The destruction of the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001 is arguably the most infamous terrorist attack on the United States in history. This event was distinguishing and memorable to nearly all who were alive to witness the fear that coincided with the attacks. I, myself, can not remember the day of the attacks because I was too young. Growing up in post-9/11 America, I experienced firsthand the measures our nation took on security (particularly in airports). I feel greatly lucky that these are the only repercussions I experienced after the attacks on 9/11, because many lost their lives or a life of a loved one. Each person recalls and interprets September 11th differently, which was clearly evident while reading both articles from "Talk of the Town." Authors, John Updike and Susan Sontag, gave their personal New-Yorker insight to their experiences and reflection on the attacks.
Updike viewed the attacks from a mere mile away, and captured the awe and terrifying image of the collapsing towers. As he and his wife viewed the death of thousands, Updike expressed more of a feeling of unison with not only New Yorkers, but Americans as a whole. He also expressed concern for the country's freedom of motion, feeling that this attack would limit some of our country's accessibility and ease to certain privileges-- and it did regarding flying procedures. Updike's article also hinted hope. His conclusion expressed an uplifting tone, while still acknowledging the pain the attacks took on Americans.
On the other hand, it seemed that Susan Sontag took on a more political viewing of these attacks. She certainly recognized the heartache and severity of the situation, but she sought out change in our country. She believed that change in our international relations with the Middle East would change our country's future, and ideally to prevent affairs such as 9/11 from occurring again. Sontag explains that this is not a fight between men, but among countries. In addition, she cynically analyzes the notion that "America is strong," because although we may be strong, strength is not going to prevent these occurrences from happening, and we must change as a nation if we truly desire a new future.
Hi Cora! While reading your post, I had some interesting thoughts and questions. You mentioned how Updike talked about how America was unified after these horrible attacks. This is certainly a great thing, and follows his "uplifting" tone that you spoke of. However, what would've happened to us as a country if this weren't the case? What if, as Susan Sontag did, we had started blaming other Americans for their actions leading up to the attacks? In my opinion, this would've led to fighting on our own soil, not just overseas. Sontag talked an awful lot about "change," as you pointed out. She blamed the government for failing to deal with the attacks well. In my mind, the country needed positivity, even if false, in order to cope with these horrible attacks. The last thing we needed at the time was cynical people like Susan. Though I do recognize the validity of the points she makes now, I think that, at the time, they were too severe. Everyone has different ways of dealing with tragedy, and I don't think she recognized that the government was trying to do just that. Though she was correct to suggest change and stress the necessity of it, I just don't think she should've been quite so quick to point fingers. We needed time to heal. This truly is a "fight among countries," which is why we needed to band together at a time like this, not criticize our government, as Sontag did, for how they dealt with this horrible tragedy.
ReplyDeleteEmily, I don't seem to fully agree with you. In my opinion, I felt that Susan Sontag wasn't trying to be "cynical" about 9/11 but truthful. This planned incursion wasn't enacted by two demented terrorist searching for a random wrecking. In reality, they had observed thousands of 9/11s occurring in their nations for years. For years they saw foreign troops from thousands of miles away deploy into their country. For years they heard the United States at fault. Arguably, Susan wasn't trying to depress U.S.citizens with her words. She, in fact, believed a nation so strong deserved to hear the truth. These citizens should demand both sides. For when we don't, the United States unanimously agrees to a president stating Iraq definitely has nuclear weapons. Unquestioningly, we want to avenge our victimized nation. And one again, we deploy our troops.
ReplyDeleteI see where Emily is coming from, because I'm sure that at the time everyone in America was scared and wanted to be comforted. That doesn't mean, though, that the government had the right to lie to the people and blindly attack Iraq without doing the research, solely to give the American's something to rally behind and feel that justice was being served. At the time Americans may have wanted to be consoled, but in reality the world and government needed more people like Sontag to tell the truth and face the realities about what was going on in our country.
ReplyDelete