Now try picturing that same child walking hundreds of miles of arid landscape across a country enmeshed in a civil war. There are no adults anywhere nearby, food and water are scarce, menacing soldiers with automatic weapons routinely appear. Many of those soldiers are just a few years older than the child you know.
Sadly, the story of Valentino Achak Deng - masterfully rendered by Dave Eggers in What Is the What (2006) - is far from unique. Seven-year-old refugees across the globe face circumstances like Deng's nearly every day. In lieu of recommending this disturbing and important book, let me instead pose a question to readers of my blog, many of whom I know to be responsible and humane citizens of the world.
Doesn't each of us have a moral obligation to at least expose ourselves to stories like Deng's, no matter the discomfort that exposure creates in us?
Yes I agree that it’s important to be exposed to these stories because it helps us see and empathize with the humanity in these individuals. It’s hard to lump people together in an amorphous group when u know what they have been through as individuals.
ReplyDeleteKim; Thanks for the comment and the affirmation.
DeleteYes--a million times over. I wish I could read books like Egger's but I'm too weak, especially when it involves children.
ReplyDeleteRegina; Reading a book like this is indeed difficult. There are other ways to expose ourselves to these stories to help us stay grounded in our shared humanity. Thanks for the comment.
DeleteI 100% agree Uncle Pat. I have been trying to get one of my book clubs to read hard things (I recently suggested Poverty, by America by Desmond but it was not chosen). I have already started giving books to Meghan; several years ago she read When Stars Are Scattered by Jamieson and Mohamed and this was eye opening for sure.
ReplyDeleteMarisa; Pretty wild that you chose this post to comment on because guess which children I was thinking of as I read Deng's story? Imagining either of my precious nieces in a situation even remotely like his literally stopped me cold as I was reading.
DeleteAs a general proposition, a moral obligations is a double edged sword and can cut both ways...liberators and oppressors both use it for their own purposes. It isn't necessary to seek out stories of suffering in order to feel our shared humanity because suffering is already there in the background of all that we experience. I remember walking up the long narrow steps into the upper floors of the home where Anne Frank and her family were hidden from the Nazis. That was in 1971. In 2000 I returned to the same building whose lower floors had been converted to a multi-media presentation designed to inform visitors about the circumstances of the Frank family ordeal during World War II. It seemed to me to be waste of time and effort and detracted totally from the raw emotion I experienced the first time I saw the the hidden rooms where the family lived during the war. Their ultimate betrayal came at the hands of someone who felt a moral obligation to expose their existence.
DeleteAnonymous; Thanks for the time and thought you put into this logically presented counterpoint.
DeleteFrom one "anonymous" to another; Re your 3:11 comment above, although you are technically right in saying the concept of moral obligation all depends on what one calls "moral", I don't see how anyone could claim that exposing a family to arrest and deportation to a prison camp is moral - as in the case of the Frank family - except in the most perverse way of thinking. According to AI, "Basic human values are core beliefs and principles—such as honesty, respect, compassion, responsibility, and freedom—that guide behavior, promote social harmony, and define ethical conduct. These universal values, including peace, love, and truth, are considered essential for personal growth, meaningful relationships, and a peaceful, cooperative society." I don't any reasonable person could argue with that definition. For me, the interesting word in Pat's original post is "obligation." That's a tougher one. I don't think it's a necessity to read Deng's story in order to behave in a moral way and treat others with compassion, so I see no reason why a person should have to endure something that might truly upset them, as the reader Regina said in her comment. That said, the AI values listed above include the word "responsibility," which is a close cousin of "obligation." I believe we are responsible for doing some things in order to make the world a better place. In short, humane people like the three of us (Pat, and both of we anonymous readers/commenters) should be able to agree to disagree about what our moral obligations are. I can't imagine any of us would want to be aligned with the people who outed the Frank family, morally, "obligation" aside.
Delete