Abu Ghraib and the image

Those images are only a part of a painful and sorry sight played by a
despotic power! The Abu Ghraib pictures are not art works, even someone may
understand photography as pure and simple imitation of actual things or
photography as a simply reproductive tool. Because those are images of
phantoms in a cave, in platonic sense. The victims of abuses are others,
they are nobodies, completing forgotten on your own pain. From this
pictures, we know nothing about their lives or their feelings and the
dominant impression when contemplating them is the gratuite exposure of
shadows in a wall. The bric-a-brac of the bodies reminds red meat in a
slaughterhouse, carcass plunder as the work of a butcher.

I think we are living a time where cruelty took the place of capitalism
cynicism, what was unthinkable years ago: punishement made the rules,
scourge is before law, as "In the Penal Colony" of Kafka. The passivity and
the silence of international law behind terror regime of Israel, doing the
law means nothing! The only law is the barbarie and savagery of Isreal state
that have been killed dozen and dozen of lebanese and palestine children,
beyond the eyes of the world! And this strange passivity and silence may be
a sign, a sympton of excess of sorrow, a overplus uneasiness for such orgy
of blood. The war machiney of Israel have been unmasked as a paranoic and
perverse machine. In a delerium of destruction, soldiers, rabbin and jews
psychologists going to the desert to do a new holocauste, the ultimate
sacrifice in the name of Jehova. A new alliance between USA and Isreal
consolidate the revenge of the Israel sons against the descendents of the
cananeus and filisteus, the original people of the hebraist promised land.
The Isreal policy to palestine land is a irrational one, haven't no concerne
about rights or justice, but is determined by the desire of revenge.
In fact, this is the only motive for the terribles crimes accomplished by
the
Army of Isreal, to give cruelity a new horrible meaning.

Joao
[email protected]


On Jul 21, 2006, at 7:28 AM, Susana Mendes Silva wrote:

>
> I find this sentence quite intriguing. Why this images are art works for
> you? Because you find in them some aesthetical value? Because they mimic
> the "transgressive art that is part of a fairly standard Avant-garde
> position essentially epatez du bourgeois"? They seem to me like war
> trophies…