Still in pursuit of identity, one of my books has posed an interesting argument: Are crimes perceived as more terrible when the victims are anonymous?
Yes, it is one of these obvious questions I never thought of (and this is when you know you have fallen in love!). Originally emerging out of the depths of my research on the writings of the Marquis de Sade, ‘anonymous victims’ here refer to the shadow of our soul – in fact, the im/personality of the shadow.
Being anonymous, not known as a number on a document or in reference to another person (like wife, father, sister etc.), comes with the loss of identity. No body, no mind, no presence. Perfectly featureless.
Perhaps neutral? But how can people mourn for something neutral in death, for someone they have never known and do not have an emotional attachment to? I never understood this obvious flaw in ‘logic’ within people: Yes I feel sad when I visit my grandparents’ grave. Naturally there is an emotional family bond. But I feel almost happy for the dead seven year old girl who died 1837 who I visit at Kilpeck church, Herefordshire, regularly.
Now, if I understood for both ‘categories’ of these dead (recently deceased and a hundred years ago) that they have died because their fate was to go, then should I not feel delighted? Sharing in their good fate. Their destiny was fulfilled, and that was all they needed to give a little bit of maturity to their souls. Thus same must apply to the anonymous dead, even more so trusting in their true fate, they have fulfilled a purpose (for others, thinking of war heroes, and themselves).
Success – even in the underworld – is a reason for joy, is it not?
(taken from a letter to a friend)