No-Wash Protests: Film Analysis

Words: 511
Pages: 3

First, about the no-wash protests. “Wash”, the act, features very prominently in the whole film. For example, the prison officials keep washing the blood off their fist and the feces off the walls, as well as the urine off the corridors in the prison. This kind of wash is set in stark contrast to no-wash, advocated by the protagonist Bobby Sands. In my opinion, to wash is not just as simple as the act of cleaning in common sense. Instead, it means to wash away evidences that have been left behind by brutal violence. Just as a murder would try to wash away the victim’s blood to cover up his crime, the prison officials are ordered by the authorities to wash away the evidences that can prove that the prisoners have been maltreated, or even to restore order in the prison. Meanwhile, it is necessary to …show more content…
Hunger strikes are very common in the world’s history. Numerous people have resorted to this kind of form of protest to show their opposition and to fight for what they want. But what’s really stunning is that at the end of the film dozens of people died of hunger, which exposes audiences the cruel nature of such form of protest. What Sands represents is the weaker side, lack of any power to fight against the authorities. What’s left with them is themselves, their own body in particular. By starving themselves, they abuse their own body to present the most sorrowful and pathetic protest one could imagine. On the one hand, it really arouses sympathy among the audiences since it is human nature to sympathize with the weak side. Of course, this may not be the original idea of Sands and his companions. On the other hand, death cause by self-imposed hunger is abnormal and such abnormality is most effective to make a point and draw people’s attention to take what they fight for as serious as they can. This kind of hunger not only stands for the physical hunger one can feel, but also the spiritual hunger for justice and rightful