Subscribe via RSS Feed

On Metaphors and Violence

[ 1,038 ] December 18, 2012 |

The last couple of days have been a bit challenging for me. Being attacked by a David Horowitz wannabe for saying I wanted to see Wayne LaPierre’s head on a stick has led to a world of fun, ranging from a meeting with the Rhode Island State Police last night to people inundating the University of Rhode Island community with warnings of their murderous colleague in their midst.

So to clarify, I want to make it blindingly clear that I did not call for the assassination of Wayne LaPierre. In my world, calling for someone’s head on a stick is a metaphor to hold them responsible for their actions. I think the last time “head on a stick” actually meant murder was sometime around 1450. That anyone would take this seriously as a murder threat is completely absurd. What stinks about it is that it has now involved my family, colleagues, and university. So I’ll apologize to them and to anyone legitimately offended by my metaphor.

If we go to the Urban Dictionary to see how it defines “head on a stick,” there are several options. Some range around medieval violence. But this is the actual definition in use today:

A metaphor describing retaliation or punishment for another’s wrongdoing, or public outrage against an individual or group for the same reason.

After the BP Oil Spill; many Americans would like to see Tony Hayward’s head on a stick, myself included.

This is the obvious definition I was using. Do I want to see Wayne LaPierre punished in the way many of us wanted to see Tony Hayward punished during the BP oil spill or the way many of us wanted to see Dick Cheney punished during the Iraq War. Of course. That would mean real accountability for causing immeasurable harm to families, nations, and/or nature. Do I think the National Rifle Association is culpable for the murders of thousands of people in the United States and Mexico because of the policies they support? Yes. Do I think it is reasonable to call the National Rifle Association a terrorist organization? Although obviously using more than a little hyperbole, yes. It is defensible precisely because the polices they support facilitate the terror unleashed in Newtown, at the Clackamas Town Center, at the Sikh temple in Wisconsin, at the theater in Aurora, at Columbine.

And in Springfield.

In 1998, my high school Spanish teacher was killed by her son Kip Kinkel before he went to his own high school and opened fire, killing 2 students and wounded 15. This is personal stuff to me. I will never forget the moment I heard about it. I was driving in east Texas when I stopped to eat. I picked up a paper and saw it. I don’t know what noise I made, but whatever it was it caused everyone in the restaurant to turn and look at me. I just started shaking. I was never a gun guy, but it was a fundamental moment in my political life. So when I see yet another school shooting, I get very angry and emotional. If that occasionally leads to unfortunate language, well there’s the reason.

But let’s also be clear–these people KNOW I am not calling for LaPierre’s assassination. They use language far surpassing anything I would ever say all the time. Here is Glenn Reynolds, so outraged by my intemperate language, asking “can we see some heads roll” over the Benghazi attacks. Does Reynolds literally want to see the head of Susan Rice decapitated from her body? Of course not. It’s a metaphor. I wouldn’t have even looked twice at that line because I know exactly what he means, even if I disagree with him. Not to mention that Reynolds has quite literally called for the assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists. But I am today’s subject of the right-wing Two Minute Hate. Tomorrow it will be some other poor sap. This is all a game to these extremists, seeking to turn the tragedy of Newtown to focus on the real victims here–American white conservative gun owners. The fact that my intemperate language helped give them a lever to try and turn that narrative is unfortunate and I apologize for it. But of course they would have found any number of other people or situations where they would have done the same thing.

And look, if I used violent metaphors, that’s a bad thing. I will admit that at certain moments such language might become part of my vocabulary. But then I’m a product of the same violent culture that makes real discussion about guns virtually impossible in this country. Scholars such as Richard Slotkin and Richard Maxwell Brown have spent whole careers exploring the theme of violence in American history. Others have noted the massive violent underpinnings of the United States ranging from antebellum mobs to lynchings to violence in the popular media. I probably shouldn’t use that language and certainly will be a lot more conscious going forward of not using it again, particularly since it doesn’t help in the battle against actual violence. Violence is a huge societal problem that influences all of us in various ways. Some may use violent metaphors to express their frustrations. Others join organizations that support assault rifles and semi-automatic weapons being in the hands of anyone without any sort of background check or regulation. I’ll leave it to you to decide who is the bigger problem.

Share with Sociable

Comments (1,038)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. […] with accumulated wingnuttery is this: If I’m careful, it won’t happen to me. Erik employed an emotional-but-common metaphor to describe his feelings about a major public figure in the wake of a tragedy; the response has […]

  2. […] Daniel Inouye Was the Biggest Punk in Congress (in a good way) Why is Twitter letting us export? On Metaphors and Violence The Battle Of Athens Revisited An A-to-Z Guide to 2012′s Worst Words The National Review […]

  3. […] has defended that tweet on the grounds that it was metaphorical: So to clarify, I want to make it blindingly clear that I did not call for the assassination of […]

  4. […] has defended that tweet on the grounds that it was metaphorical: So to clarify, I want to make it blindingly clear that I did not call for the assassination of […]

  5. Andy says:

    Ya, you can’t be to blame for anything you say or do! After all you’re a product of the violent culture so you shouldn’t be accountable for anything…ever. But of course evil people like the NRA–people so evil that they want the right to defend themselves–those evil monsters ARE accountable for what they do and deserve to be imprisoned until they die.

  6. […] prompting a visit from the police. This is not reasonable. Crooked Timber has a good rundown. Here is Erik's own take. Especially if you've read Erik's posts over the years, consider joining me in writing an email to […]

  7. […] turning to resources like social media and mobile applications to glean information about products and services a brand’s online presence is more important than ever before when it comes to establishing a […]

  8. 88888 We’re not sure when they are ample to halt a pedicab driver, but we haven’t nevertheless placed so much of our self worth inside their palms.. Via internet TutorialsLet’s deal with it, a variety of of us will not provide the time or moolah to implement hair dressers, louis vuitton agenda planner make-up artists and stylists on even an occasional foundation.
    Cheap Louis Vuitton Handbags Online Outlet

  9. […] 1:22 pm ET: Loomis defends his “head on a stick” comment in a blog post. (It’s OK because it was a metaphor, you see.) He mentions in passing that he had […]

  10. […] 1:22 pm ET: Loomis defends his “head on a stick” comment in a blog post. (It’s OK because it was a metaphor, you see.) He mentions in passing that he had […]

  11. […] University of Rhode Island professor Erik Loomis is defending his angry, violent tweets on the grounds that they were metaphorical. […]

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.