University of michigan professor Jonathan Marwil teaches a history how the september 11th remembered. The class discussion revolves around this is a depress photographs of a 9 11 victim falling from the World Trade Center. Okay, lets begin. So far, but we have been focusing on, first of all, was the film, and the images in the naudet film done by the two brothers. French brothers, 9 11. So, we looked at, what . Images of the buildings, and noticeably images of firefighters because they were the main focus of the film. And last week, we started talking about the 9 11 Commission Report that is how, was the event investigated, and we are going to continue on with that on thursday of this week. What we have it looked, at what you might think is, in some ways, not appropriate to look at, are the dead. And the dead of this event, if you think about it, and if you thought about it very much, they are in a rather unusual position visavis the dead of other either terrorist attacks, or attacks by political regimes, or armies on populations and that is they are not visible. We have nobody is if you think about it. Almost all the bodies in new york were incinerated, they took out parts of bodies afterwards and want to whole bodies they found believe it or not. There are no bodies and shanksville, pennsylvania, and i have not seen pictures of the bodies injured as well as dead of the pentagon, though im sure there are some pictures out there somewhere. But, in new york, its a grave site. Ground zero is a grave site without any bodies. And whats so interesting is they are unseen. The most obvious example of a dead person is this man, as yet not certainly identified. Possibly identified, not certainly. Hes on his way to death. As were some 200 300 people. No one knows how many people jumped. From the twin towers. Most of them, by the way, from the north tower hit first, smoking while the second tower was struck and went down first. Okay . Most of the jumpers from the north tower. I will say, nobody knows exactly. Estimates to 300, but that represents roughly 10 of the People Killed in the World Trade Center who chose to jump. Rather than suffocate, be burned to death, whatever. Perhaps some accidentally fell, or somehow fell, you know, its about nudge, didnt intend to jump, but most of the people, it seems, who were seen by onlookers, people were there in the streets below, they saw a lot of these people. It seemed that they jumped. But they made a deliberate. And in some cases, we know that people jump together, Holding Hands we dont have people being pushed latest sided to jump. And lord knows one can understand why. The death by suffocation or by fire, noticeably by fires, terrible kind of death. Now, today, you were to have read the article by tom juneau published in esquire in 2003. About this particular photograph, which is a set of photographs, a man falling almost, not all the way down, but the photographer, richard drew, snapped a bunch of pictures. So, hes in various positions. Juneau wrote this piece about this image, and tried, through investigation, to identify who this man was, very difficult to do when you think about it. In the piece you may recall, he uses the phrase that this photo, and others like it, were iconic, but not permissible. Now, this photo appeared on, i think, page seven of the New York Times on september 12th. I remember seeing it. In fact, i have it in my office. I have that complete issue of september 12th. A long before i knew i was going to teach a course like this. I never appeared again. I never appeared. I shouldnt say never. It appeared again in New York Times book review in 2007, but it was also published and other papers. It was seen on cbs, and then immediately taken off of the airways in the United States, did not appear in magazines. There was a kind of voluntary censorship. A voluntary decision. It should not be seen. If you picked up a european magazine or newspapers in the days following september 11th, let alone the weeks, you have seen this picture or others like it. Europeans did not have any trouble, or were not troubled, i should say, at least publications were not troubled printing this, and other pictures. So, i guess a good place to start with this situation, or this issue of the dead is to look at this image and say, or ask, what is in permissible . At the same time, if its iconic, is there not a kind of contradiction that something that would be iconic, that would have the value of an icon would be an icon not to be seen . Now, thats more than one question. Lets start with, perhaps, a more immediate of the two. Whats in permissible . Why should does not be allowed . To be seen . You might want to think, by the way, or recall. Remember what jules naudet says what is going into the tower with a fireman, in the north tower, and he decides not to photograph a body at the doorway to the tower. The should not be seen, he says in the film. They that would give you a handle. But what do you just instantly think is the problem with this being, sort of, a forbidden image . As if it were some sexual image that we are not allowed to see. Yeah . Well, in the article, he talks about, in my reaction is, well, that person has a family, and they would be severely hurt by saying that, if they recognized their Family Member, husband, father. If that person had a family. Remember, we dont know for sure who he is. Its a male, undoubtedly. That seems to be certain. But even the article goes from one possibility to another possibility, but its not even sure if that. This could have been a bachelor not, okay . Do you think even if you assume that you know who it is, okay, should that have made it impermissible to be identified since the family, and friends of the family, and other Family Members know that person died that day . So, with that make a difference, even . Yeah . I think theres a difference in the way that people perceive when someone dies by like something that they cant help, whereas if they choose to commit suicide, you know it inaudible they knew they were going to live, i think the Family Member would have, or anyone who knew them would have had a hard time compete with the fact that they died by jumping out of the building, rather than do you recall what the daughter of the first suspected of the first person is expected to be this man with another said when she was interviewed by the journalist lets quoted in the article . I dont remember the exact words, but are something along lots of like, thank goodness hes not going to hell, or something. Not quite, not quite. I thought that they were its a sin to try to in the catholic religion, suicide is a sin, okay . That is, you know, you might wind up, where you dont want to be. Its only true. Do you recall the words . She said the piece of bleep its not my father. Yeah, yeah, and the mother doesnt want to think so either, the shes not as strikingly eloquent as her daughter. About the matter. And, clearly, or seemingly clearly, they expect that they have a problem with the mans death, because they know hes probably dead, but that they dont want to believe that he wouldve committed suicide. Thats what makes him that piece of bleep , as the article says. We dont use the word again, but the arctic its not the death itself. And are we the point you raised, which i think is quite a fair point, that, lets say he could be definitively identified, you know, if