存在许多种形式的“他者性”，它们推动了“他化”的“结构性”表达。

There are many types of Otherness which advance ‘structural’ expressions of “Othering”.

在劳伦斯·弗林格蒂的诗中，“两个拾荒者坐在卡车里”与“两个漂亮的人坐在奔驰车里”近在咫尺，而他们之间横亘着那道“高高的鸿沟”，我们彼此之间的距离也是如此：

The distances between us, like the “high gulf” in Lawrence Ferlinghetti’s poem in which “Two Scavengers In A Truck” come into close proximity with “Two Beautiful People In A Mercedes”:

“而那两人中较年轻的一个/也戴着太阳镜，留着长发/年龄与那位奔驰车司机相仿/两个拾荒者俯视下方/仿佛身处遥远的高处/凝望着那对时髦的情侣/就像在看一则无味的电视广告/广告里一切皆有可能/而那抹鲜红的灯光在一瞬间/将四个人紧紧聚拢在一起/仿佛在他们之间/真的有任何事情都可能发生”。

“And the younger of the two/Also with sunglasses and long hair/About the same age as the Mercedes driver/And both scavengers gazing down/As from a great distance/At the cool couple/As if they were watching some odorless TV ad/In which everything is possible/And the very red light for an instant/Holding all four close together/As if anything at all were possible/Between them”.

这首诗描绘了一辆“明亮的垃圾车，车上两名身穿红色塑料夹克的垃圾工”，两人向下望去，看到一辆“优雅敞篷的梅赛德斯，车里坐着一对优雅的夫妇”。垃圾工“弓着背，/看起来像某个/钟楼怪人卡西莫多”，而坐在梅赛德斯里的富有男子则有“及肩的金色头发和太阳镜”。与他形成对照的是那些被我们的观念所“他者化”的人，他们生活在社会阶层的边缘，对他们的描述则朴素得多。 结构性的他者化，即将某一群体隔离并标定为低劣的居住空间，修建实体屏障以阻挡所谓“未被驯化”的人，这种现象在巴勒斯坦希伯伦的景观中体现得十分鲜明。通往易卜拉欣清真寺（Masjid al-Khalil，亦称亚伯拉罕清真寺）的有两条道路，中间以围栏和铁丝网隔开。其中一条道路干净平整，铺着柏油，老人和孩子都能轻松通行，有人看守，环境宜人，这条路供犹太定居者使用。另一条则是坑洼不平的土路，满是垃圾，狭窄难行，尤其不适合残障人士和老人行走。两者的差距一目了然。专供巴勒斯坦人使用的道路则设有数十个检查站和路障，严重拖延了通行。检查站的入口看上去就像最高安全级别监狱的大门。

The poem describes a “bright garbage truck with two garbage men in red plastic blazers”, the men look down into “an elegant open Mercedes with an elegant couple in it.” The men are “hunched back/Looking like some/Gargoyle Quasimodo”, while the wealthy man in the Mercedes has “shoulder-length blond hair & sunglasses”. His apparent opposite, Othered by our perceptions of those who exist on the margins of social class yards, is afforded a more plain description. Structural otherness, the separating and designating to that Other a substandard living space, an erecting of physical barriers to keep out the ‘untamed’ is vivid in the landscape of Hebron in Palestine. There are two roads leading to Masjid al-Khalil (Abraham Mosque) separated by a fence and barbed wire. One of the roads is clean and asphalt-paved, easily accessible for the elderly and children, guarded and pleasant. This road is for Jewish settlers. The other road is an uneven dirt path, littered and narrow and unsuitable for walking particularly for the disabled and elderly. The contrast is glaring. Roads designated for Palestinians are restricted by dozens of checkpoints and barriers, severely delaying access. The entrances to the checkpoints resemble the front of a maximum-security prison.

