The concept of "eye for an eye" is often attributed to a passage in the Old Testament of the Bible, specifically in the book of Exodus. This idea suggests that individuals who have been wronged should seek retribution in a manner that mirrors the harm they have endured. However, in contemporary society, this concept is considered outdated and morally questionable. The phrase "eye for an eye" implies that justice can only be achieved through revenge or retaliation. It suggests that by inflicting the same harm upon the perpetrator, balance and fairness are restored. However, this approach fails to consider the complexities of human behavior and the potential for empathy, forgiveness, and the possibility of redemption.
She is intuitive wisdom passed on through generations of women before her. She is sensitised, sensualized, born from exalted devotion and beauty. She knows ritual, sacrifice and remedy. She wanders the lands with pride and power, intoxicating, of deep, untouchable instinct. She is feminine magic directed and induced by nature. She is the mysterious born from a liminal space unable to be grasped by the mind. She is source, creatrix, bound to the mystery of the great force that animates all of life.
Jones Prize for Short Prose, and the poetry collection Conjoining , and is the editor of North Dakota Is Everywhere An Anthology of Contemporary North Dakota Poets. Having experienced this myself, when a former institution I worked for allowed my words to be twisted and violent threats made to me when I followed the institution s own policies, I know, as does Nuernberger, that even being a writer does not translate to control over your own words, especially within patriarchal systems.
However, this approach fails to consider the complexities of human behavior and the potential for empathy, forgiveness, and the possibility of redemption. In reality, the notion of an "eye for an eye" perpetuates a cycle of violence and does little to address the underlying issues that give rise to harmful actions. It promotes a culture of vengefulness rather than promoting reconciliation or societal progress.
BREVITY's Nonfiction Blog
After reading The Witch of Eye, Kathryn Nuernberger’s new collection of meditative and lyric essays about the cruelties inflicted on certain women—mainly “witches” but sometimes saints, though their ends are often equally as bloody—I was furious. As Nuernberger puts it, “I have anger and anger to spare.” Not because of reading the familiar stories—even if the named individuals are new to me, the stories are always “one version of the tragedy after another.” But because of how, as we are reminded in “Translations of the Conclusions & Findings Report for Catalina Ouyang as the True Confessions of Johannes Junius,” a piece on the gross institutional failures of Title IX investigations, words may be used against you: “your words aren’t words, your words are evidence, your memories are words, your feelings are evidence of the opposite of your words, except when they are consistent with something the panel considers evidence.” Having experienced this myself, when a former institution I worked for allowed my words to be twisted and violent threats made to me when I followed the institution’s own policies, I know, as does Nuernberger, that even being a writer does not translate to control over your own words, especially within patriarchal systems. The silences from these institutions were telling.
Creative writing that incorporates research often is about looking past the official account, reading into the apocrypha, the off-the-record, marginalia. Especially into erasures and silences. As Nuernberger relates, “A translator once told me that the first act of translation is to move silence into words.” This tactic is stated in that Title IX essay, which occurs at the end of the collection, but it’s truly Nuernberger’s strategy for both The Witch of Eye and her most recent poetry collection, Rue. While I am here to review The Witch of Eye, I’d argue for a paired reading of these two texts, two sides of the same silence being translated. Both books deal with women and knowledge that have been marginalized, erased, and/or demonized. Rue tends to zoom in more on the knowledge—the natural lore (especially of plants traditionally used for birth control), the whisper network of how to navigate the world of men—that gets deemphasized, suppressed, forgotten. As a forager, I was thrilled after reading it, began looking for the plants she notes, noting descriptions in my mushroom guides of the telltale phrase “brings on the menses.” Rue’s sister, The Witch of Eye, focuses more on the women targeted for possessing this knowledge.
The distinctions of content and genre between the two books are fine—where they differ is in style. Rue is comprised of long poems that trace the twists and turns of the author’s process of mind as she processes these ways of knowing and how they’ve been received, long passages that attempt to create connections to this knowledge, grapple with it, reclaim it, and weave it into a current consciousness and context. In contrast, The Witch of Eye is quite fragmented—punctuated with white spaces that echo the silences she is writing into, translating. These essays are rich, dense with information and images, and yet so clear-eyed in their focus and project. Like the hagstones—the naturally-occurring stones with holes, the “stone monocle” she describes in “The Eye of the Hagstone”—“they can help you see what is real.” Nuernberger braids together historical details, records of confessions and torture, philosophical mediation, myth, personal reflection and narrative, social and literary theory, and theology. These are related in terse sentences and fragments juxtaposed in such a way that you can watch her mind at work on the page and follow the connections she makes as she leaps. In “Titiba & the Invention of the Unknown,” when Nuernberger introduces us to historian Michel de Certeau, who “wants to know what makes ideas possible,” and who insists we ask “what makes something thinkable,” and follows it with bits of transcript from the interrogation of Titiba in Salem, it’s clear the question we are to consider is, how can a culture simultaneously imagine such horrible things are possible, and yet insist that the woman is the cause, despite her denials? Nuernberger also implicates our systems of power in how such imagined horrors are projected onto scapegoats, while actual horrors get glossed over: murders of women, Title IX panels that protect colleges over victims, Carlisle Indian schools, the incarceration of migrant children by ICE.
