Identifying
Terrorists and the Ghost of Cesare Lombroso
The
criminal [is] an atavistic being who reproduces in his person the ferocious
instincts of primitive humanity and the inferior animals. Thus were explained anatomically the
enormous jaws, high cheek-bones, prominent superciliary arches, solitary lines
in the palms, extreme size of the orbits, handle-shaped or sessile ears found
in criminals, savages, and apes, insensibility to pain, extremely acute sight,
tattooing, excessive idleness, love of orgies, and the irresistible craving for
evil for its own sake, the desire not only to extinguish life in the victim but
to mutilate the corpse[.]
--Cesare
Lombroso
So, it’s some time between last Thursday late afternoon and
early Friday morning, last week. My sister and I are riveted by the coverage of the Boston
Bombing manhunt. Separated by 200
miles, we’re in contact via email and telephone. One of our conversations occurred after the suspects’ photos
were released, but our discussion focused on cable network coverage –
particularly CNN’s.
On Wednesday last, CNN’s John King had not only erroneously
reported that a suspect was in custody but had added that the suspect was “a
dark-skinned man.” Considering
that King’s sources were shaky, his gratuitous quasi-racial call-out was
troubling. More troubling, I
think, than his erroneous reporting about a suspect in custody . . . because of
Boston’s uncomfortable history of racial bias and, even more importantly,
because of this country’s uncomfortable history of racialized scapegoating.
But my sister and I were not being politically correct
(after all, we were sleep-deprived and caught up in the drama). Instead, we started guessing the
ethnicity of the suspects – after dissing the very ‘white’ John King and his
maladroit reporting and suppositioning.
Our conversation occurred before the suspects were identified by name.
Me: Hell, I lived in Boston for over four
years. If you showed my their
photos, and labeled them simply as part of the Marathon crowd, and asked me
about their ethnic background, I’d probably say . . . Italian? Greek? Lebanese? Albanian? Persian?
Sister:
Irish. One of them looks like a former relative-in-law.
Me: (With a shrug, and an ensuing
conversation about which low-life relative she was referring to.) Whatever, all I could feel comfortable
saying is that they’re not Scandinavian, Central African, or Asian.
Sister: Actually, I thought maybe they were
Asian.
Me: You’ve got to be kidding (I was
thinking of epicanthic folds).
Sister: No – really, look at the flat facial
planes.
Turns out she was right. The brothers are ethnic Chechens, a segment of peoples from
the Caucasus region of what’s now Southern Russia and what was one of the
furthest reaches of Mongol hegemony hundreds of years ago. Mongol, Tatar, etc. . . . all were
marauders/conquerors from the east who not only secured political dominance for
a while but also marked what is now the Eastern European gene pool (not that such marking is always, or sometimes, or even at all readily apparent).
Timur the Lame /
Tamerlane, conqueror of much of the Ottoman empire,
Central Asian and Caucasus
region hero (after whom the elder Tsarnaev brother was named)
Point of all this?
Here were two well-educated, progressive/liberal women chatting blithely
about race/ethnicity. Considering
the circumstances, we were skating on the very thin ice of racial
profiling: what was left unsaid
was the assumption that the suspects’ genetic heritage might give clues as to
why they did what they did and maybe even to their propensity for
‘terrorism.’ The ghost of Cesare
Lombroso haunts our culture still.
Cesare Lombroso, Sir
Francis Galton, Louis Agassiz
Cesare Lombroso (1835 – 1909) was a father of
anthropological criminology – the belief that there are ‘born criminals’
recognizable through distinctive physical traits. With the classificatory zeal that typified much 19th-century
positivistic science, Lombroso took multiple measurements of criminals and the
insane, of the imprisoned and the dead, assembling this data into elaborate
taxonomies of ‘avatism,’ regressions in the evolutionary scale. He accompanied his published findings
with weirdly compelling photo arrays ‘proving’ how criminals and ‘lunatics’ are
distinguished by specific physical marks, marks readable as ‘facts’ thanks to
what he believed to be the camera’s impartial truth-telling.
A photo array by
Cesare Lombroso
Lombroso is just one of many 19th-century
scientists fascinated with the intersection of criminality, ‘deviance,’ and
photography. Sir Francis Galton
(1822-1911), cousin of Charles Darwin, produced work similar to Lombroso’s;
Galton’s studies flirted with a eugenically influenced Social Darwinism and
seem to have been motivated in part by fears that Britain’s upper class was
being threatened by the lower classes and by undesirable immigrants. In the meantime, squads of anthropometrists
and photographers were busy throughout the British Empire, measuring and
‘shooting’ indigenous peoples so they could be identified, classified, and more
easily ruled.