在二十世纪的南非种族隔离制度、北美强制实行的黑人隔离，以及以色列的隔离墙、希布伦的“种族隔离道路”，都旨在把“他者”移出人类关怀的圈子。其用意在于传递这样一种信息：这些他者不属于这个社会，不是“我们”的一部分。每一种做法都是一种结构性的表达，意在宣告“你不属于这里”，从而在社会之中造就一种被他者化的结构性位置。

Apartheid in South Africa which forced segregation of Blacks in North America in the twentieth century, the Israel’s separation wall, the “Apartheid roads” in Hebron are all designed to remove others from the circle of human concern. This is to relay the message that those Others are not part of the society, not a part of who “we are”. Each is a structural expression of saying “you don’t belong”, creating an Otherised structural position within society.

先知（愿主赐福他并使他平安）教导我们，伟大不一定在于一个人财富的多寡，尤其是当这些财富没有得到负责任的运用时；伟大在于人心的丰盈。穆斯林绝不可因一个人的衣着、外表或他可能显露的任何异于常人之处而评判与他相接触的人。与个人内心的运作相比，这些都是表面的东西。先知的许多同伴即使社会地位崇高，衣着外表却保持着朴素，这是他们的习惯。《古兰经》实际上也教导说：

The Prophet (peace be upon him) taught us that greatness does not lie necessarily in the extent of a person’s wealth, particularly if that wealth is not used in a responsible way, but that greatness lies in the richness of a person’s heart. The Muslim must never judge a person he comes into contact with by his clothing, by his physical appearance or any seeming abnormality he might exhibit. Each of these is superficial in contrast to the workings of that individual’s heart. It was the practice of many of the Prophet’s companions to exhibit a simplicity in their appearances despite their lofty social standings. The Qur’ān in fact teaches that:

“不要傲慢地在大地上行走，你不能踏穿大地，也不能与山岳比高。”（17:37）以及“至仁主的仆人，是那些谦逊地在大地上行走的人，当愚昧的人向他们说话时，他们说：‘和平！’”（25:63）

17:37 “Do not strut arrogantly about the earth: you cannot break it open, nor match the mountains in height.” And 25:63 “The servants of the Lord of Mercy are those who walk humbly on the earth, and who, when the foolish address them, reply, ‘Peace’”.

理应不自抬身价，也不怀有傲慢之心，因为这会阻碍他接近、交流和陪伴那些处于社会边缘的人。事实上，先知ﷺ曾被艾布·哈米德·安萨里（Abū Hāmid al-Ghazālī）以如下优美的方式描述：

It is befitting one to not carry himself in an exalted way nor to adopt a spirit of arrogance which would inhibit his approaching, communicating with or keeping company with those who exist on the margins of society. The Prophet (peace be upon him) in fact was described beautifully by Abū Hāmid al-Ghazālī in the following way:

他是最宽容的人，最勇敢的人，最公正的人，最贞洁的人。除非是他所拥有的女奴，或是他的妻子，或是与他有血亲关系的至亲（mahram），否则他的手从未碰过任何女性的手。

“He was the most forbearing of people, the most courageous of people, the most just of people, the most chaste of people. His hand never touched the hand of any woman unless he owned her as a slave or was married to her or was closely related to her by blood (mahram).

他是最慷慨的人，从不把一第纳尔或一迪拉姆过夜留在身边。

He was the most generous of people, who never kept a dinar or a dirham with him overnight.

如果他有剩余的东西，而在天黑之前找不到可以给予的人，他就不会回家，直到把它捐给需要的人为止。在安拉赐予他的一切之中，他除了留存一年的最简朴的口粮——椰枣和大麦——之外，什么都没有拿，并把这些全部为安拉而施舍。有人向他要求任何东西，他都会给予；然后他会回到他一年的口粮中，把其中的一部分捐给更需要的人，因此他有时会在这一年结束之前就把口粮用完了。他自己修补凉鞋，缝补衣服，在家里帮助家人，并为他们切肉。他是最谦逊的人，不会直视任何人的眼睛。无论奴隶还是自由人邀请他，他都会应邀；即使是一杯牛奶的礼物，他也会接受，并且会回报那人。他不吃施舍之物。奴隶女子和穷人向他求助时，他都会予以回应。他为了主的缘故而发怒，但从不为自己的缘故而发怒。他坚守真理，即使这会给自己或同伴带来伤害。他发现他最优秀的一位同伴被杀害在犹太人居住的地区，但他并没有苛待他们，也没有超出伊斯兰教法所规定的范围去做任何事。

