The 21st century population continue to experience an increase in exposure to violence and torture through digital media such as television and the internet. In her article, Maggie Nelson observes that violence and torture are no longer perceived as elements that affect human beings, but rather, they are perceived as a new style of art. Whereas this is the case, Martha Stout argues that consistent exposure to trauma has a negative effect on a person since it creates a platform for a person’s dissociation from reality. Furthermore, she notes that such exposure particularly among adults could have a lasting effect on an individual’s memory, awareness, and the sense of self. This essay compares and contrasts Nelson’s argument on violence and torture and Stout’s analysis on the effect of trauma on a person’s memory and the sense of the self. Importantly, this essay argues that consistent exposure to violence and torture could lead to irreversible traumatic experiences and dissociation.
21世纪的人口继续通过电视和互联网等数字媒体遭受暴力和酷刑。玛吉·纳尔逊在她的文章中指出，暴力和酷刑不再被视为影响人类的因素，而是被视为一种新的艺术风格。事实就是这样，玛莎·斯托特（Martha Stout）认为，持续暴露在创伤中会对一个人产生负面影响，因为它为一个人脱离现实创造了一个平台。此外，她指出，这种接触，特别是在成年人中，可能会对个人的记忆、意识和自我意识产生持久的影响。本文比较和对比了纳尔逊关于暴力和酷刑的论点和斯托特关于创伤对人的记忆和自我意识的影响的分析。重要的是，本文认为持续暴露于暴力和酷刑可能导致不可逆转的创伤经历和分离。
To begin with, continuous exposure to violence in digital media that Nelson describes in her work could lead to a form of cultural trauma and dissociation. In other words, whereas most there is a perception that trauma and dissociations can only occur in a person’s life due to exposure to actual traumatic events in life, this is not the case. On the contrary, increased exposure to violence and torture could results in a person experiencing a certain level of trauma, which eventually affects his or her personality and memory. From Stout’s perspective, “…traumatic memories include chaotic fragments that are sealed off from modulation by subsequent experience” (Stout 422). Arguably, once a person has been exposed to trauma, it is almost impossible to transform his or her traumatic conscience using other life experiences. In other words, memories from exposure to trauma are recorded in areas of the brain that is different from where memories from normal experiences are recorded, thus making it difficult to “edit” or “replace” them. This is affirmed in Nelson’s work in which she reiterates that some memories due to exposure to “modern” art that portrays violence and torture are likely to remain with the person in question for a lifetime. “…you may not remember much of what happened; you may not remember any of the characters;…you will be left with something far more amorphous–a kind of vibrating memories of the unnerving psychic state the work induced, or capture, or invented” (Nelson 310). Notably, from Stout’s argument, it is clear that normal memories are subject to meaning modification by future experiences and events…while traumatic memories are sealed off from such modification. Speaking from this point of view, the memories that Nelson refers to her work are consistent with the traumatic memories that Stout reveals in her article. Therefore, one can note that continuous exposure to violence is likely to lead to formation of traumatic memories in a person. Importantly, Nelson argues in her work that the digital media plays a critical in creating a public sphere where people can meet together but at the same time fail to form any relationship with each other. In other words, through exposure to violence and torture images, an element of dissociation emerges and as such, such images are treated just as images irrespective of whether they represent actual people in society or not. Importantly, from a collective perspective, violence and torture images are just but a form of entertainment whereas from an individual perspective, such images have an identity transformation effect with a lasting impact.
首先，Nelson在其作品中描述的持续暴露在数字媒体中的暴力可能导致某种形式的文化创伤和分离。换句话说，尽管大多数人认为创伤和分离只能在一个人的生活中发生，因为在生活中暴露于实际的创伤事件，但事实并非如此。相反，更多地接触暴力和酷刑可能导致一个人经历某种程度的创伤，最终影响他或她的个性和记忆。从斯托特的角度来看，“……创伤记忆包括混沌碎片，这些碎片被随后的经验与调制隔离”（斯托特422）。可以说，一个人一旦受到创伤，就几乎不可能用其他生活经历来改变他或她的创伤良知。换句话说，暴露在创伤中的记忆记录在大脑不同于记录正常经历记忆的区域，因此很难“编辑”或“替换”它们。这一点在Nelson的作品中得到了肯定，她在作品中重申，由于接触到描绘暴力和酷刑的“现代”艺术，一些记忆可能会伴随着相关人员一辈子。“……你可能记不住发生了什么事；你可能记不住任何一个角色；……你将留下一种更加无定形的东西——一种关于工作所诱发、捕捉或发明的令人不安的精神状态的振动记忆”（Nelson 310）。值得注意的是，从斯托特的观点来看，很明显，正常的记忆会受到未来经历和事件的意义修改……而创伤记忆则不会受到这种修改。从这个角度讲，Nelson提到她的作品的记忆与Stout在文章中揭示的创伤记忆是一致的。因此，人们可以注意到，持续接触暴力很可能导致一个人形成创伤记忆。重要的是，Nelson在她的作品中指出，数字媒体在创造一个公共领域方面起着至关重要的作用，在这个公共领域中，人们可以聚在一起，但同时却无法形成任何关系。换言之，通过接触暴力和酷刑图像，出现了一种分离的因素，因此，这些图像被视为图像，而不管它们是否代表社会中的真实人。重要的是，从集体的角度来看，暴力和酷刑图像只不过是一种娱乐形式，而从个人的角度来看，这些图像具有持久影响的身份转换效应。