“All images that display the violation of an attractive body are to a certain degree, pornographic. But images of the repulsive can also allure. Everyone knows that what slows down highway traffic going past a horrendous car crash is not only curiosity” (95).
I’ve had this exact thought while reading previous chapters of this book. There is something truly fascinating about gross and terrible things or events. This thought continues into the other quotes I found(though may not put into this post), but this one specifically says something about the nature of the event, rather than the human condition to see it at all costs. In the same way that love and hate aren’t truly opposites, something gross and terrible can still interest and force people to keep looking.
What is the middle ground? When is a picture too grotesque to look at or not grotesque enough?
“Wherever people feel safe–this was her bitter, self accusing point–they will be indifferent” (100).
The middle part of this sentence wasn’t necessary, but I thought it kind of emphasized the angry repulsion we have within ourselves over our fascination with events that don’t affect us. This quote is entirely true. The closer we are to a situation, the less we want to hear about it in the news or other media. Maybe this is why even with awareness of certain situations, people don’t help the victims. Instead, those viewing the story see it as just that, a story. Something that isn’t real or is so far removed from their reality that they don’t even think about helping to lessen the effects of the situation.
What is needed to make people who aren’t close to a situation want to help when different calamities affect other people?
