[Previous entry: "Convergences"] [Main Index] [Next entry: "flickr"]
11/08/2004 Archived Entry: "Oz"
Very seldom do I venture publicly into politics, and even less often do I come out publicly regarding the world of the Middle East - a world I have strong passion about for all kinds of personal reasons. But this article in the online New Yorker about Israeli author Amos Oz touches on much of what I feel as well. Oz (also one of Israel’s great novelists) offers some fine observations and discussion. When friends chide me/laugh a bit about my taking Matthew Abraham to task on Pre-Text for his Re/Interview with Chomsky and Finkelstein, what I think folks aren't seeing is the complexities of the situation I wanted Abraham to turn to for discussion instead of mere Israel-bashing (which is what he did in his narrow questions). And this is much of what Oz touches upon as well: the situation is more complex that the critiques realize. How easy it is on both the right and left to reduce complex conflict to a moral high ground of right and wrong. But how even easier to now erase one group's right for nationalism (Israel) by favoring another's, to write out one history by writing in another, to become the very racists one supposedly want's to defeat. Instead of vocalizing the difficult histories which generate nationalisms, instead of addressing the long standing existence of peoples in a region, and instead of acknowledging the agencies of many parties (and not just Israeli and Palestinian), the dominant voices - and here I unfortunately must address mostly the left's self-righteous behavior - make errors in judgment which equal the very same errors we easily attribute to the Bush administration's failed foreign policy. This is seen as well on the often fair minded attempts of Crooked Timber to engage in discussion. Even if the intent is good (and I say that only because of a caveat the editors put out regarding comments), the discussion quickly falls back on the very problems Abraham is guilty of propagating: using the wrong language to describe the situation, innacurate historical readings, but most importantly, the very racist discourse it is tempting to work against.
When Arafat dies, I'm sure I'll have more to say as well.
Replies: 2 comments
"When friends chide me/laugh a bit about my taking Matthew Abraham to task on Pre-Text for his Re/Interview with Chomsky and Finkelstein, what I think folks aren't seeing is the complexities of the situation I wanted Abraham to turn to for discussion instead of mere Israel-bashing (which is what he did in his narrow questions). "
To be fair, some of those friends did indeed see your point on the list. Some of those friends simply chided or teased you about the stylistic tone you chose to employ in your "taking to task." It was acerbic . . . or maybe even Ricerbic.
Posted by Friend @ 11/09/2004 10:22 PM EST
Amen. We use the same old, tired ways of thinking about the issue and quickly become polarized and defensive and so on. I would be very interested in hearing what you have to say about all of this.
Posted by joanna @ 11/09/2004 09:44 PM EST