you are Family Member of that person, would you really want to see that . Well, no, you probably would not. But, we dont seem, in america, to have a problem with seeing dead bodies from wars, or crimes, or traffic accidents, or fires. What let me put it this way. Whats the difference between a man, actually not get that, he will be very soon. Whats the difference between someone dead from september 11th as opposed to seeing a person dead from any number of other causes in this country, that we seem not have a problem with, and certainly, of course, movies show terrible images of that all the time. But, lets not even talk about fictive media. Just talk about, you know, we are live. We are almost bombarded with images of the dead, and badly injured. And we were warned, sometimes tv programs will say, you know, disturbing images, you know, if you dont be disturbed, dont watch the program, but they show them. Yeah . I think, when you talk about war, or an accident, that body almost that was what happened, and there was a delay choice, right . You go to war, you are expected not expected, but you take that risk because you are going to get shot, there will be that body. This is are your normal everyday citizens who had no choice, except you jump, unless they want to suffocate to that. So, in a way, with these people, if youre looking at as a family, dont expect them to be jumping from a building, whereas if you go to war, you almost expect that phone call monday. Our fair enough. Would that argument then, so to speak, include why jules naudet does not want to photograph that person when he goes to the north tower . The person is already dead, probably not identifiable, easily, but he doesnt want to do that. Go ahead. We talked about with the naudet brothers, how he was in the normal photographer. So it struck him as something hes almost like an everyday citizen seeing a dead body that someone just died, whereas we talked about if his brother was there, he was a photographer, he probably we cant say for sure, but he wouldve been more inclined he probably would have. As a photojournalist, or as a camera man, to see that, and to film it. Then the question, is do you think they wouldve included in the film . Its a he had shot. It they shot 175 hours footage through the training, of the firemen, and the fires, and the buildings themselves. The question is, what they have included that image, even if gedeon shot it and when you jules did not, what they have included it in the film . Do you think theres something about the dead of september 11th that separates them out from other did . Sir . I dont think theres necessarily difference between the date of september 11th. For example, we are able to see the image of father judge who had died on september lemon, but i think that there is something intimately personal about seeing someone in the active dying as opposed to being dead already. To see the life of them being taken, as opposed to, like theyre in person or inanimate body themselves. Theres something that we can relate to them, there is more immediate empathy in seeing some alive one moment, and that the next. I think thats why the image of the falling man is so taboo because its the immediate of his incoming death that we find so troubling as opposed to, you know, the image of someone whos that already. Do you think i like the point, i think we would all agree thats a good distinction to make. Do you think we would have trouble, because i certainly have seen some pictures, seeing someone jumping from the San Francisco bay bridge . Golden gate bridge . Because i have seen photographs of people jumping. Is that is that different . I think thats different in a number of ways. One being that its not as inherently violent, the image of them, for example, perhaps crashing into the water would be less disturbing than seeing the falling men hitting the ground, then you have the fact that he is forced to trump, rather than some news jumping from a voluntary act. Voluntarily committing suicide. Yeah . Theres something about the actual event of such a 11th that impacted our whole country. Even if you are not found him over a son who died, 9 11 still having to do, as what our whole nation felt more vulnerable. I think everyone is more sensitive about the issue, even if they werent directly affected, or one of their Family Members, just like the whole notion was affected. I think evan is more sensitive. We felt more vulnerable it is somehow that sense of vulnerability that we felt, which certainly was part of the experience of that day, and lingered on for many days thereafter, as the country worried about, is there going to be another attack . Everybody thought there would be. I was telling another class this morning, theres something very interesting about the days following september 11, and 2001, and the days following december 7th 1941. And that is that if you really read in the literature, and go back and check it out, you realize that everybody expected that the next stop of the japanese was california. They were going to stop in hawaii. They were coming. And people were very on edge that that was not the event itself, that it was finished with pearl harbor. And the same thing, i think, was true. I know it was true after september 11th. The next three days, everybody said, you know, is there another city . And the sort of planes coming, etc, etc, etc. So, that sense of vulnerability lets hold on to, that but there is more hands, yeah . I think it separates itself from other pictures that could be similar to this, like someone jumping off of a bridge because this was a result of an act of terror, as opposed to just, like, something and everyday life like a car accident, or Something Like that. So, this man was forced to make the decision to take his own life. Because of the terrorist attack. Fair enough. I mean, i think that says, it that explains, or offers an explanation that it was an act of terror, but i wonder, if, in fact, that is really the reason why we dont want to see it, that we know that the immediate cause is the burning building, and that that was created by an act of terror. I wonder if that really is what is disturbing about it. Yeah . I think going along on that note, as opposed to other people, maybe even some also jumping from a building, i think people pair that image with other images theyve seen from that day, and other ideas they have from that day. So, i mean, if you take that image, for me personally, when i see that, im picturing, in my mind, also the burning building and the plane hitting the building. I think pairing that altogether kind of makes it seem a lot worse, maybe, then the still image itself. If you just look at it, its not such a, oh, im going to courage that image, i cant look at it. Its like, what the response from your mind is it . Let me just be provocative, because i agree with, you the image is, yes, you are aware that that man is failing to his death. You cant escape that, but what drew the photographers attention in part is the geometry. I mean, theres something aesthetically quite intriguing about the geometry of that building. The lines, the verdict calorie of the entire image. The body going down. By the way, thats the most commonly that was the image chosen by the times, where hes in vertical flow with the building because on drews images, hes in a different position. None of them is quite as vertical, and in fact, a couple of them, hes sort of flailing around, as you might expect. But this one, theres something, i dont want to say peaceful, now would be going too far, but hes not struggling. Its as if he dove down into the earth by his own choice, and he just happened to line up with the building. That is, there something aesthetically right, however grotesque the overall setting is for this moment happening. Adam . Other the distorting part is that he does look graceful. They are not going to pick a photo where he has flailing, or he looks like hes in pain, and struggling. They will pick a photo where it feels like youre watching a man take the last few moments of his life, you know, escape this burning, chaotic, smoke filled terror above him, and just take the last few moments of clean air. I think thats the most disturbing part. We dont think about taking that choice in our everyday lives. Graceful, yes. I like that word as well. And clearly, the choice, i mean, its not a choice that any of us would ever choose to be confronted with, though, when you think about, it many people are. People facing their own death. Maybe one of you has a grandparent or somebody, very ill, with something or other, and the doctor says, well, i can do another operation, i will give you three more weeks and the grandparents says, no, ive had enough of this. Anybody have that experience, with not want to do . I do, my mother, when she was very ill. Doctor said yeah, we can operate again, and they could promise her was a couple more months and not very pleasant months, so she chose to die. So, the choosing of death in a certain manner, shouldnt have to jump from a building today, but the choosing of death over continuing living is not, altogether, unusual. Yeah . I think part of the reason its so taboo and emotional is because, like, its really the only picture that makes any connection with like how awful the people in the building were struggling. Like, you see the burning building, you see the plane crashing, in and you just think like, this is terrible, this is a horrible thing to happen, but when you think about the fact that people made the conscious decision to jump out of a building, that like really brings you face to face with how much they suffered inside of that building. Or, maybe they hadnt suffered. But knew they were going to. There is no evidence that this man has been on fire. Right, it just makes them more like real people to you, to like, i dont, out rather address a deeper connection. Well, i think you made a very fair point, yeah. Go ahead. Just to go along with, that its not that thats the only picture of people inside thats like the only picture of victims, usually that, you will see at all. Yes, i mean we dont have very much. Thats less not a guy surrounded by burning oil, jet fuel, and metal. This is a guy in a very clean, open free space. There is nothing inhibiting what you see is about to happen and you kind of have to accept that is the only connection you have. Well, that leads, doesnt it, in a certain way to moving from the impermissible, to the iconic and iconic image. I dont want anyone to get contradiction tween being iconic and impermissible. As just talk about if i said to you, if i started out today by saying and junod is what the low and have said such a thing, that this image really is iconic of september 11th, at least in new york. This is the image that, really establishes what september 11th is all about. Thats an icon. Something we really heed. Do you think thats true . Now, thats a separate. You are connected, finally, but thats separate from saying its impermissible. Do you think, if somebody wanted to say, give me an image of 9 11, and he might say, well, there it is. There is the standard image. Is that iconic, though . Does that rise to a certain level of, ultimately, getting out the truth . Which is what icon stands for. Ultimately getting of the truth of what september 11th was. And of course, that and many images like it where the images we were constantly bombarded with that they, and have since ever since. Yeah . I dont think it should be the iconic image, because i think its more of an image of destruction. This is what youre talking about . Yeah. Images like, buildings collapsing, even someone purposely, obviously not in an active terror, but if the building had to come down, you see pictures like that. But you dont see a human aspect of it, one must go look at that picture, they probably dont think about the people who are inside, whereas when you look at the picture of the falling man, if its a very human face on september 11th, and makes you think more of the victims, which i think is what it should be. Well, when i see that, do we do you think we imagine the people inside, with that image . You know, if you are very young then, but when you saw all those pictures that day, running on tv, and the next day, in the next day. Did they set off your mind imagining what people inside must have felt, or was the picture itself, the horribleness of the pictures, the buildings falling, that your imagination just stayed there, with the buildings . Your imagination didnt travel inside. This picture, you cant help let me summit. You cant help but be imagining in looking at it of what is about to happen to him. And is that what is terrible about a picture . Because you, in your minds, eye you see it coming, the, within a matter of seconds, whats going to be of him. Whereas, you can never quite grasp the people inside, because you cant see it. Its left only in your imagination, and therefore not as powerful, or more powerful . What do you think . I think, for me, the fact house and fifth grade one happened, ive never been to your car that point, i had seen pictures of the towers before, but ive never been inside, so i couldnt draw that. I mean, we thought about the people when we are sitting in class, an elementary school, watching on tv, but we didnt have any idea of what it looked like inside, so for us it was that iconic image of the tower being hit, and then also later on, after the fact, it a lasting, i think, images every september 11th when the anniversary, they do those because of lights that went up in the new york skyline. I think that was the other lasting image that i have from the tower perspective, not even talking about the pentagon. When youre in the fifth grade, you are what, ten, 11 . Just about. Yeah, do you recall was it that kind of picture that the tower is being struck or both of them burning, that, so to speak, shocked slashed impressed you the buildings one and then the other coming down . For me, it was the second tower being we saw the plane flying towards, it and to me, it sat image. I mean, the towers coming down, it was terrible, but we, i dont know, for me it was the plane right before it struck. Okay, okay, but lets go back to the falling man, or the jumper. More thoughts on what makes this iconic, what makes this so what . Important . First here, and then, yeah. People would argue its iconic because inaudible most people, he said september 11th, they would associate the other image, or some sort of image of the tires being hit, or on fire with that day, but because its so unique, it kind of bring something deeper to the table, and its not an image that a lot of people capture. I mean there is a lot of views and shots of the towers getting hit and, being on fire, but thats like the only picture thats been published thats of a man shoving from the building. Before we go over here, you remind me of something, i want to bring it up and ask you. Richard drew, the photographer, in 1968, in june of 1968, what was, it about you in fourth or fifth, he was in los angeles when Bobby Kennedy was giving his speech at a hotel. And that was the night that after kennedy finished his speech, and went down, he was going through the kitchen, going out to the cars, is gonna take him away from giving the speech, and he probably had the democratic nomination wrapped up at that point, okay . He was shot and killed. And drew was one of the photographers there, and took a picture, which has been seen many times. Of the dead or dying Bobby Kennedy on the floor, in the kitchen of this hotel. That was part, it has been printed many times. How do you compare that, in terms of the shock, and by the way, that image is about the only image of kennedy lying on the floor. There are a couple of other doctors there, they might have taken a very similar image, but no one got it in the act of shooting, per se, as i recall. But, the image on the floor, the dead or near did kennedy. Is that an impermissible image to be revealed constantly . I dont know. I guess, but i think that because of the context, and response to the dates of september 11th i mean, look at the pictures no context, you dont know how hot he jumped from, you dont know much about it, but knowing that it is related to the event, i think, its what makes it so much worse in the minds of a lot of people. Interestingly, people have argued im not suggesting rightly, or wrongly, because historians are only profits of the past, not of the future, but ive argued that was a significant turning point. Those shots in the history of america, that if kennedy had not been shot, and the election had gone on, he wouldve won over nixon. In the history of United States would have been different. In fact, some would argue that his death, at that time, was more pivotal in terms of changing or not changing things then his brothers death in 1963. But you can read about that and see for yourself. Yeah . So, about this picture, i think, at least, for me, there are a lot of parallels that you draw from this man falling from the twin towers. I think the one that pretty much stands out in my mind, that i can relive the image of the buildings actually fall. You hear this man sort of falling, and yes an emotional connection to it, but i would pose the question here, and try to answer, is if the buildings didnt fall, with this picture still be, sort of, iconic . I could draw perilous journeyman falling, and falling man, or showers coming down, falling, and therefore making more, that much more sort of significant. So, and my mind. As im seeing this photo as being truly iconic, in an event of 9 11. Well, i think youve raised a wonderful question. What, and i dont know exactly the time of this, but i think it is before the south tower actually came down. What if they hadnt come down . Word this picture be as disturbing . Forget about the iconic part now. Will this be as disturbing to us as the buildings had not fallen . The fires have gone on, probably similar number of people would have been dead because, ive pointed out to you, its been pretty well established that most of the people who died in the twin towers were at the floor of each individual tower, or the force, where the plane struck, or above. That the overwhelming number of people below those floors got out under their own steam, and walked out, so to speak. So, you know, whats the impact of those towers dont fall . I think its a wonderful way of free framing the question in terms of trying to find the sense of this picture. What it means to us, and why we are so disturbed by it. Yeah . If it hadnt fallen, it becomes more disturbing on a personal level because, in this image, knowing the towers did come down, you kind of see him coming down with the towers. In a sense, but how did not come down, that issue of suicide and him choosing to take his whole life and jumping becomes that much more real because, in that matter, he is not coming down with the building. Okay. Any other thoughts on that . Yeah . I think if the tower set outcome down, it would be less disturbing because, the fact the towers did come down, he becomes all the more important. He embodies all of the deaths, you know, those who perished in the towers that we never got to see. The author relates this image to the two of the unknown we soldiers, the soldiers that we did not get to see parish, did not and we have no real remains to speak of. That brings it back to, can the picture of kennedys death, you know, the uniqueness of kennedy as an individual, as a National Figure we, distinguish it from a falling man, because the falling man is everyone . Hes everyone who died, in the fact hes also still alive we junod mix that point. We can put ourselves in shoes, and put ourselves in the shores of everyone in that tower. Does that, having said that, okay . Is there a level at which this picture disturbs us, that has less to do with well, i dont see less. Lets just say that disturbs us, both because of september 11th, but independent of that . Now, its been indicated that, somehow, this is maybe all of us at some point. But, all of us would remind our pictures taken. At whatever point might be, that this particular representation of that point, of having to make a choice about life or death, is a point in which we are very uncomfortable in our own skins with this phenomenon that is that this picture has let me try to put this in a clearer way. There is something threatening about this photo. To us. And we may not even be able to articulate what it is, but its disturbing us is because in some way or ways it threaten us. Yeah . Adding to that, its such a personal decision that he made. I mean, that i feel like we can understand but that it was taken like the people photographed and it became an image like he didnt have a choice in the matter you know he couldnt have known. But he did have a choice, didnt he . I dont he couldve known. His death his personal choice becomes such a public sign. Do you, since the word has been used now, certainly a part of the inquiry by junod, do you think that this was suicide . Your understanding of suicide . No, says, i mean, i think its clear to everyone that there were two choices, and both of them are death. He just chose to controls on faith. Does anybody want to see that any differently . Yeah . I think its on a sign of a last hope. If you are there, you look, can you see there is, fire and smoke, people dying around you. Theres an open window, you know there are firefighters are. I remember, wondering whether and have those giant trampolines there to try and catch people who were falling. I think its like those last few moments that last hope that maybe if i jump there will be something down there to catch me. Okay. Yeah . Just going back to your question about what suffers knowing about it, i dont know if this is what you are looking at but i dont have an opinion about any of this. The falling man is kind of like some sort of businessman and the twin towers represented like the severity of advancement of western economy and stuff. That was crashing down, and the businessman is crashing down, so its kind of threatening to every American General about so, you think we sort of translate this into a metaphor, a metaphor of this image a metaphor of the larger american destructive act that this attack represents. Okay. Any other thoughts on this . Yeah, in the back . This picture can be seen us threatening because, in a certain way, this man perceived mindset from we think he chose to do goes against possibly a collective anger that people have instead of choosing to almost be defined and stay in the building and wait for help. He quit, he completely resigned. At least thats what, i mean, the image seems to show. That might conflict with what a lot of people were feeling at the time on a national level, on the Foreign Policy level even. So, i think that might have upset some people. Its interesting that his wife, we already had the quote about the daughter, his way, if you may recall from the article, she says that she wants to, quote, clear my husbands name, meaning that she doesnt want it to be him because that would mean he committed suicide, and being a good catholic, he shouldnt do that. So, she, clearly, interpreted it, or perhaps just thought that the local priest where the church was going to interpret it as suicide. But, do all of you agree with what was said over here . Its clearly not suicide, a choice between two deaths, and how can that be suicide . Or does anybody want to yes, maam . I dont think its suicide because i think this person, that day, those people on the top levels of the tower, their choice of life or death taken of them they knew they were going to die and that men chose freedom he wanted the choice to choose how he was going to die and maybe it is that simple that he would survive somehow, but it was like a last chance at freedom. Like, i dont die because terrorists hit my building. I want to deliver than i choose. Unfortunately, we dont know what was in his head and we could construct any scenario for what he was thinking. He might be saved, the fireman might have some sort of super math, or he was just a choice between two deaths, one less hideous than the other, or, who knows . We dont know. So, all we can really deal with for the interpretive schemes that people, close to these people, or investigate these people, what it is they want to construe this to me. Yeah . I was just, as youre saying, about the interpretations, i might take this photo threatens the psychological defenses of everyone who was related to the victims of new york. You talked about it a bit in the article, how, after they decided, it wasnt the one man whose daughter had made a statement, they questioned whether or someone else and families like, no i wouldnt be him, because this is the rest of them, she would have left him. They dont think you dont because of suicide, or that he just gave up, he would have jumped, thinking that he wouldnt come home to him. They thought he wouldve died, thinking of his wife, and his three daughters, and the other man wouldnt have jumped because he would have left his sister. So, i think its different for how we proceeded in terms of how the Family Members of these victims perceive, it how they, sort, of their brain made them perceive it to be able to cope. Perhaps our interpretation of how he perceived it, or how others are interpreting he perceived it is just an extension of how we are perceiving it as well. We need to be careful of that. Yeah . I think, as you said earlier, this is like one people saw the people jumping, it was the first indication of just like how horrible it must have been out there. People might be very uncomfortable with these images. And if you see the human side and put yourself in a position. If you can imagine yourself, like im one of the top floors having to make that decision. It kind of think to yourself what i want to be photographed jumping from the building . A lot of people would say no. So maybe thats where some of this comes from. Just from a technical standpoint, the definition of suicide i think it is, because you are choosing to take your own life, whether or not the circumstances you are in, are favorable or you could keep living on. Because this guy maybe thought he couldnt, so he decided to take his own life. I think that, people obviously look at it you know like he kind of had that only option, so its not maybe as shameful as jumping off of a bridge or something. He was almost forced into the situation to commit suicide. So you have to look at it in context. I am not catholic, but i have thought at times, i should consult with a local priest. Can what the standard was, it must have been the gust within catholic circles within 2001. How are these people to be seen . Are they to considered suicides, because in one sense as you try to argue technically they were. What or are they seem to be people, in an impossible situation where suicide is simply not a longer relevant category. Or interpretation. And perhaps, any of you who are catholic, or if theres a priest in the family, or your close to one you might want to ask and see what was the understanding at that time. Was there a kind of, growing understanding on this matter within the church. As i said i simply do not know. So you had your hand up for a long time go head. So key, the idea of suicide, really comes down to me and i think its like page one 98, and there was a quote here, that they are uncertain and scared, but when did they know when did the moment come, you dont maybe just came so quick. So it seems like a strong emotional state. And psychological state in life, so when did the people know that the jumpers, know that there was absolutely no hope. That they would not be saved. You know they were on that floor the towers were gonna come down, at what point did they know and they didnt actually choose you know im not gonna die this way i will die another way. Obviously in any particular case, its not very noble, one if it was published 102 minutes, which is a reconstruction of what was going on in both hours, in the period of time hundred and two minutes from the first plane hitting the first tower, to that first tower coming down. And talking to lots of people who survived, can there was evidently, continuing and considerable considerable effort to get people out, to help people and people stayed to help other people out. That is the urgency of life, that hardwired drive to survive. And that is a hardwired instinct, and that was operating as long as possible. And then we come to that question well, when did so and so already so and so no, just that some sort of instinctive fashion that survival was not in the cards. And that they wanted to choose how they want to go. And whether it even was that rational i dont think that we are never going to be able to decide. I think thats another way to look at this, that can be show how it wasnt suicide and if youre pushed off a building thats not suicide and in the sense these people were pushed off the building. Yes yes i think thats a perfectly good argument to make. Now is not a choice like this is the ended, jump you know. It wasnt in any real human terms a choice, and i want to move on a little bit times going on, and i want to suggest another way of thinking when we put it this way. Another way of thinking about this image. And, why it is disturbing. And why it is in permissible, and why its iconic at the same time. Go and see how you react. , that this picture, is more than almost any other kind of image, from september 11th. Certainly anything having to do with the buildings, we dont have much in the way of individuals but, it registers a kind of vulnerability and somebody mentioned this earlier on in the discussion today. A profound, almost existential vulnerability, that we have a humans that we are always damping down ourselves. But that this image is so profoundly it touches on what we do not like to consider and that is a kind of ex central vulnerability as human beings that we always have. At any age at any time. And this picture, can worms its way into that sense. Any thoughts on that . Im just throwing it out as a thought. Yes sir. The first thing that strikes me about this, in what will make you feel vulnerable if youre anything like me, is that it doesnt matter 3000 people, were in the tower and died, or in the plains and every of the situation, it happened that day, but what it came down to his every person had to make that choice or go that way or make that choice youre not alone. But good point, but let us say that somehow or another, just imagine this that the photographer calls, shot not the one man but that there were four other people alongside him. Well independent not Holding Hands. We do know some people held hands, because people saw it and reported it. But there are four other people, do you think that the impact of this picture on you would be the same if you saw for random people as distinguished from one. And if you think there is a difference between four and one. What do you think it is . And doesnt have anything to do with the pointed just made. I think there is a difference, theres an intimacy to the photo with being one person. Telling into his life, and this moment that he is experiencing. He knows hes going to die. And use if you are of the photo, know hes going to die also. And you know as if you are youre going to die to. He is us. For is not us. One is us. Did you want to add to that . If there are four people there, well they made a decision together, and what was going to happen but he just seems so long. The last couple seconds of life. I think that is what makes it more intense. Theres a famous statement, we live together and everybody dies alone. However you die, you death is alone. Even if there are people around. And this is pitcher in that sense quirk to that understanding . And is it, what is so disturbing that, it almost isnt september 11th, it is just our situation. The human situation. The mortal situation. And something to think about. I wanted to turn, but not turn entirely away from this to the other piece, that i had to read for today. The ex are, its a very small expert, from this volume called portraits. Which was published in 2002, and it is a compilation of some 1900, can i guess you call them portraits, and you might also call them obituaries, but the times didnt like it. The New York Times starting in the fall, as you read the introduction, in the fall of 2001, after september 11th, decided to investigate an inquiry into who all these people were that died in the twin towers. And finally, over 130 reporters worked on this, and reporters from every possible field in the times, spent some time making phone calls looking a public records, looking to see what they could find, to come up with a short statement. These range from five to five to ten sentences, none are very long. Why through the whole book and i xeroxed couple of pages of it. And i want to say totally randomly, but not quite randomly. And god, in the forward, they use the statement, they say that these are not really typical obituaries. And that, theres something consoling, good about the statements. There are these people, the statements made about them that suggest that did the subtle was nobility of everyday existence. So that, lead in let me turn and read to you, for those who didnt bring i think today, i want to read the one that determined which pages i would choose to show you. I said morales randomly. On ty early randomly. And this is the one on Josh Rosenthal got, and like the others it short. Last sunday night Josh Rosenthal went out to supper with his sister helen, to celebrate becoming a fall, and the fact they were all together again after being a part of the summer. He had just picked up catcher and the ride he said she said, and he was adorable about the relationship between hogan and his sister. A portfolio, manager at fiduciary trust, mr. Rosenthal most like to quote play with his nieces. Of course i would say that, ms. Rosenthal said. Thats a sister. He would tease them or seamlessly, just like he would tease me when i was a little girl. He would also bring them gifts, from his many travels. Like a snap with their names in japanese, are chinese robes. Ms. Rosenthal, who described her only sibling as your best friend, said that the two have been especially closest, since a two month trip they took together in Southeast Asia but two years ago. Where they discovered each other as adults. He was not teasing me anymore she said. And of quote. So now, is that an obituary . Clearly not right. We dont know who this guy is except hes a Portfolio Manager she has a sister who loves them. So there are all like this, in one form or another. They each have a different spin but they are all like this, and as i said in the introduction there are referred to as being consoling, so what do you think could that word means, and how does it apply to these portraits of the dead. We have been talking about the did in one context today. I am now shifting your attention to, how the dead are going to be remembered. At least in this first kind of exposure of them to memory, in the form of these portraits. Can i think this one in particular, could it is more focused on the sister, and her emotions towards josh, more than him as a person, and its like she is remembering him in a way that she can let go of him and emotionally cope with what had happened to him. I think thats very well said yes. So what happens to josh in this. Whats the fallout to josh, if this is really about his sister. He becomes remembered as his sister remembers him. Okay okay. Its not really about him as a person. Well i dont know how far we want to go with that, you get a sense of him even know you might get a sense of the sisters affect more. There is ahead of here yes. I think building on what she said, its how it sister remembered him, but these portraits are painted for me to remember the person as a victim of september 11th. Its the person as they know its kind of like an obituary but not talking about the twin towers, not talk about the plane etc. Well the book, everybody there was there but. I think if you look at it, can if youre looking at one of them, without any contacts its like they were victims, but is talking about their life and i dont picture it, when i was reading them i dont connected well what a great life key and in the twin tower. I think it, more of a celebration, and a personality. And i dont think its nice that they dont talk about how they died in that okay. Yeah . I just think reading through this, that didnt really great job of showing the human value loss at a. It wasnt just a number. It wasnt just an attack on these buildings, falling down, there was an attack on our economy, on our system. It was more about the people in the building, and what the represented. They werent just average people. To go and get this little snippet of their lives, and bring it out. I think its a really much better way to remember them. Like she said, removing the stigma of this person dying on september 11th, kind of, it doesnt give good creek as to what the really stood for. Its all the best way, i think, to remember them. Do you ever eat obituaries . I have a few in the past three years. How would you distinguish, then, between the kind of obituaries you planted, and this one . I take your point about it, but im curious, and whats the difference between this, the way you articulated, and the standard obituary . The senate obituary is just much more broad. They usually start at the beginning, and go through different phases in the persons life. A short of history, not along once for president s, the short one for the grocer down the street . A few paragraphs, or something. What these sought to do, is focus on one moment, and bring that one moment, and embody each person in that one moment and i think that it shows how each story kind of, that person will be remembered by that and what kind, you are right, thats what they will do. What kind of moment is it that is consistent in all of these can you tease at what kind of moment we editors were looking for in these pieces . Because, obviously, the reporters investigated, they rode up, they gave the right up to the editor, and it is said, yeah, thats great. He or she said, no, go back, lets reframe that differently. What is it that each of these is consistently trying to do, you know they are very different lives, people from different, you know, backgrounds, different occupations. You are left, i think, with something very important that, is perhaps, suggested in that statement, the one that i read, the nobility of the existence. What is it that you are left with . First and second. I think its not so much a defining moment in lives as much as how their families and friends would remember them, or just one single moment that summit would find memorable. It might not what would make it memorable . What gave him or biloxi, if you will . I think, in this one, it is kind of remember personal one with their siblings. Maybe, when they grew up, or when the moved, on or when they just learned something about the other person. The one prior to that, you know, a little girl said, oh, hes a keeper. It might not be the defining moments of their relationship as a whole, but its something that the family is going to hold on to forever. Would you believe the little girl use that expression . I think there are fishing, so i think so. I got a bridge in brooklyn for you, though. There you go. So, to his point, i think they try to portray the victims, sort of, like kids, they use that dialog. You know theres a certain quote here is, he had a devilish grin on his face because he knew i was scared. You know, bringing more of a personal feel into their lives, a little segment, you know. It wasnt so much as giving them descriptions on how it was, warlike bring it a dialog between the members and say like, you know heres how we see him and you him. I think thats a unique way of writing about each of the victims here. Any other thoughts on a common denominator in these things . I wouldve left to be an element the acts of kindness, expressions of love, and you see that every story is ultimately positive, whether its hosting barbecues three neighborhoods, getting married, moving to new york to live with loved ones, every story is about the love that these individuals who died half or those around them. Thats very good point and would you add the word value to that . That each of these was a person of value, if only two other people . They werent necessarily valuable to the nation. They went out of the way to show the connections that these people had to those around them. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Other yeah . I like that they showed the normalcy of their lives. Yes. The everyday existence, so to speak. People of every day so they went on a fishing trip on the weekend, he was out to dinner with the family. These are just normal things that happen every single day. Nobility of everyday existence. Yeah, i know. Its well done. I mean, ive read many more than this one. Yeah . I think, in a sense, by talking about so many people, that these people have touched their lives, or that they had an effect, and i think it kind of makes it seem like there was almost no victims than just the number of does. I mean, more people were affected by this and victimized by this event then just like, oh the 3000. All these people death kind of played an effect on so many people down the line. I just felt like more than just about 3000 deaths. Would that there have been achieved if they had just published the kind of street forward, obituaries . For example, a stick rosenthal, Josh Rosenthal was 41, 42. He had graduated from the university of michigan, 1979, he went to new york, he got into what he got into, and he left a loving sister, helen. Okay . Your standard obituary, because he hadnt done anything famous. He was just a businessman. Would that not have achieved the same thing as you are trying to say . To some people, maybe, i think that just kind of makes it seem just so standard, and like, okay, here it is, heres what needs to be written. This is the how many of us which have wanted to read . I would not, and it is because of personal and makes you feel for those actual connections they, had not just, i mean a lot of people that were so close with a Family Member, this, for that, it makes it seem positive light in all of it, and how much of an effect we actually had on these people that were part of their lives. Okay, okay. Yeah . I think that, also, because there were so many people that died that day, in the same way, there needs to be some way to write these obituaries or pieces about them that would make them stand out and not just make them like one of the masses that died on september 11th. So, i think thats why they approached it in such a non typical obituary way. You. Each of these individuals is given a real identity. Not an identity of statistics, when they were born, wear them to school, kind of thing. But and identity as they are kind of human being. And when you think about the word identity, and you come back to this, and that, and the question is, the loss of identity in the actual destruction of the twin towers, the fact that nobody, nothing virtually was recovered, it is a deaf site without bodies, okay and what does it mean that, in the aftermath, there is this, quest if you will, a desire to give these people identity, just as the reporter for this, what is so important, what is so important, it seems, is that we identify this man the second one for the first guy, but is that important . Identifying him by name, as important as knowing him as an anonymous jumper faced with no alternative . , which is the more important thing to know about this figure . Who he, was or what he faced . This is actual identity as a human being significant to anybody else but his family . It is, so to speak, identification of him as a victim precisely like virtually all the others with no chance, is that what should matter . Heavy question, have a question. Anyone want to light in that one and somewhere, and give a thought to this . Yeah . I think thats a tough question to sort of answer. I think, from a subtle