A photo array by Sir
Francis Galton
Both Galton and Lombroso were influenced by predecessors
like the Swiss physiognomist Johann Lavater, the Austrian phrenologist Franz
Josef Gall, and the French criminal photographer Alphonse Bertillon, who
invented the mug shot. But it was
in the United States that this composite discipline really took off . . . and
has stayed put, as the open-source multi-media photo array produced last week
attests.
In the States, the first systematic student of what
photography could reveal about ‘types’ was the famed naturalist Louis Agassiz
(1807 – 1873). He collected
daguerrotypes of slaves in the late 1840s, supplementing them with pictures of
Chinese and Native American people.
These collections reinforced Agassiz’ belief in ‘special
creationism’: that different races
were created separately, at different times, a belief easily enlisted as
support for slavery due to inherent racial inequality. At about the same time, Matthew Brady
was commissioned to photograph prisoners in New York City, as authorities hoped
that correctly reading people’s features could disclose their authentic
character and their suitability for rehabilitation.
One of Agassiz' daguerrotypes: “Guinea” Jack
By the 1850s, police departments were keeping photographic
records (“rogues’ galleries”) of all sorts of criminals, from vagrants to
murderers. After President
Lincoln’s assassination in 1865, the photographer Alexander Gardener was tasked
with recording the crime scene, evidence, and suspects; he produced one of
the first photograph-based Most Wanted posters, featuring the as-yet
unapprehended conspirators.
Gardner’s Wanted
Poster
Although new scientific methods – like fingerprinting and
DNA testing – have replaced the photo array as ways to solve crimes or to
predict potential criminal behavior, photo arrays have not disappeared. They remain a tool for eyewitness
identification, and Most Wanted posters still decorate post office walls. With the explosion of media
technologies, digital Most Wanted posters also can decorate (not to say invade,
flood, overwhelm) our televisions, computers, tablets, and smart phones. From Thursday evening to Saturday
morning last week, it was impossible to turn on any electronic gadget, with the
possible exception of the microwave, and not be bombarded by images of the
Tsarnaev brothers.
Once they were identified, speculation turned to their
ethnicity and what it might mean.
Were they militant Chechen separatists? Were they radical Dagestani Islamicists? Were they controlled by a mysterious
Caucasian branch of Al-Qaeda?
A Russian raid on a
village in Dagestan
A rural mosque in
Chechnya
A speculation not prompted
by their photographs was the possibility that they were mentally troubled (or
sociopathic) young men who sought some sort of solution via an explosion of
random violence. In other words,
the sort of speculation surrounding other young men who’ve recently committed
mass murder in the United States.
No one suggested that the Newtown, Aurora, Tucson, or Virginia Tech
murderers were foreign-connected terrorists. Or the Columbine killers. Or the Washington D.C. snipers, one of whom was seventeen
years old.
I fear that the spurious connections between appearance,
race, and criminality forged over a hundred years ago by men like Lombroso,
Galton, and Agassiz have not disappeared.
On a Federal level, the fact that the brothers are labeled as terrorists
and charged with use of ‘weapons of mass destruction’ is a bit puzzling. Didn’t the Newtown massacre create
terror, and didn’t the semi-automatic weapons used cause more mass destruction
than the Boston bombs, at least in terms of fatalities? On a sadly
predictable political level, some Senators and Congressmen have called for a
halt to Immigration Reform efforts in light of last week’s events, using the
convoluted logic that since the Tsarnaevs were immigrants, then regulating
immigration in a more orderly manner would lead to more acts of terrorism. Say what?
FBI’s first ’10 Most
Wanted’ Poster, 1950
All this calls to mind J. Edgar Hoover’s comments at the
beginning of his career, when he led the World-War-One-era ‘Palmer Raids’
against ‘communists’ and ‘anarchists.’
Most
of the individuals involved [. . .] are aliens or foreign-born citizens. [. .
.] Out of the sly and crafty eyes of many of them leap cupidity, cruelty,
insanity, and crime; from their lopsided faces, sloping brows, and misshapen
features may be recognized the unmistakable criminal type.
Hoover is dead.
Lombroso and his like-minded 19th-century scientist confreres
are long dead. The ‘atavistic’
urge to equate criminality with ethnicity, an urge that assumed monstrous
proportions in the 20th century, deserves to be dead as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment