From: hartigan@ac.dal.ca
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Torture and the mind: _Star Trek_ vs. _1984_. 
Date: 31 Dec 92 20:31:28 -0400
Organization: Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada


This is a reply to "Drake" regarding a criticism I made about the
Star Trek episode in which Captain Picard gets tortured by the
Kardassians (?). 

My newsreaded deleted his post before I had a chance to reply to it, so 
I'm doing so here. 

In brief, my criticism was that I thought the show confused two related, but
different subjects: the psychological effects of prolonged torture,
and the use of pain as a means to induce people to perform what Sartre
calls the act of "bad faith."  I said that I thought Orwell handled 
this issue better in _1984._

Why? Well, Picard's comment to the ship psychologist was that "at the end,
there, I really thought I saw five lights." (the torturer was trying to
get Picard to say that there were five lights behind him when in fact
there was only 4). 

In Orwell's novel, the torturer tries to get the protagonist, Winston Smith,
to acknowledge the veracity of the equation "2+2=5."  In the final
scene of the novel, Smith writes the equation "2+2= " but does not
write an answer. Finally, he sees on the telescreen that Big Brother's
forces have won a major military victory, and he, who has hated Big Brother
all his life, is overcome with happiness. "But it was all right,
everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the
victory over himself. He loved Big Brother."   He dreams blissfully
of the "long-hoped-for bullet entering his brain."

The Star Trek show's point seems to be that Picard is so motivated by
the prospect of further torture that his visual perceptions actually
change. Nevertheless, Picard refuses to say that he sees five lights, 
even though he apparently does see them. Picard remains defiant even in
the face of the "treachery" of his own neurons.  

Orwell's point is different -- Winston Smith actually LOVES Big Brother
at the end of the novel. His defiance is replaced by the deepest affection
for his torturers.  Orwell, I would argue, is free of the Romanticism
that underlies the STTNG episode, which seems to say that even though
Picard's very perceptions have been altered, his desire for an end to
the torture warps his sight, his "soul" or (whatever)
remains free. Winston Smith finally gives his "soul" away in return
for an end to an otherwise endless and futile struggle. The torturers
of _1984_ would regard the Kardassians as amateurs.

In other words, I don't think the point that STTNG was making was as 
interesting as Orwell's.  Orwell shows us how one comes to love
an oppressive and evil force -- we give our souls away in return for
an end to the struggle. This is a lesson that we can use everyday, 
for Winston Smith is extrordinary only in that it takes a very long
and painful struggle, with the prospect of a lifetime of the same, 
to make him deny his integrity.  The people around him, the 
ordinary citizens of Oceania, give away their souls far more cheaply.
This fact, which Orwell brings home to us, explains a lot, 
especially (though not exclusively) in the realm of religion.

Now, STTNG shows us how torture can be a motivator
strong enough to even alter our perceptions (which no doubt it can),
and in this regard, it takes on an unusual and daring subject.
But ultimately it just affirms the Romanticism of its audience -- Picard
does not submit. Yawn. More dime-store Romanticism. "You can mess with my
body, my desires, and even my brain, but you can't really get at a
brave man's soul!"  

From _1984_ :  

   "They can't get inside you," she had said. But they could get inside you.
   "What happens to you here is _forever_," O'Brien [Smith's torturer]
    had said. That was a true word. There were things, your own acts,
    from which you could never recover. Something was killed in your
    breast: burnt out, cauterized out.


Well, enough for now. 

Sean Hartigan
hartigan@ac.dal.ca

"It is impossible to build a civilization on fear and hatred and cruelty. 
 It would never endure."

 "Why not?"

Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc