黑料社

Metta Means I鈥檓 Sorry you鈥檙e Sorry:听Intimate Enemies and intersubjective Agency听in Cambodia

Darcie De Angelo
黑料社

Scholars have asserted that because Cambodians are Buddhist, they rationalize violence and trauma through ontological alterity, that听is, a Buddhist 鈥榣ack of agency鈥� (Cassaniti 2012). Karma,听reincarnation,听codes听of strict behaviour, and hierarchy weave the 鈥榬ed thread鈥� that听explain how people听鈥檃llow鈥� violence to take place. But, in Cambodia, these arguments risk repeating colonial听convictions of听鈥榙ocile鈥櫶齭ubjects, which do听not correspond to histories of political uprisings,听sanctioned revenge, and genocide. Today, former Khmer Rouge听leaders and cadre must live and听work side-by-side with听their听victims. How can we听鈥榓rchaeologize鈥� the 鈥榣ack of agency鈥� or rather, the听contemporary understandings about self-expressed in Khmer Rouge survival narratives in another way?听What are the听logical听extrapolations of different expressions of agency when Cambodians say they feel听metta for demining rats and dogs, that means,听according to a deminer: 鈥淚鈥檓 sorry you鈥檙e sorry鈥�? My听fieldwork among deminers, who work with mine detection rats, shows that metta,听or 鈥榩ity-love,鈥� a听Buddhist sentiment, when taken on its own terms rather than translated, helps to understand Khmer听Rouge survival听stories听as a way to provoke pity in the listener. To be pitiable in Cambodia is to be听loveable, but, more importantly, for a postgenocidal听nation, to be pitiable proclaims the teller鈥檚听innocence. This is听especially significant when Cambodians must confront the听material remnants of听war, when Khmer Rouge leaders manage demining organizations, and where every survivor, including听one鈥檚 self,听is an 鈥渋ntimate听enemy鈥� (Theidon 2012).

听