Lest I make the issues introduced in the The Witch of Eye seem reductive or simply a performance of female outrage, this book is quite complex. Throughout, Nuernberger wrestles with her own involvement. She cites Adrienne Rich: “Women have often felt insane when cleaving to the truth of our experience…and [w]e have a profound stake…in describing our reality as candidly and fully as we can to each other.” She struggles with all the ways her marriage makes her crazy, yet also needing to fully present herself to her husband, and how that became a spell, “a slow spell and often a very boring and repetitive one…. It has made me more dangerous and more kind than I would ever have figured out to be on my own.”
These essays are fascinating—while their titles often seem like we’ll be covering familiar material—“Titiba,” “The Devil’s Book,” “Hildegard von Bingen,” “Medusa,” “Marie Laveau”—this is no pop-culture recitation à lá Sabrina or AHS: Coven. Instead, Nuernberger zooms in on the unspoken details: “in ‘The Torture Used Against Witches’ (1577) the cherubic boy-man with curly locks has a boner so big it almost interferes with his capacity to turn the wheel that pulls the woman’s arms unaccountably backwards.” In a lurid depiction of torture, “The parchment is centuries old and tattered, but the pigments have not lost a shade. Or maybe someone came back later to add this color so they could imagine the moment more vividly.” On the pressures of inquisitions to get “new” information and, therefore, the need for inventive details and additional accusations, Nuernberger admits “there are aspects of an inquisition I would probably enjoy [like] adding decorative touches to the archetype of the devil.” Yet she also works through resistance: “The vow of silence is not necessarily a refusal to invent…. It can simply be a promise not to invent each other.”
While musing on the lush green meditations of Hildegard von Bingen, Nuernberger makes her own confession: “I started reading about witches because I thought I’d find people talking about how they felt this green world offering to take over their bodies if only they could figure out how to let it…. Like anybody, I live at the intersection of longing and discipline. Like anybody, I am not sure if I have made the right choices.” This longing for knowledge, and the means to use it, can lead to rage, confusion, and silence. But I’m so grateful for Nuernberger’s attempts to translate those silences.
___
Heidi Czerwiec is an essayist, poet, and author of the lyric essay collection Fluid States, selected by Dinty W. Moore as winner of Pleiades Press’ 2018 Robert C. Jones Prize for Short Prose, and the poetry collection Conjoining, and is the editor of North Dakota Is Everywhere: An Anthology of Contemporary North Dakota Poets. She writes and teaches in Minneapolis, where she is an editor for Assay: A Journal of Nonfiction Studies.
By focusing solely on retribution, the concept disregards the importance of understanding the factors that lead to harmful actions in the first place. Additionally, the implementation of an "eye for an eye" approach can lead to a never-ending cycle of violence. If each party involved seeks to exact their perceived version of justice, the acts of retaliation will continue indefinitely, perpetuating a cycle of harm and suffering. Rather than breaking this cycle, an "eye for an eye" mentality escalates conflicts, often leading to further damage and destruction. Moreover, the concept of an "eye for an eye" undermines the potential for personal growth and redemption. It negates the possibility that individuals can learn from their mistakes and change their behavior. By condemning individuals to a continuous cycle of retribution, society fails to recognize the capacity for growth and transformation. In conclusion, the idea that an "eye for an eye" is a solution to achieving justice is outdated and problematic. Society must strive to move beyond this approach and embrace more compassionate alternatives. By focusing on understanding, empathy, and rehabilitation, we can build a more just and inclusive society that values forgiveness and reconciliation..
Reviews for "From Witch Hunts to Rehabilitative Justice: Rethinking the Concept of "Eye for an Eye"
1. John - 2/5 stars - "Eye for an Eye is a Witch" promised an intriguing and suspenseful storyline, but it fell flat for me. The characters lacked depth and the plot felt predictable. Additionally, the writing style was disjointed and lacked cohesiveness, making it difficult to fully engage with the story. Overall, I was disappointed with this book and wouldn't recommend it to others looking for a thrilling witchcraft-themed novel.
2. Emily - 3/5 stars - As a fan of witchcraft and supernatural stories, I was excited to read "Eye for an Eye is a Witch". However, I found the pacing to be incredibly slow, and it took far too long for the story to pick up. The characters were also poorly developed, and I struggled to connect with any of them. While the concept had potential, the execution left much to be desired. If you're looking for a fast-paced and gripping witchcraft tale, I'd suggest looking elsewhere.
3. Sarah - 2/5 stars - I had high hopes for "Eye for an Eye is a Witch", but unfortunately, it failed to deliver. The plot felt convoluted and confusing, with numerous loose ends left untied. The writing was overly descriptive at times, bogging down the story and making it difficult to stay engaged. Additionally, the characters lacked depth and seemed one-dimensional. Overall, this book left me feeling unsatisfied and I wouldn't recommend it to fans of witchcraft or supernatural fiction.