Thought experiment

A few days ago, I asked people to imagine that it was an uncontested fact that the prisoners in the photos at Abu Ghraib were

terrorists, people who had participated in beheadings or attempted suicide bombings or bombings of civilian targets. No doubt, everyone knows it, they themselves freely admit it.

I then asked if that would change in any way, to any degree, your reaction to the photos, that is, if you knew the suffering was being inflicted on the guilty and not the innocent.

I've got another one for you. Just like that one, there is no right or wrong answer, no "you're a good person/you're a bad person" result, just something to think about.

Imagine a drawing of the US Capitol building with the dome tipped back. Out of the opening rises an angel of death wearing a swastika. The picture is titled "The New Democracy." Think about your reaction to that picture.

Okay, now add something: The picture is hanging on a wall in a fabric shop in Tripoli, Libya. Does that in any way change your response to the picture? Does, that is, the location in which the sentiment is expressed, the identity of the speaker (in the case the person displaying the picture), make a difference?

The picture and the location are real, appearing in a photo in the winter 2004 issue of Aperture magazine. (You can see the drawing in the photo, although not on a scale to make out what it is, by going to this link, where you will see a picture of the issue's cover with thumbnails of pages next to it. Pick the second from the top; the drawing is visible in the photo on the lower right, beneath the title "This is Libya." Again, it's not on a scale where the drawing is legible, but knowing what it is already, you can sort of make it out.)

I'm curious as to how others would react partly because I know my reaction was affected by the location. Only a little, but enough that I was aware of the difference. I know that if I saw that picture on a wall in the US, I would be more offended than I would be by seeing it in Libya, but I would be less disturbed. The thing is, I'm not really sure why or even if I could clearly explain the difference between being offended and being disturbed. I have some suspicions, but I have to work through my own reactions, which is, again, part of why I'd be interested in hearing others'.

For anyone who says "context doesn't matter," consider this: As much as I enjoyed Richard Pryor - nobody was better at characterization - I was always uncomfortable when he told "nigger" jokes. But I know damn well I would feel very differently, I would be moved to boiling fury, if those same jokes were told by a white man. Context does matter. Not always enough to make a difference, but it does matter.