Background image

terug

The tragedy of Aids

The tragedy of Aids

11     The tragedy of Aids is that it burst on a world that was half expecting it. When the
2 syndrome was first identified in 1981 the warning bells were already beginning to sound
3 for the liberalism of the 1960s and 1970s, social purity was mobilising for action, and the
4 New Right was on the threshold of its decade of triumph.
25     What better judgment on the moral failures of the past than a virus that seemed to
6 affect disproportionately those already targeted for punitive action - the sexually,
7 culturally and racially marginal? Here, in the words of President Reagan's Director of
8 Communications, was nature's punishment on those who had transgressed the laws of
9 nature.
310     In the approach to the millennium, Susan Sontag has suggested, a rise in
11 apocalyptical thinking may be inevitable. The sense of an ending, a premature fin-de-
12 millennium spirit, appeared early in the world of sexuality, always a sensitive barometer of
13 cultural trends.
414     What has been called a 'recessionary erotic economy' was well-developed by the
15 early 1980s, with a growing fear of disease matched by fetishisation of fitness. In such a
16 climate Aids, intimately associated with sexual behaviour and with a prominent gay
17 minority, became a symbol for a life already corrupted, for the healthy and beautiful body
18 undermined by the viral invader. The hollowed faces and wracked and painfully thin
19 bodies of people with Aids were a marker for a spoiled identity, a metaphor for an ill-fated
20 liberation, for an inflationary moral economy that inevitably crashed.
521     As a result, instead of evoking the sorrow, empathy and identification the sick and
22 suffering might have expected from a liberal society, people with Aids were reviled and
23 rejected. Throughout the Western countries affected most, the governmental response
24 - especially those governments where the New Right were dominant - was slow and tardy.
25 As Randy Shilts has bitterly observed, by the time President Reagan had delivered his first
26 speech on Aids, six years into the crisis, over 36,000 Americans had been diagnosed with
27 the syndrome, and some 20,000 had died.
628     It was not until the end of 1985, when it looked as if Aids was seeping into the
29 general population, that the British government showed any signs of urgency, and
30 attempted to manage the crisis. Aids was an epidemic that was allowed to happen, because
31 of the indifference, if not downright hostility, of those in power and because of the
32 association of the epidemic with those the culture preferred to forget.
733     One major reason for this neglect lay in that moral absolutism which bubbled to the
34 surface in the 1980s. Throughout the decade New Right activists, secure in their own
35 rectitude, have preferred to attack the victim rather than the disease. So we hear the
36 leader of the Moral Majority in America calling for the rounding up and quarantining, like
37 sick animals, of homosexuals. We witness 'a group of Christian doctors' in Britain issuing a
38 plan to halt the Aids epidemic by segregating tens of thousands of people carrying the
39 HIV virus . We see a prominent police chief foaming about people at risk 'swirling around
40 in a human cesspit of their own making'.
841     The quotations could go on and on. They expose, in their language and
42 prescriptions, a fear and loathing that goes beyond the rational. HIV brings terrible
43 illnesses, but we have known for a number of years how it is spread, and how its spread
44 can be minimised. As the decade ends we are on the verge of making Aids a condition that
45 can be managed, at least in the developed countries.
946     Aids would have made an impact whoever and wherever it had struck. Its power was
47 dramatised, however, because from the first it encapsulated some of the most profound
48 currents that are reshaping the world. Aids powerfully underlines that peculiar tension
49 between the universal and the particular which is so characteristic of the times we live in.
1050     Aids is a syndrome of diseases that emerged in the first place in particular
51 communities in the west: among gay men, drug-users, haemophiliacs, blacks . It is local and
52 specific in its patterns of personal and social relationships. But at the same time it is global
53 in its dissemination and impact, epidemic in East Africa as much as North America. The
54 syndrome illustrates simultaneously the diversity of the world - the variety and complexity
55 of its patterns of behaviour, its moral codes, its way of life - and our interdependence as
56 citizens of the global village.
 
     Jeffery Weeks in 'New Statesman and Society', December 22, 1989