Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Mitchell, J. (2012). Promoting peace, inciting violence: the role of religion and media . Routledge. 328 pages. ISBN 978-0-415-55746-7.

Mitchell, J. (2012). Promoting peace, inciting violence: the role of religion and media .... Jolyon Mitchell is especially well known for his expertise in ethics and popular culture. In this book, for example, he delves into the causes of violence and its transformation into its opposite. In essence, he considers the role of religion and the media in building peace; but the author is well aware that religion, too, can produce violence — that it is, indeed, often perceived as a major source of violence. Still, it also has the capacity to promote peace. The strength of the book, and its weakness, lie in its exceptional scope. Geographically, Mitchell cites examples from Britain, Iran, Rwanda, South Africa and India. The media he studies are equally diverse: print, digital and audio-visual. I do not propose to enlarge on these examples. The book is divided into two major parts. In the first, the author examines the ways in which a range of media can generate violence. He gives many examples: pronouncing a war to be ‘holy’; celebrating heroic martyrdom; commemorating past hurts or victimisation; instilling fear of the ‘other’; encouraging people to fight for what seems to be a greater good; vengeance; and so on and so forth. Stained glass, impassioned sermons and posters, stimulating radio broadcasts, cartoons: all of these can incite people to beat ploughshares into swords. The basic technique is to transform the neighbour into the ‘other’. Violence is difficult to stop once it becomes endemic. The author maintains, with Girard, that the root of violence is mimesis. Religious language disseminated by various media can be very effective in creating a vicious circle. But religious language disseminated by various media can also promote peace. Mitchell finds his best examples in South Africa, and this is my main criticism of the book. It is doubtful, to say the least, that past hurts have been healed in that country; indeed, many still see the covert remains of apartheid as a time bomb. The main focus of this part of the book is on films. Films are a highly popular medium that could do much to nurture peace. The author makes a number of suggestions, but I doubt whether these models apply to other situations: think of the use of films by dictators. A movie can act as a trigger; but if there is no community to sustain the protest, or no other media to support the initial spark, the non-violent movement fades and dies. In that respect the new digital media could strongly reinforce the traditional ones. Mitchell concludes by citing some admirable works of art to illustrate the peace-building process: Fear action by Paul Hobbes, Clay gun by Noah Scalin, various cartoons. The author is optimistic, and indeed it would not do to underestimate the power of the media; but in the end it all depends on whether this power is in benign or hostile hands. And then there is the time factor. It takes time for the media, whether abused or put to ethical use, to influence public opinion. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Empirical Theology Brill

Mitchell, J. (2012). Promoting peace, inciting violence: the role of religion and media . Routledge. 328 pages. ISBN 978-0-415-55746-7.

Journal of Empirical Theology , Volume 26 (2): 253 – Jan 1, 2013

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/mitchell-j-2012-promoting-peace-inciting-violence-the-role-of-religion-YzB4H86l1y

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
Subject
Book Reviews
ISSN
0922-2936
eISSN
1570-9256
DOI
10.1163/15709256-12341264
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Jolyon Mitchell is especially well known for his expertise in ethics and popular culture. In this book, for example, he delves into the causes of violence and its transformation into its opposite. In essence, he considers the role of religion and the media in building peace; but the author is well aware that religion, too, can produce violence — that it is, indeed, often perceived as a major source of violence. Still, it also has the capacity to promote peace. The strength of the book, and its weakness, lie in its exceptional scope. Geographically, Mitchell cites examples from Britain, Iran, Rwanda, South Africa and India. The media he studies are equally diverse: print, digital and audio-visual. I do not propose to enlarge on these examples. The book is divided into two major parts. In the first, the author examines the ways in which a range of media can generate violence. He gives many examples: pronouncing a war to be ‘holy’; celebrating heroic martyrdom; commemorating past hurts or victimisation; instilling fear of the ‘other’; encouraging people to fight for what seems to be a greater good; vengeance; and so on and so forth. Stained glass, impassioned sermons and posters, stimulating radio broadcasts, cartoons: all of these can incite people to beat ploughshares into swords. The basic technique is to transform the neighbour into the ‘other’. Violence is difficult to stop once it becomes endemic. The author maintains, with Girard, that the root of violence is mimesis. Religious language disseminated by various media can be very effective in creating a vicious circle. But religious language disseminated by various media can also promote peace. Mitchell finds his best examples in South Africa, and this is my main criticism of the book. It is doubtful, to say the least, that past hurts have been healed in that country; indeed, many still see the covert remains of apartheid as a time bomb. The main focus of this part of the book is on films. Films are a highly popular medium that could do much to nurture peace. The author makes a number of suggestions, but I doubt whether these models apply to other situations: think of the use of films by dictators. A movie can act as a trigger; but if there is no community to sustain the protest, or no other media to support the initial spark, the non-violent movement fades and dies. In that respect the new digital media could strongly reinforce the traditional ones. Mitchell concludes by citing some admirable works of art to illustrate the peace-building process: Fear action by Paul Hobbes, Clay gun by Noah Scalin, various cartoons. The author is optimistic, and indeed it would not do to underestimate the power of the media; but in the end it all depends on whether this power is in benign or hostile hands. And then there is the time factor. It takes time for the media, whether abused or put to ethical use, to influence public opinion.

Journal

Journal of Empirical TheologyBrill

Published: Jan 1, 2013

There are no references for this article.