What Are the Narratives of Women in Violent Communities?

Hannah Arendt (1906-1975) was preparing for her PhD in philosophy of love from the University of Marburg in Germany when the Nazi regime invaded the country and began to pursue Jews. Thus pursuing Arendt, a Member of a Jewish family, forcing her to flee to France after being detained in Germany for four days, and then In France. She was also detained in concentration camps by the French themselves. Miraculously, she managed to escape to the United States in 1941. She then worked as a reporter for The New Yorker and covered the Eichmann trials in Jerusalem, which he was convicted of involvement in massacres of Jews in Europe. These trials prompted her to write about the concept of the triviality of evil, and she acknowledged the radical goodness of man, which she saw as inherent in mankind, unlike many philosophers who viewed human nature as evil.

Difference Between Old and Modern Violence

In her book On Violence (March 1970), Arendt differentiates between old violence and the violence of modern societies that aims not at absolute victory but to subjugate the adversary through various means of oppression. It differentiates between three types of violence used by the authorities: military violence, repression, and violence resulting from technological advances that destroy human freedom based on freedom of thought, as well as the use of such advances by political regimes for military armament. This particular point is understandable at the time of the book's publication, when the Cold War culminated in the arms race between the United States and the Soviet Union.

Arendt says violence and power are incompatible, but at the same time they appear together. Power does not need violence because it is legitimate because of the group, but violence always needs non-political tools such as repression, circumvention, and social adaptation for ideological change or oppression. If power shifts to the power of the individual against the group, it loses its legitimacy and turns to violence. Although Arendt acknowledges that the ruling authority, whether democratic or totalitarian, uses violence, whether soft or direct, where the former employs the power of coercion and subjugation in the name of the public interest, while totalitarian power uses violence in the name of God or the ruler, it asserts that violence. The contemporary becomes violent when it is only individual, directed in the name of the individual against the community, not the other way around. In Life after Trauma, Violence and Self-Reconfiguration (2002), Princeton University philosopher and professor of values Susan J. Bryson begins her personal experience of analyzing violence. She was abducted while pregnant and raped, and almost lost her life. She then embarked on a long journey to build a new self after the one she lost with the accident. Bryson does not emerge from power, but from the self that a person loses after an event in which a person feels completely helpless in the face of one of the forces that threatens his life.

Susan J. Bryson's Views on Violence

Bryson tries to dissociate herself according to previous concepts to the same, narrative and independent self. Bryson sees it as harmonious and complementary to each other, and deals with different self-interpretations. Metaphysics viewed it as something that, over time, its perseverance of personal identity. This identity consists of a physical experience that is attached to memories and other personality traits, while post-structuralself is seen as one of the stories that tells a point of view that expresses psychological communication between one person and others. While there is a traditional interpretation of the self that i consider individual and recognizable away. about its social context and over time. On the contrary, feminist interpretations of self were viewed through ways in which they were formed in relation to other selves and in support of the social context.

Through her personal experience, Bryson went through stages that she had to create a new one, she said. She viewed the victim of violence not as a pity but as a philosophical concept that required reflection and support for the rebuilding of a new one. It is also striking that victims who face long periods of repeated torture are able to separate themselves from their bodies. She points out that victims of sexual and other physical abuse against children make this strategy a line of defense against the risk of self-harm. Some of them appear or be personal or more unharmed from these attacks. Bresson says that, "a prerequisite for recreating a new self for the stubborn is that they can create an account of what happened in their own way and find a recipient who hears this narrative, shows understanding and sympathy."

In an interview, Hannah Arendt said that men seek to be influential in their books, unlike them who just want to understand what happened, to resist her fragile memory, as if Arendt implied her statement that creating a narrative is a prerequisite for building a new self, which Arendt insisted after she moved to America. She is determined to preserve her native language, which was part of her old self, and although she writes in English as if she were writing to a recipient who did not go through her tragedy, he would be different from her own. The language is the double narrative bearer that Arendt has narrated throughout her life, one for herself in her old language, one new one directed at the other and to the new self that surrounds her.

It may be legitimate to question the narratives of women in violent societies, where most of them are physical violence, and the experience of violence within narrow communities in families, families or wider communities on the streets and the working environment becomes part of the character formed, and these experiences are shown in women's narratives, who have a means of narrative, whether language, image, composition, or any other artistic expression tool. In cultural circles, the truth of the body is disguised as the main component of the self of the woman writer, either because of the body's rejection as a self-fulfilling component. Due to the ideas of the ancient philosophers who called for abandoning the idea of the body by transcendence and transcendence, or as the preserve of male writers for use and employment. But a woman's attempt to create a narrative parallel to her own life and personal worries to go to another narrative that may be broader and more comprehensive, being described as "women's writing" by underestimating it and not to be able to analyse it, so that violence moves into a new circle, from old self-defeating violence to new violence that rejects the formation of a new one.

If it is Arendt's manly writing that takes a distance between the author and the world, from god's point of view to analyze or create the world, women go on more than themselves in an attempt to build an integrated narrative of what happened to them to understand the world. While the remarks against women's writing as a reflection of the victim's narratives are not something to be ashamed of. But the world itself should be ashamed to use violence against individuals. If writing is a narrative about a victim, not receiving it, attempting to attack it or denying it hinders the creation of a new self. Although some say it is not the job of literature to pay attention to all this, the lowest required level of literature is self-expression. The deviation from that concept may be linked to the cultural bubble within which we live. According to Arnt, intellectuals have a great ability to view anything and falsify it using language.

All of this may lead us to an important question: do women not produce major narratives, and do men not produce micro-narratives? It is wrong to admit this, which has set itself into the world, explained the concepts of violence, evil and power in a comprehensive way, and Bryson also explained her concept of violence against individuals and the production of narrative sedation of man. Self may be a starting point for the world, and we have to accept that.

As part of the 16-day campaign against violence against women, Dar Han in Cairo held a women's amateur photography exhibition, opened by professional photographer Randa Shaath. The worldwide campaign against any kind of gender-based discrimination, held annually at this time, has been given the slogan "For women's writing". The posts, which were signed by eight photographers, were dominated by portraits.

The publisher of the house, Hind Salem, says that women's photography is not only the one depicted by women, but that it expresses something that belongs to women, in a world whose details are sharp and delicate. She explains that feminism is more understood by its male equivalent, and cites one of the posts that provided a picture of a man and a woman, the man at the front of the staff smoking shisha while the woman in the background. She says that the feminist presence in the picture is an important factor in looking at the accepted photography presented.

Rajai Musa (editor of the house) says that the exhibition is dedicated to Karima Abboud, the first Palestinian Arab photographer, holding a camera and taking a successful photo in 1913. Opening her own studio in Bethlehem to photograph women, and establishing her photographic experience to photograph women in the streets, homes and workplaces. He tells that women have a long history as photographers alongside Abboud in the Arab world. There was Margaret Camion, who was the first woman to take a picture in 1863 and dated her at 1 p.m. on January 29. Moussa adds that the term feminism is absent from Egypt, although it has existed in Europe since the 1960s, due to the ambiguity about the concept of feminism within art and its rejection, skepticism or lack of understanding. He says that he is personally with this concept, because art is linked to its maker and its identity. Moses adopts the concept of the thinker Jacques Lacan, the "mirror", in which man sees himself in childhood to form himself. He argues that art is likewise a mirror of self-identification and self-understanding and that it reflects the identity of the manufacturer, whether it is feminist or masculine. He continues that it is the male producer who establishes and entrenches values, while feminism views the world relatively and is far from major concerns or narratives.