If he had anything left over and he could not find someone to give it to before night came, he would not go home until he had donated it to someone who needed it. He did not take anything from that which Allāh had bestowed upon him except one year’s supply of the simplest provisions, dates and barley, giving all of that for the sake of Allāh. He was never asked for anything but he gave it, then he would go back to his annual supplies and donate from them to those who needed it more, then he might run out before the year ended. He used to repair his own sandals and mend his own clothes, and he would help his family in the home and cut meat for them. He was the most modest of people and would not look anyone straight in the eye. He would respond to the invitations of slave and free alike, and accept a gift even if it was a cup of milk, and he would reward a person for it. He did not eat food that had been given in charity, and he would respond to slave women and the poor when they asked him for something. He got angry for the sake of his Lord but he did not get angry for his own sake. He would adhere to the truth even if that resulted in harm for himself or his companions. He found one of the best of his companions slain in an area where Jews lived, but he did not treat them harshly or do more than what which is prescribed by sharīʿah.

相反,他为那人支付了一百头骆驼的赔偿金(diyah),而他的一些同伴却连一头骆驼都迫切需要。他会在腹部绑一块石头,以抵御饥饿的痛苦;他也不拒绝合法的食物,而且他不会斜倚着进食,也不会在桌子上吃东西。

Rather he paid a diyah for him of one hundred camels even though some of his companions were in desperate need of just one camel. He would tie a rock to his stomach to ward off hunger pangs, and he did not refuse halal food or and he would not eat reclining or at a table.

他直到与安拉相见之前,从未连续三天吃饱过面包。他宁愿把所有的东西施舍出去,也不愿自己吃饱,这并非因为贫穷,也不是出于吝啬。他会接受别人的餐饮邀请,探望病人,参加葬礼。他独自一人走在敌人之中,身边没有护卫。他是最谦逊、最安静的人,却不骄傲;他是最善言辞的人,却从不冗长啰嗦;他面容最为和悦。他不为世俗之事忧虑。他穿戴所能找到的衣物,让他的仆人或其他人骑在他的坐骑后面同行。他骑的是手边现有的坐骑,有时是马,有时是骆驼,有时是骡子,有时是驴。有时他赤着脚步行,不披斗篷,不戴头巾或帽子,去探望麦地那最偏远角落里的病人。他喜爱香水,厌恶难闻的气味。他会与穷人同坐,向贫困者奉上食物并与他们一同进餐;他尊重有德之人,以善待的方式软化有地位之人的心。他维系亲属关系,却不因亲属而偏袒他们,胜过那些更优秀的人;他从不严厉对待任何人。对于向他道歉的人,他接受他们的解释;他会说笑,但所说的只有真话;他微笑,却从不大笑出声。

He never ate his fill of bread for three days in a row until he met Allāh, may He be exalted, as he would prefer to give away what he had rather than eat his fill, not because of poverty or miserliness. He would accept invitations to meals, visit the sick, and attend funerals. He walked alone among his enemies without a guard. He was the most humble and quiet of people without being arrogant, the most eloquent without being long-winded, the most cheerful of countenance. He did not worry about worldly matters. He wore whatever he found, and let his slave or others ride behind him on his mount. He rode whatever was available, sometimes a horse, sometimes a camel, sometimes a mule and sometimes a donkey. Sometimes he walked barefoot, with no cloak, turban or cap, visiting the sick in the furthest parts of Madina. He loved perfume and hated foul smells. He would sit with the poor and offer food to and eat with the needy, honouring the virtuous and softening the hearts of people of status by treating them kindly. He upheld ties of kinship without favouring his relatives over those who were better than them, and he did not treat anyone harshly. He accepted the excuses of those who apologized to him; he would joke but he only spoke the truth, and he would smile without laughing out loud.

如果他看到被允许的娱乐,他不会加以谴责,并且他与妻子赛跑。当有人对他大声喧哗时,他忍耐承受。他有男仆和女仆,但他的饮食和衣着并不比他们更好。他不会虚度光阴,而是为了真主而努力,或者去做那些有益于自我提升的必要之事。他不会因为任何穷人的贫困或长期疾病而轻视他,也不会因为任何国王的权势而畏惧他。他以平等的态度,同样地号召他们二者归向真主。55

If he saw permissible play he did not denounce it, and he raced with his wife. When voices were raised against him, he bore that with patience. He had slaves, male and female, but he did not eat or dress any better than they did. He did not waste time without striving for the sake of Allāh or doing that which was essential to better himself. He did not look down on any poor person because of his poverty or chronic sickness, and he did not fear any king because of his power. He called both of them to Allāh on equal terms.”55

在一个空间与边界能够确立自我认同、归属感的不同世界里，我们必须认识到，这些同样属于他者，而非凌驾于他者之上。要做到这一点，需要一种建立在承认“空间”所赋予的特权之上的共情。战争与冲突关乎空间及其位置，而抵抗者同样将自身置于空间之中，这一空间由他们对所挑战的冲突的认知所界定。2003年，布赖恩·霍（Brian Haw）选择将其反战抗议的场所设在议会广场外的硬化地面上。他扎营的原因，是反对伊拉克战争，尤其是战争在伊拉克造成大量孤儿的问题。在他这种自我禁锢之中，我们看到他将自己认同的他者具象化了；他所激发的共情，不仅体现在对“空间”的限制上，也体现在它“取代”他者之位的方式中。在他的抗议中，我们能够体会到，他试图向观者“展示”的不仅是他的抗议行为，还有自我与他者之间更为宽广的界限：议会大厦与他的帐篷之间、结构与布料之间的巨大规模差异，可以与他所看到的受害者与侵略者之间的悬殊相互呼应。

So, in the viewing of a different world, a world in which spaces and boundaries can assert a self-identity, a sense of belonging, we must appreciate these also exist for the Other and not in spite of the Other. Doing this, involves an empathy founded on acknowledging the privilege that ‘space’ accords. Where war and conflict have to do with space and locations of space, those who resist also situate themselves within space defined by what they perceive about the conflicts they challenge. Brian Haw in 2003 chose to make the scene of his anti-war protest a site on the paved floor outside Parliament Square. The reason for his encampment was to protest against the war in Iraq and in particular how the war gave birth to many orphans in Iraq. We see in his self-confinement an actualising of the Other he identified with; the empathy he stimulated is discernible not only in ‘space’ restrictions, but in its way of ‘taking the place’ of the Other. In his protest, we appreciate how he sought to ‘show’ his spectators not only his act of protest, but also the broadened demarcations of self and Otherness in which the disparity in size between Parliament and his tent, between structure and cloth might connect to what he viewed as the disparity between victim and aggressor.

