On Killing by LtCol Dave Grossman, 2009, Excerpts
The link between distance and ease
of aggression has long been understood that there is a direct relationship
between the empathic and physical proximity of the victim, and the resultant
difficulty and trauma of the kill. This concept has fascinated and concerned
soldiers, poets, philosophers, anthropologists, and psychologists alike.
At the far end of the spectrum are
bombing and artillery, which illustrate the relative ease of long-range
killing. As we draw toward the near end of the spectrum, the resistance to
killing becomes increasingly more intense. This process culminates at the close
end of the spectrum, when the resistance to bayoneting or stabbing becomes
tremendously intense and killing with the bare hands becomes almost
unthinkable.
Civilians and soldiers have
withstood the actuality of fear, horror, and destruction during artillery
bombardments and aerial bombardments without losing their will to fight, while
the mere threat of invasion and close-up interpersonal aggression has turned
whole populations into refugees fleeing in panic. The potential of close-up,
inescapable, interpersonal hatred and aggression has greater impact on the
morale of the soldier than the presence of inescapable, impersonal death and
destruction.
The eyes are the window of the soul,
and if one does not have to look into the eyes when killing, it is much easier
to deny the humanity of the victim. The victim remains faceless, and one never
needs to know one’s victim as a person. And the price most killers have to pay
for a close-range kill – the memory of the “face terrible, twisted in pain and
hate” – this price need never be paid if we can simply avoid looking at our
victim’s face.
Maximum Range and Midrange
Close Range
Bayonet Range
Fleeing
Knife Range
Hand-to-Hand Kill
No comments:
Post a Comment