Until We Have Faces

 Stella Morabito points out that masks are another way to impse social control at The Federalist. Morabito goes through the history of the mask mandates, pointing out that we were instructed first NOT to wear masks, before we were instructed that we MUST wear masks. She also makes it clear that the skepticism about masks arises from the nonsensical situations in which masks are mandated.

There are, of course, several obvious reasons to object to mask mandates. First, those who push for them have made it very easy to be skeptical of their claims that any old mask is essential for public safety. A mask alone in the car? On the beach in the sun and salt air? On the walk into a restaurant but not after you’re seated?

But the real point of Morabito's essay is that masks dehumanize us and therefore isolate us from the rest of humanity. We are meant to see each other, to develop and nurture relationships. Sure, it is possible to have strictly transactional relationships at a distance, but for truly long term friendships, and even love, we must be close, and must see each other's face. She notes too that in court cases, the witnesses must have their faces uncovered or juries can not tell if they are telling the truth. And children need to learn the art of reading faces, so should not be masked.

Central to Morabito's analogy is a book by C. S. Lewis, Till We Have Faces.  In summarizing the novel, she notes that the main character, Orual, wears a veil precisely so no one can see her face, which she believes gives her power over others. But:

At her moment of epiphany, Orual realizes she spent her life hiding from the truth, often in the most specious of ways. Once she accepts the truth, Orual understands that her life, spent in pursuit of the total control symbolized by her face-covering, didn’t serve her well.

It doesn't serve us well either. It is only by facing the world barefaced that we can nuture our friendships and our loves.