Mongoose, Baudrillard

Baudrillard is very concerned with the effects that images have on our culture; he believes that the image actually gives and creates meaning for events the take place in the world. He also believes that although they can “exalt the event, they also take it hostage” (228); by this he means that a particular image is all that comes to mind when then event is spoken of. Baudrillard uses the example of September 11 and the collapse of the World Trade Center Towers, whenever someone hears the words terrorism or terrorist attack their mind automatically views the image of the towers collapsing and this strikes up certain emotions within them. He also believes that the terrorists use these images in order to promote fear or other terrorist ideologies; they know and take advantage of the ‘real time’ transmission of images around the world, knowing that the entire world will soon see the image and immediately strike fear in all who see them. Baudrillard presents the argument that these images and the emotions they bring up for those who see them were responsible for support of the war, a war which he sees as contradictory. He believes that fighting violence with violence sends the wrong message and serves no purpose.
Zizek’s article runs along the same path with Baudrillard in coming to the conclusion that the images of September 11 have come to make the actual event un-real. By saying that it is unreal they mean that they have been repeated so many times that we are no longer seeing the actual event, but rather just images of the event. To me this idea kind of tied in with Benjamin’s ‘waning of affect’ idea; Benjamin argues that when we see an image too many times it loses it affect and originality on the viewer. While I don’t believe that seeing the images of September 11 will ever lose their power and the feelings of hurt and anger that come along with them, I can see where they are coming from on this.