Week 9 or 10 Analysis

I'm confused as to what week we're actually on. Anyway, I'll be analyzing Pierre Bourdieu et al., The Weight of the World: Social Suffering in Contemporary Society. I was actually very surprised to find that none of the pieces in the book directly dealth with HIV/AIDS. Is there another example of suffering in contemporary that is more accute that has more emotional, physical, spiritual, and societal implications? Can we not say that for at least the first decade and a half of AIDS in Western society, that the disease was truly our modern leprosy? (Attitudes and actions have improved somewhat, but there are those who are still sadly ignorant or malicious towards those with the disease.)

I want to look at two pieces in The Weight of the World. The first piece is the second half of "Inside 'The Zone'" by Loic J. D. Wacquant. Wacquant discusses various attitudes towards those living in the ghetto. The "miserabilistic" attitude leads one to mental compassion for those in the ghetto. Such a view believes that those in the ghetto are "reduced to the passive state of hapless victims." The other view is the "populist" that "celebrates thenvirtues of the dominated and portrays as a heroic strategy of 'resistance' what is often merely an economic tactic of self-preservation." Both views lead us to objectify those in the ghetto. Wacquant wants us to instead "suspend, if only temporarily, one's initialreaction of sympathy, indignation or horror, and agree to look at this world from the point of view [of]...the 'natural attitude' or everyday life." (Wacquant, in Bourdieu et al., 152)

Wacquant's words might at first feel like a slap in the face to Christians who truly want to be compassionate people and suffer with those enduring injustice. But before reacting to the fact that Wacquant is critical of only mentally compassionate responses, let us appreciate his critique first. Wacquant's view wants us to actually go into the culture or life of a person first and see their world through the eyes of the inhabitants of that society as much as we can. Christians have an amazing capacity to help, but we have also had an astounding ability to be paternalistic. The ghetto is by no means a paradise -- simply read the account from Ricky in the book -- but it is a home full of people created in God's image. Only through seeing the world through the eyes of the inhabitants are we able to truly suffer with (be compassionate) people in the ghetto. This stance does not lead to quietism, but respect for the people there.

I wonder how Wacquant's words can critique (both positively and negatively) the Church's response to HIV/AIDS. Africa is on fire and the world must respond. But do we do so only out of mental compassion? Are we apt to in fact romanticize those living with the disease? One option leads to paternalism and the other to quietism. Do we instead allow Africans to take the lead in fighting the disease in their country? This third option is one of the most difficult for our project since those groups leading in Africa are hard to find on the web. Africa as a continent is still in the process of development and the Internet is by no means a primary source of information and communication for the general population. Right now most of our resources are Western, but I think that they are doing a good job. Still, it would be great to find more African groups fighting AIDS.

The second article I want to respond to is "The Sick Person as Object" by Francois Bovin. his interview with Isabelle, a hospitalized woman seeking help with her life-long disability. Isabelle's account of meeting with doctors who performed several surgeries to give her prostheses is incredibly shocking, especially the callousness that some of the physicians and nurses showed her. While this piece is a good discussion for the reform of hospital care in the West, it does not have much to do with a societal or Church-wide response to HIV/AIDS. I do think, however, that Bonvin's article can help us as we move forward in addressing HIV/AIDS.

First, while we are rightly putting a lot of energy into prevention, we must remember that there are over 40 million people living with HIV right now. Prevention alone is not a just response to the disease -- we must also treat the ill. What we must protect ourselves from, however, is the objectification of people living with HIV/AIDS. They do have a horrible disease, but these people are not the disease. Isabelle recounts how her health care providers saw only her disability. Her emotional and physical pain were not heavily considered since the goal was to alleviate her disability. The doctors and nurses were well-meaning, I am sure, but they made a mistake and did not treat Isabelle as a whole person. They only treated the malady. We cannot make the same mistake with HIV/AIDS. We are not treating only symptoms, but trying to help whole persons. These people are no different than the rest of us. They have families and friends, they work, they live in communities, they participate in their faith traditions. A societal response to those living with and dying from HIV will have to take the whole person -- including their larger milieu -- if that response is to be just and consistent with the gospel of Jesus.