在类似的意义上，在奥斯维辛的大屠杀纪念馆里，摄影证词的陈列方式象征着个体性与集体性的统一，并与纳粹对受害者的去人格化相抗衡。个人档案得以置于一个按集体苦难规模而布局的空间中，既体现犹太囚犯的集体经历，又突出他们各自的姓名与职业。由此，这一空间将博物馆参观者想象中的集体过去，与单个囚犯的个体视觉联系结合起来。人们由此直面对那些囚犯所施行的非人化之逆转。他们的衣物、鞋子、行李箱，以及头发、笔迹等身体特征，都把那些被剥夺、被抽象化、被推远的东西重新拉近。博物馆的场所与空间，在强化对大屠杀的记忆方面，自然发挥着不可或缺的作用，然而奥斯维辛本身绝非一个同质的空间。它反而因囚犯从各分营源源不断的调动而支离破碎。每一张肖像都展示着囚犯的照片，连同其姓名，姓名之下列有囚号，以及民族、出生日期、被监禁前的职业、被遣送的日期和死亡日期等详细信息。肖像的排列暗示着团结，也暗示着受难者身份的平等，以及在奥斯维辛死亡的终局性。它们见证了一种仍然完整、尽管已被玷污、却尚未在身体、情感和精神上被集中营生活彻底摧毁的"在场"的生命。这面肖像墙与那些以图像方式直接描绘后一种状态的其他照片和绘画形成对照。来自美国的和平活动人士雷切尔·阿利恩·科里（Rachel Aliene Corrie）曾与由巴勒斯坦人领导、致力于人权与非暴力抵抗的国际团结运动（International Solidarity Movement，下称ISM）合作，她在为保卫巴勒斯坦农民的家园而开展的工作中，挑战了一种结构性的"他者化"。 2003年1月，她前往以色列，随后到达约旦河西岸，在那里接受了国际连带运动（ISM）的培训。她经常与几位美国和英国的活动人士聚在一起，抵制对巴勒斯坦人住房的拆除行动。2003年3月16日，正值第二次巴勒斯坦大起义期间，她与其他活动人士聚集在一位巴勒斯坦药剂师的住所外，被一辆装甲的以色列国防军（IDF）推土机碾压致死。她的言论对“自我”与“他者”的考量，以及这些考量与空间、身份和认同之间的关系，提供了非常重要的启示，这些言论选自《让我独自站立：瑞秋·科里日记》，由日记和电子邮件组成，后由她的父母选编出版。

In a similar sentiment, at the holocaust memorial in Auschwitz, photographic testimony is positioned in a way that symbolises individuality and togetherness and offsets Nazi depersonalisation of its victims. Individualised entries can exist in a space arranged to reflect the scale of collective suffering, the collectivised experience of Jewish prisoners, as well as to emphasise their individual names and occupations. The space thus meshes an imagined collective past for the museum visitors with an individualised visual connection with single prisoners. One is confronted with an undoing of what had dehumanised those prisoners. Their clothes, shoes, suitcases, physical features of hair, handwriting, all serve to bring into proximity what was denied, abstracted and distanced. The site and space of the museum is of course altogether present in accentuating the memory of the holocaust though Auschwitz itself was anything but an isotropic space. It was instead fragmented with the endless movement of prisoners from sub-camps. Each displayed a photographic portrait of the prisoner including his or her name, under which is the prison number and details of ethnicity, date of birth, occupation before imprisonment, date of deportation and date of death. The arrangement of the portraits suggests solidarity, as well as an equalising in victimhood and the finality of death at Auschwitz. They serve as a testimony to a ‘present’ life, sullied though still complete and not yet physically, emotionally and mentally decimated by camp life. The wall of portraits offsets other photographs and drawings which do graphically portray the latter. Rachel Aliene Corrie who was an American peace activist working with the Palestinian-led human rights and non-violent resistance group International Solidarity Movement (ISM henceforth) challenged a structural otherness in her work to defend the homes of Palestinian farmers. She travelled to Israel in January 2003 and then to the West Bank where she received training from the ISM. She would frequently gather with several American and British activists resisting the demolition of Palestinian homes. On March 16, 2003 during the Second Intifada she gathered with other activists outside the home of a Palestinian pharmacist when she was crushed to death under an armoured IDF (Israeli Defence Forces) bulldozer. Her statements which shed very important light on ‘self’ and ‘other’ considerations and the way they relate to space, identity and identification are taken from Let Me Stand Alone: The Journals of Rachel Corrie, made up of journal entries and emails later selected for publication by her parents.

2003年1月29日，科丽（Corrie）驻扎在加沙期间，观察并评论了空间的限制、行动的束缚、与土地之间感官联系的断绝，以及暴力如何影响儿童，这些因素对巴勒斯坦人的景观与景观营造（landscaping）具有重要影响。这是一座监狱，看守者认为它太大了，于是现在正在把它挤得更小。这里的人们生活在海洋的气息之中，却再也无法去看海了。"这里有什么美丽的东西？我们本可以去看海。一件美丽的事情。现在我连海都看不到了。对孩子们来说，还有什么是美丽的？一个名叫阿里的八岁孩子，在我到达的前一天死去了。他只是想看看坦克——看看坦克——结果他们把他的头炸开了。"56 广阔的大海与加沙狭窄的土地形成了对照。其人民的苦难，因被剥夺了观看一片他们坚信本属于自己的景观的权利而进一步加剧。任何土地的"景观"（landscape）都由相同的社会过程构成，而作为动词的"景观营造"（landscaping）则是指人类的能动作用改变土地的方式，从而创造出承载各类场所的独特空间。57

On January 29, 2003 whilst Corrie was stationed in Gaza she observed and commented on how limitations of space, restrictions of movement, of sensory relationship with land and the way children are affected by violence come to have an important bearing on landscape and landscaping for the Palestinians. This is a jail that the jailkeepers decided was too big, so now they are squeezing it smaller. The people here live within the smell of the ocean but they can’t go see it anymore. “What is there beautiful? We could go see the ocean. One thing beautiful. Now I cannot see the ocean. What is for the children that is beautiful? An eight-year old named Ali died the day before I came. He just wanted to look at the tank – see the tank – and they explode his head.”56 The expanse of the ocean is set against the constricted land of Gaza. The suffering of its people is exacerbated through their denial of vision of a landscape that they believe is inherently theirs. While ‘landscape’ of any land is made up of the same societal processes, ‘landscaping’ understood as a verb is about the way in which land is transformed by human agency, creating unique spaces upon which sites are located.57

对于加沙的居民来说，这意味着他们虽然能"闻到"大海的气息，却无法"看见"它；正是原住民无法让自己的孩子欣赏"那美好之物"，这一处境塑造了她富有同理心的观点。对蕾切尔而言，自我与他者的界限是接纳性的：她并不主张她与巴勒斯坦人之间关系的相互性，而是单向的。蕾切尔在叙述中纳入遇难儿童阿里的事例，将无法看见大海与"坦克——他们炸掉他的头"并置，形成对照。她在信中通过将自然与机械并置，来突出她所观察到的破坏。

For the residents of Gaza, this means that though they can ‘smell’ the ocean they cannot ‘see’ it and it is this inability of natives to enjoy ‘what is’ beautiful for their children that informs her empathetic outlook.58 Demarcations of Self and Otherness for Rachel here are receptive; she does not espouse mutuality in relations between her and the Palestinians, it is instead unilateral. Rachel’s inclusion of child victim Ali in her account serves to juxtapose the failing to see the ocean with seeing ‘the tank – and they explode his head.’ She uses her letter to accentuate destruction in what she observes by juxtaposing the natural with the mechanical.

印象是，没有任何东西真正被“看见”，美与残酷交织在一起，融入一个只能被感受的领域。瑞秋反思自己作为一个“白皮肤”之人的特权：她能够看见、能够见证，而她的情感要求她超越自我与他者之间的界限。科丽所描述的加沙城，实际上在视野之中“迷失”了，在视觉和记忆中都错位了。加沙的孩子们知道大海就在那里，却看不见它，因此他们的视觉依恋是错位的，但他们仍然通过嗅觉这一感官依恋保留着这座城市，还有他们认为本质上属于巴勒斯坦的地貌特征。我们不禁要问，我们能否知道科丽是否映照了阿里的视角？阿里闻到的大海气息与科丽的相比又是怎样的？

The impression is that nothing is ‘seen’, both beauty and cruelty are meshed together into a domain in which things are only felt. Rachel reflects on her privilege as a ‘white-skinned’ person who can see and witness, and whose feelings mandate a transcending of Self/Other boundaries. The Gaza City that Corrie describes is actually ‘lost’ ‘in the field of vision’, dislocated in vision and memory. Since the Gazan children know the ocean is there, but cannot see it, they have a dislocated visual attachment but still retain the city through sensory attachment of smell, and points of landscaping they believe are inherently Palestinian. We question whether we can know if Corrie mirrors Ali’s vantage point? What is Ali’s smell of the ocean in comparison to Corrie’s?

Corrie 再次并置了她所观察的巴勒斯坦人在玩耍时对空间及其时间性的不同理解:"孩子们在我们身后玩耍,当他们想走进废墟里和我们一起玩时,我们大声喊'La! La!'——因为不知为何,即使你生在笼中,从未在没有整夜枪声的环境中生活过,你依然能够玩耍。"59

Corrie again juxtaposes the way space and its temporalities are considered by the Palestinians she observes whilst they play: “Children play behind us and we yell, “La! La!” when they try to wander out into the rubble to play with us – because somehow even though you are born in a cage and you have never lived without shooting all night, you are still able to play.”59

她对“笼子”的描述意味着限制；在她目睹的实际禁锢之中，她能够将“笼子”和“射击”与“游戏”并置，借助观众与儿童相关的共同象征符号来唤起共鸣。Corrie 对那些与一片已变得“想象化”、如同牢笼的土地存在感官联系的儿童的描述，深刻地揭示了自我与他者之间的认知关系。这两段描述都是她自己的感知，也是一个成年人对加沙儿童所经历之事的理解。

Her description of a ‘cage’ denotes restriction; in the physical confinement that she witnesses she is able to juxtapose ‘cage’ and ‘shooting’ with ‘play’, drawing on the mutual iconic codes by which her audience can relate to children. Corrie’s description of children who have a sensory relationship to a land that has become ‘imagined’ and cagelike is insightful for what it tells us about Self/Other perceptions. Both descriptive accounts are her own perceptions, and an adult perception, of what children in Gaza are experiencing.

在2003年1月19日写给母亲的一封信中，科丽进一步超越了占主导地位的苦难与受害话语，她颠倒了“自我”与“他者”的界限：

In a letter to her mother dated January 19, 2003, Corrie is able to further transcend the dominant discourse of suffering and victimisation by inverting ‘self’ and ‘other’ boundaries:

“我认为，白人有时在美国也会受害于一种仍然偏袒我们、而压制有色人种的制度；男性也会受害于一种偏袒他们、而压制女性的制度；犹太裔以色列人（比美国的白人和男性所受的伤害要大得多）则受害于以色列的一种制度，这种制度偏袒他们，而压制巴勒斯坦裔以色列人和被占领土上的巴勒斯坦人。尽管如此，这一制度依然是一种种族主义的制度。”60

“I think white people sometimes suffer in the United States from a system that still privileges us over people of color; men suffer from the system that privileges them over women; and Jewish Israelis suffer (much more than white people and men in the U.S.) from a system in Israel that privileges them over Palestinian-Israelis and Palestinians in the Occupied Territories. Nevertheless, the system remains a racist one.”60

Corrie的话语体现了支配者与从属者之间的单极关系，这似乎源于她五年级时的一次演讲，她在演讲中说道："他们就是我们，我们就是他们。"61 她认为，将自我与他者常态化，是产生共情思考的前提。Corrie所描述的这种一体感，是致力于超越地缘政治时间框架、重塑"自我"与"他者"认知的活动人士所反复强调的重要主题。在下面这段评论中，Corrie通过地方营造来建构自我/他者的身份认同：果园、温室和果树遭到毁坏，使她能够在一个极其个人化的层面上产生共情。她借用了"克雷格叔叔"和"奶奶"的形象： "我特别是在看到果园、温室和果树被毁的时候会想到这些。那是多年的照料和培育啊。我想到你，想到让东西生长需要多长时间，这是一项多么充满爱的劳动。我真心觉得，处在类似的境况下，大多数人都会尽其所能地保护自己。我想克雷格叔叔会这样做，我想奶奶大概也会。我想我自己也会。"62

