

http://www.e-flux.com/journal/view/241



videos by Jacopo Natoli







BURNING_FALLING_BRUSHING <http://vimeo.com/28571581>







(…) The broadcast image remained dominant during the revolutions throughout
the Arab world, from Tunisia to Egypt, Yemen, Bahrain, and Libya. Yet, with
the outbreak of the Syrian revolution, it looks as if something major has
changed. The revolution in Syria did not confront an authoritarian regime
like those of Egypt or Tunisia. Aziz Al-Azmeh has labeled the regime in
Syria a nizam mamlouki—a regime (nizam) that sees the people, the land, and
everything above or below it, as an unquestionable part of its own exclusive
property. In a sense, the Syrian mamlouki regime doesn’t care for the lives
in its possession, and therefore finds it simple to punish them with death
and starvation. In Daraa, things could not have been more clear: a city is
punished by withholding electricity, water, and food, leaving it to choose
between dying or yielding. It was a medieval kind of military procedure with
no relation to modern times. It is well known that president Bashar al-Assad
governs Syria from the memory of his father, the president Hafez al-Assad,
who used fighter planes to bombard the city of Hama in 1982, executing a
massacre with no modern parallel other than the massacre of Hiroshima. For
Bashar al-Assad to govern from the memory of his father is somehow
explainable, but if that memory is to be so obsolete and defunct as we have
seen most recently in the actions of the Syrian security forces, then the
invitations to coexist with the regime necessarily become irrelevant.
Consequently, the equation created by the Syrian rebels, with their profound
modernity, defeats not only Bashar al-Assad, but also the conscience of a
world showing limited support for rebels who die in front of cameras.

>From the outset of the crisis in Syria, political analysts waited for a
demonstration of millions in Damascus so they could begin to anticipate the
collapse of the bloody regime. Images of a million demonstrators is itself
enough to change the logic of politics in the world, for it is irrefutable
evidence that “the people want a change of the regime.” Yet the first weeks
passed without a demonstration by millions. There were small demonstrations
springing out of unexpected places in many Syrian towns and cities, and they
were met by unspeakable violence from the security forces. The toll was
modest in terms of numbers, but the rebels demonstrated an audacity that the
world has not seen, and is probably not yet willing to see.






*the Heart from the Moon <http://vimeo.com/28572127>*







International television networks and news agencies backed away from showing
the images of the blood and torn flesh that protesters shed fearlessly in
the face of their oppressor. The excuse was the same: some violent scenes
should not be broadcast live, for such images could have undesirable effects
on viewers. But the images from Syria are not those that were previously the
subject of distaste. They are not the images of Zarqawi, nor the images
taken by privileged journalists in southern Sudan.

The image-makers of Syria, for the first time in history, simultaneously
occupied two enormous roles: the role of the victim and that of hero. The
Syrian photographer is a protester, but instead of filming the crowd he
films his own personal death.




THE RISING OF THE SOUL <http://vimeo.com/25825890>







It is a form of suicide against the cameras that spares no one, even if the
world’s networks refrain from broadcasting its images. The protester in
Syria is simultaneously a victim of bare repression and a historian. A
protester who writes history with his own blood, body, and nerves will be a
challenge for future historians, but the revolution in Syria has also put
the media to a difficult test. Régis Debray has said that the journalist is
a dog going following scents, but this precise description does not apply to
the Syrian image-maker/protester. The protester there does not resemble the
journalist as a vulture attracted by the distant smell of blood. The
protester in Syria transforms the security forces into vultures, for they
show up wherever the protester is, and begin feeding on bodies. So much for
the ordeal of the media and the traditional politics of solidarity.



