Do not tell us violence is part of life. You can reflect violence without seeking to replicate it. To indulge in violence only reflects that the artist does not understand violence and how it intersects life. There is no common interest in gratuitous violence for the course of the matter and to do so is not art, but exploitation.
Star Trek: Picard writer and producer, Michael Chabon, responded to critiques of violence in season one, stating, “And the reason that there has always been violence in Trek is that Trek is art, and there has always been violence—implicit and explicit—in art. It belongs there. It belongs in any narrative about human beings, even human beings of the future.” This masking of violence though its cordial display is a cover up of the very intuition of violence. It is protecting violence as an institution. The altruistic remedy of discourse no longer glosses over finer texts of restitution and lives for the eternity of solace, but instead seeks to gratify quick-mire desire from a former glaze of concave prostitution of integrity and remorse.
Secular remunerations of violence are no longer deterred from a segregated sense of remorse for their motivation, but instead, instill their passive intrigue as a matter of determined logic. Casual violence causes determined latency of resurrected vines of dispersing motivations that are more casual than they are thoughtful. Yes, one must be thoughtful to the reality of violence and art that depicts life’s circumstances must certainly address the firm reality of violence, but this permissiveness of participation in the course of a violence-society is not a reflection on it, but a reflection of it.
With violence in art, unnecessary violence masks true violence. It dislocates strategic empathy and a product of Old World laxatives that are neither present for the enumeration of fallowed discourse nor the wasted periphery of violence as a digestive tool, which it should never be. That is the central error. It believes and perpetuates the false national notion that violence can be a digestive tool to analyze violence as a realistic entity, which reflects a lack of thoughtfulness on life as well as violence. Violence is not your brother or your reformed friend. It is the dearth of the wasted detours that de-evaluate the fragmented memory of your seized hands from the labors of your worthwhile love. What have you of love, you ask? That is not a question you would pose if violence were not so familiar to you. We must liberate our minds from the masks of violence and its attaining air. We must learn to see the day as a repositioning of reattained wealth of bread and breath of will.
Secular reformed positronic post-religiosity sees all wealth as a force of interaction of market values. Noble Laureate William Nordhaus and climate economists argue we must see the natural environment and the conservation of species as a market transaction with an affixed value that can be measured, and furthermore, applied to the national, global consciousness. They argue that without assigned monetary value we will withdraw further from consigning value as a fixed entity to be preserved and lauded. In the very same way, when degrees of violence are measured and assigned as digestive tools of reflection, they only perspire in the perpetuation of conflict maintenance. This conflict maintenance is at the heart of violence-restitution. Violence-restitution, I argue, is not the remedy to violated parties aggrieved from violence, but instead refers to the payment made of violence progressions, sacrificial altars towards the means of instilling violence; payment for goods received. Without the retraction of violence-restitituion, the casual acquaintance of violence memories, violence cells, violence through patterns that mimic the waves of conquest and condemn apertures of appraisal, will indeed nest in our hearts as something we must give to. Humans are inclined to want to participate in something outside themselves. Everyone wants something to support or validate, whether it be religion, the state, a job, or entertainment, believing it will support them in return, but rarely is this model extended towards each other.