Corrie’s words, a representation of unipolarity between dominant and subordinate, seem to stem from empathetic considerations informed in her 5th grade school speech in which she instructed: “They are us, we are them.”61 She sees this normalising of Self and Other as prerequisite to empathetic considerations. The togetherness that Corrie describes is a salient motif in the work of activists who realise the need to transcend geo-political temporalities to reshape ‘self’ and ‘other’ perceptions. In the following comment, Corrie constructs Self/Other identity through place-making wherein the destruction of ‘orchards and greenhouses and fruit trees’ allows for an empathic consideration at a particularly personal level; by drawing on ‘Uncle Craig’ and ‘Grandma’ “I think about this especially when I see orchards and greenhouses and fruit trees destroyed - just years of care and cultivation. I think about you and how long it takes to make things grow and what a labour of love it is. I really think, in a similar situation, most people would defend themselves as best they could. I think Uncle Craig would. I think probably Grandma would. I think I would.”62

Corrie 试图通过融合对"自我/他者"二元对立的回应来说服她的母亲。

Corrie seeks to convince her mother by merging conflict responses of Self/Other binaries.

科里将巴勒斯坦与美国两地的精神景观交织在一起，这使她无法把某种理想化的体系仅仅视为一时的文化时尚而加以接纳。通过同时认同这两种景观，我们并不感到她与所描述的环境破坏之间存在"距离"。科里指出，任何对加沙圣地景观的思考，都必然要求反思生活在那里的人们所应承担的生态责任。科里对祖父的提及，则体现出亲身经历是共情的决定性因素。

Corrie’s drawing together mental landscapes from Palestinian and American settings disallow an embracing of an idealised system as a mere cultural fashion. By aligning herself with both landscapes, we do not sense a ‘distance’ from the causes of the environmental destruction she describes. Corrie describes how any consideration of the sacred landscape of Gaza would necessitate a reflection of the ecological responsibilities of those who live there. Corrie’s references to her grandfather reflect the necessity of experience as a determinant of empathy.

她认为，“奶奶”很可能理解巴勒斯坦人的处境，因为她自己也有过类似的体会，知道失去橄榄树时他们可能有怎样的感受。

She submits that ‘Grandma’ could well understand the plight of the Palestinians since she has experience of what they might feel at the loss of their olive trees.

在她的信中,她还探讨了身体穿行于区域、地点和障碍之间的理论与现实,将加沙的本地居民、她自己及其亲属置于在场与缺席的行动者位置上。科里用来描述不公正感受以及巴勒斯坦人抵抗权利的语言,大量借鉴了她自身的体验,或她认为具有普遍性的、对归属权的回应。因此,科里暗示,无论对巴勒斯坦人还是美国人而言,都存在一种对农业景观的情感归属感,“照料”“耕作”和“生长”成为塑造她声援之政治形式的关键词。她所描述的、为“让事物生长”所需的“爱的劳动”,与巴勒斯坦农民所使用的母性象征相对照,是一个值得玩味的说法。63

In her letter, she also engages the theoretical and practical reality of bodies moving through areas, locations and obstacles by situating native residents of Gaza, herself and her relatives as present and absent actors. The language Corrie uses to describe feelings of injustice and the right of the Palestinians to resist draws extensively on her own or what she considers universal responses to rights of belonging. Corrie therefore intimates that for both Palestinians and Americans, there is an emotional sense of belonging to agricultural landscapes, ‘care’, ‘cultivation’ and ‘grow’ becoming keywords that shape the political form of her solidarity. The ‘labour of love’ she describes required to ‘make things grow’ is an interesting description in light of how it correlates with the maternal symbolism used by Palestinian farmers.63