societal viewpoint in the context of the event, his identity is actually what we can see here, this an known man, jumping from a building, and what we can put into context of 9 11. I think, what we want to strive for, is to actually see him as a person without the context of 9 11. I guess we all want to sort of eventually strife, or to see this man without him being sort of this free falling jumper out of a building. You know, so no when i first saw the picture, my mind immediately went to i dont see him as whether, you know, he had a background, a family, what his name was, his professional. I just saw him as a sort of iconic photo of him and giving out of a bidding, without a face. About how to get to a point where i can see im not as a somber, but as someone like jonathan wrote in this piece. Yeah . I think that, a lot of it has to do with all these bodies that are just jumbled under this massive heap of debris, and a lot of the bodies were never even found, so the families were kind of looking for something concrete to hold on to, that person, and other people. They were faceless bodies, and the porch is kind of give them that something to identify, you know, and relate to the loss of life that happened. Do you think in these portraits, presumably, they are intended to be consoling. And i take it from the things that have been said thus far, that most of you would agree with that, reading these is not difficult, that there is something humanly, you know, attractive about each of these such in that, yes, you know they are dead, but the way in which they are described, they are living on the page for you. But does that, do you think, and im only posing this, im not, in any way, you know, suggesting, i think so, i want to see if you think so. Im only posing this. Do you think, in some way, that that is a problem for coming to terms with what happened on september 11th . That we have managed to turn all the victims into really nice people . You know, each having their own ability as human being. And that, by doing that, we may have been, but . Trying to distance ourselves from the actual core of that day. Trying to make it a little less difficult to accept actually what happened, what it means to have happened, even why it happened. That we are sheltering ourselves. One, two . Im not sure if i know you might be going after anything specific im not going after anything, im just asking a question. The way i see it, is when you look at this, its more disturbing because we dont know who that is, and as the article says, the fact that we have known with a falling man is all along, that sort of could be any one of us, or any person, but when you look at these portraits, i want to make these into real people, its somewhat comforting in the fact that, oh, thats not me. Thats not me. I know thats not somebody that i know, its not im not dead, somebody i know is a dead. This is somebody completely different, ive never heard of them, no numb. But that guy, that could be anybody, and thats the scariest part about it. Well, but keep in mind, when i raise that, and i will let you speak in a second, when i raise this question about sheltering ourselves. Remember, only seen once. We werent allowed we dont want to because, the reason why the magazines and newspapers and tv stations took it off, is because they got flooded by phone calls. Dont show that, you shouldnt show that, thats too terrible to show. You know, it was in some basothos decided, oh, i dont like that picture, us not use it again. It was public pressure not to show, and they have not, ever since, but this had, 2007, the times used in the book review. But its still something that sort of and in the forbidden zone, and so, is trying to console us with the obituaries, and trying to mask us from the horror of really the choices to be made that day, can those two things those two efforts, so to speak, consolidate into a way in which at some level we dont want to witness september 11th in its full horror . Im gonna say that welfare comforting, i think that makes you witness september 11th an away you never get before. I mean like who wants to read about somebody whos 20 years old, whose fiancee worked with him and couldve been there that day and hes leaving behind not only her, but a fiveyearold kid. The idea of people dying, its tragic but when you put on such an individual you know it feels more like it has so much impact when you realize who else was affected by it its not just about the 3000 victims who passed away. But everyone. Okay have only a couple of minutes and i want to fill you in on such an intriguing aspect of rosenthal, do any of you know who he was . Other than what you read there . Okay so i dont think he would, and he was a graduate of the university of michigan. And his mother, Marilyn Rosenthal taught at dearborn. And, after his death, his mother, who was a medical sociologist, she wasnt a physician herself, but she taught at dearborn Sociology Department and she also had an appointment here at the medical school. She decided she was going to put aside, her actual academic field. And she spent the next five years of her life writing a book and researching and writing a book. On the pilots of the plane that snatched into the south tower where he was. And she went to the middle east, to interview his mother, okay. And family, for this book. But she died, in the summer of 2007, before she finished it. Because i knew her, and i got her to agree to come in and talk to the class the first time i taught it which was in the fall of 2007. She is going to come in and talk about what it meant, the mother of a victim, trying to talk to the family, of the perpetrator. Or one of the perpetrators. And what did she, not simply have to overcome, in dealing with these people but overcome in her own self. In her own psyche to pursue this as an effort. And, the book was not finished, and i dont know that is going to be finished. But, she was responsible will not responsible in the sense of funding, but there is now every fall, in fact i think it was about ten days ago, there is a Josh Rosenthal lecture here at the university. Named after him. And if you go down to gallup park on the river, there is a lovely wooden bench, dedicated to him that was funded by friends of the family. And he is the most famous, victims of 9 11, with an association of the university. But if you go to alumni hall, which is just you go up there in turn right, there is a plaque on the wall of the i think 11 or 12 michigan alumni there were killed on september 11th. And its in alphabetical order. So michigan has a certain attachment, but the rosenthal is the only one of them that has emerged his name them and connected with events here at the university. So, i think that will do it for the day. I thank you very much. This was good. Good. And its troubling to talk about, death in these matters, but i think it is something that deserves some discussion. Thank you. Heather penny was one of the first f 16 pirates, scrambled from the air force base after the 9 11 attacks. Her father john penny was a pilot and captain. Coming up miss penny talks about her experiences that day, and the possibility she might have to bring down flight 93 which the terrorist had hijacked. This event is about one hour and 20 minutes. Well good evening im chris brown the Deputy Director of the smithsonians air and space museum, and its my