With Tattoos, Young Israelis Bear Holocaust Scars of Relatives
I strongly support the right of people to get whatever tattoo they desire, even if said tattoo would shock or offend others.
That said, I feel this practice is taking the "cult of remembrance" regarding the Holocaust yet another step too far. As Jonathan Ornstein said to me before I left Krakow, "Judaism as a religion has always encouraged people to move on, to not wallow in our grief. By constantly memorializing the Holocaust in this way, we risk constantly reliving it, not just remembering it." He was referring to the March of the Living, but I feel that this practice follows in the same category. It's one thing to want to signify or remember your family member's sacrifice and memory, it's quite another to say this:
“All my generation knows nothing about the Holocaust,” said Ms. Sagir,
21, who has had the tattoo for four years. “You talk with people and
they think it’s like the Exodus from Egypt, ancient history. I decided
to do it to remind my generation: I want to tell them my grandfather’s
story and the Holocaust story.”
Our generation, whether in the States or Israel, knowing nothing about the Holocaust? Where did this kid go to school? While in Israel, I saw nothing but reminders about the Holocaust - after all, it is the primary reason why Israel was founded, and why many Jews say we need a Jewish state, in order to ensure that the Holocaust doesn't happen again. I'd say that the odds of us forgetting about the Holocaust anytime soon is quite simply an over-reaction.
Should we forget about the Holocaust? Fuck no. But do we, as a people, need to move on? I'd say so.
Article written by Jodi Rudoren, and published by the New York Times.
Showing posts with label Middle East. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Middle East. Show all posts
01 October 2012
The Purpose of Memory is to Remember, Not Relive
Labels:
anti-Semitism,
culture war,
history,
Israel,
Israeli politics,
Jew Card,
Jews,
Krakow,
legacies,
Middle East,
NYT
Location:
Toronto, ON, Canada
The Pot Calling the Kettle Black?
Seeking Return of Art, Turkey Jolts Museums
This isn't a new issue by any stretch, but Turkey is calling for the return of archeological treasures which it claims are rightfully theirs, with statements like these to both back up their claims, and intimidate museums:
“Artifacts, just like people, animals or plants, have souls and historical memories,” said Turkey’s culture minister, Ertugrul Gunay. “When they are repatriated to their countries, the balance of nature will be restored.”
It strikes me that Turkey has a lot of gall to wage a campaign like this; they are leaning on an Ottoman-era law to get these pieces back, when it was Ottoman authorities who would often sell artifacts to foreign collectors in the first place. Further, they are claiming that any piece which was taken from Ottoman territory belongs to them - which conveniently protects items in their own museums which were taken from other countries, then under Ottoman control. Not only is it galling that they use such a double standard, but it is against the standards they agreed to under the banner of UNESCO. If Turkey succeeds in these cases, then any nation can claim any archeological treasure, anywhere - so long as it belonged to their state at some point, in this past. So does this mean that Italy can demand the return of all Roman antiquities?
This is bullshit, and I agree with the author wholeheartedly when he ties it together with Turkey's rising status as a powerful state in the Middle East. It is easiest to flex your muscles in the cultural realm, especially when you play on Western guilt regarding past colonial and imperial ventures - while conveniently forgetting your own.
Oh, and Mr. Gunay? Artifacts, plants, and animals don't have souls or historical memories; we created them for these objects, in every case.
Article written by Dan Bilefsky, and published by the New York Times.
This isn't a new issue by any stretch, but Turkey is calling for the return of archeological treasures which it claims are rightfully theirs, with statements like these to both back up their claims, and intimidate museums:
“Artifacts, just like people, animals or plants, have souls and historical memories,” said Turkey’s culture minister, Ertugrul Gunay. “When they are repatriated to their countries, the balance of nature will be restored.”
It strikes me that Turkey has a lot of gall to wage a campaign like this; they are leaning on an Ottoman-era law to get these pieces back, when it was Ottoman authorities who would often sell artifacts to foreign collectors in the first place. Further, they are claiming that any piece which was taken from Ottoman territory belongs to them - which conveniently protects items in their own museums which were taken from other countries, then under Ottoman control. Not only is it galling that they use such a double standard, but it is against the standards they agreed to under the banner of UNESCO. If Turkey succeeds in these cases, then any nation can claim any archeological treasure, anywhere - so long as it belonged to their state at some point, in this past. So does this mean that Italy can demand the return of all Roman antiquities?
This is bullshit, and I agree with the author wholeheartedly when he ties it together with Turkey's rising status as a powerful state in the Middle East. It is easiest to flex your muscles in the cultural realm, especially when you play on Western guilt regarding past colonial and imperial ventures - while conveniently forgetting your own.
Oh, and Mr. Gunay? Artifacts, plants, and animals don't have souls or historical memories; we created them for these objects, in every case.
Article written by Dan Bilefsky, and published by the New York Times.