The Syrian bloodshed puts yet another party to a harder and more significant
test. One can assert without hesitation that the Syrian protesters defeated
all forms of political movement using violence as a means of achieving their
goals. The first losers were Osama bin Laden and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. The
Syrian image-maker is not the aggressor like Zarqawi, who used to film
himself killing his victims. The video showing the security men in the
village of Bayda stepping on the backs of the arrested might be close to
this, but it is an exception more than it is the rule. The Syrians
broadcasted images of their own death by live bullets, and the slain cannot
be blamed for his blood. Still, this image-maker places the spectator in a
complex position, for the person who sees these images can no longer risk
being on the side of the killer, nor can he or she identify with the
helpless victim.







no title <http://vimeo.com/28573151>






The Syrian image confronts the spectator with the impossibility of being
Syrian, whether the Syrian is killer or victim. It is more than a spectator
can withstand. This is perhaps why the Syrian images did not proliferate, as
did those of the Egyptian revolution, for it becomes very difficult to say,
“we are all Syrians,” as some would say we are all Palestinians or
Egyptians. We are still far from equaling the Syrians in their stature or
courage.



It is for these reasons that the victory of the Syrian revolution is
imminent. If the Syrians were to fail in face of the mamlouki regime, no one
in the world would endure this defeat. Since the beginning of the Syrian
revolution, the world has had no choice but to side with the repressed.



The Tunisians and Egyptians, and before them the Iranians and Lebanese, have
struggled to divert the image and the word from familiar paths. Their effort
was not the product of an intellectual or conceptual maturity, but a
concrete endeavor. These rebels knew that if they didn’t assume control over
the processes of interpretation, and if they didn’t announce their
manifestos concisely and without embellishment, they wouldn’t be able to
shape their own destinies and those of their countries. Some revolutions
succeeded and others failed, but the ones that failed were no less exemplary
than those that were victorious or that still have hope for victory. Victory
in revolution is not a theoretical lesson, for who can assure us that the
French or Russian revolutions failed or succeeded? Yet we know that they
inspired and effected change, not only in their immediate context but on an
international scale. It seems that the eagerness of those rebels to assume
control of the meaning of their revolutions was decisive in defining their
nature and importance. However, those rebels did not experience the medieval
machine of repression facing Libyan and Syrian rebels. The case of Libya is
of course different from that of Syria, for the world rushed to condemn
Gaddafi and his regime, and this made the theoretical burden on the Libyan
rebels less imposing. The Syrians face a regime that hasn’t yet played all
its cards, as its Libyan counterpart did. The Syrians want to prove that
their affable president is not a reformer, as Hilary Clinton describes him
to be, and that the secular regime is not a guardian of minorities as its
men like to claim.



The Syrian protesters knew, while the rest of the world didn’t, that the
moment they chose to go into the streets they would certainly fall into the
blind trap of the Ba’athist death. By carrying their cameras and filming
their personal deaths they deeply and radically changed the logic of an
image that we once recognized from a commentary on an event to an
accomplished event in itself.






I C O N <http://vimeo.com/28572885>







Presumably, this change will continue to trouble the international media. In
Egypt, Tunisia, and Iran, the word was the event, but this has always been
the case. In Lebanon, the image never reached an event, but in many ways the
events became an image. The Lebanese proclaimed that they faced a terrifying
machine of repression—the same one that the Syrians now face—but that
machine was dismantled early in the course of their revolution. The Lebanese
simply waited in front of cameras, showing their willingness to confront the
cruelty of repression without its ever having to materialize. In Syria we
find the other side of the same equation: there were only a few people
compared to the crowds of the other revolutions, but all of them were shot
at and all of them were dying in front of cameras that documented their
deafening and bloody deaths.

The Syrian authorities immediately made it a crime to possess a camera, and
they arrested anyone found taking images on a mobile phone. The image that
became an event has been strictly Syrian, for no one in the world has
produced anything similar. The media, and television networks in particular,
can no longer equal what the Syrian rebels have produced. They might have
been lucky for having been banned from reporting on Syrian soil.



By turning the image into an autonomous event, the Syrian rebels were able
to safeguard its meaning. They succeeded in guiding the process of
interpretation while they claimed and endorsed the images of their own
deaths. From now on, no state, people, or group has a right to tell them
what is best for them, or whether their president is a reformer. The Syrian
rebels now hold the exclusive right to interpret their own images, for the
images are of the event of their death, and it is for this reason they hold
the exclusive right to decide the future of their country.







PIETAS <http://vimeo.com/27188256>
#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org

Reply via email to