Labels:
aesthetics,
history,
legacies,
Middle East,
NYT,
politics
Location:
Toronto, ON, Canada
24 September 2012
The Declining American Empire?
Today were two articles in the NY Times' Op-Ed discussing the recent outbreak of anti-American feelings in the Middle East, dealing heavily with the "Innocence of Muslims" video. The first article uses Salman Rushdie and the laughter associated with the Newsweek cover 'Muslim Rage' to point out why we really need to simply stand our ground:
The Satanic Video
While another article points out why the US needs to become accustomed to the fact of its status as a declining empire:
America's Inevitable Retreat From the Middle East
I agree with the idea that the US should not apologize for its culture - I actually agreed with what Romney said, that we should stand for our way of life. Unfortunately, he said it with crappy rhetoric and the worst timing possible. Freedom of Speech is one of the best defenses against tyranny, and we should not give it up, or turn our backs on it, simply because some people get pissed off by it. Obama's response was diplomatic, to be sure, but I would have liked it to include a small explanation about how American society functions - and that the government cannot (and absolutely should not) shut down freedom of expression, even if the persons in question are idiots.
The second article was inevitable - since 9/11, everyone has enjoyed pointing out that the American Empire is on its way towards collapse. This has included me on occasion, I admit. It definitely includes everyone in the Univ. of Toronto History Department - which is rather amusing, given how much Canada benefits from American imperialism, but I digress. The author makes a comparison between the evacuation of Saigon in 1975 with the US' withdrawal from Libya - except it doesn't work. The US retreated from Vietnam because there was no strategic reason to be there, except stop the "spread of Communism" - which by then we had realized was never going to be the case. Vietnam had no economic benefit to require an American presence - while the Middle East definitely does. That was why we went into Iraq, and why we will continue to maintain a visible presence in the Middle East for decades to come, with the accompanying cost. The author is right, however, in stating that the US has really screwed up in the Muslim world during the past 20 years, and clearly pointed out the folly of following colonialist imperialism in a post-colonial world.
What I like about Obama in regards to foreign policy is his willingness to follow different models to enable American success - but those different models should not include apologies for free speech or other protected American rights.
Salman Rushdie really put it best when he was on the Daily Show last week - the US needs to stand up for its intellectuals and artists, regardless of how good (or bad) they are. Further, John Oliver made a funny point that the Muslim world is the same today as Christianity was 600 years ago - the latter got out of it eventually, and the former will do the same. We may never see Mohammed depicted on a box of Wheaties or in a sliced tomato, but every religion gets a sense of humor eventually. We just have to be patient, stand up for ourselves when necessary, and cooperate - while never forgetting that we forged an American Empire for a damn good reason.
"The Satanic Video" was written by Bill Keller, and published by the New York Times. "America's Inevitable Retreat From the Middle East" was written by Pankay Mishra and also published by the NYT.
The Satanic Video
While another article points out why the US needs to become accustomed to the fact of its status as a declining empire:
America's Inevitable Retreat From the Middle East
I agree with the idea that the US should not apologize for its culture - I actually agreed with what Romney said, that we should stand for our way of life. Unfortunately, he said it with crappy rhetoric and the worst timing possible. Freedom of Speech is one of the best defenses against tyranny, and we should not give it up, or turn our backs on it, simply because some people get pissed off by it. Obama's response was diplomatic, to be sure, but I would have liked it to include a small explanation about how American society functions - and that the government cannot (and absolutely should not) shut down freedom of expression, even if the persons in question are idiots.
The second article was inevitable - since 9/11, everyone has enjoyed pointing out that the American Empire is on its way towards collapse. This has included me on occasion, I admit. It definitely includes everyone in the Univ. of Toronto History Department - which is rather amusing, given how much Canada benefits from American imperialism, but I digress. The author makes a comparison between the evacuation of Saigon in 1975 with the US' withdrawal from Libya - except it doesn't work. The US retreated from Vietnam because there was no strategic reason to be there, except stop the "spread of Communism" - which by then we had realized was never going to be the case. Vietnam had no economic benefit to require an American presence - while the Middle East definitely does. That was why we went into Iraq, and why we will continue to maintain a visible presence in the Middle East for decades to come, with the accompanying cost. The author is right, however, in stating that the US has really screwed up in the Muslim world during the past 20 years, and clearly pointed out the folly of following colonialist imperialism in a post-colonial world.
What I like about Obama in regards to foreign policy is his willingness to follow different models to enable American success - but those different models should not include apologies for free speech or other protected American rights.
Salman Rushdie really put it best when he was on the Daily Show last week - the US needs to stand up for its intellectuals and artists, regardless of how good (or bad) they are. Further, John Oliver made a funny point that the Muslim world is the same today as Christianity was 600 years ago - the latter got out of it eventually, and the former will do the same. We may never see Mohammed depicted on a box of Wheaties or in a sliced tomato, but every religion gets a sense of humor eventually. We just have to be patient, stand up for ourselves when necessary, and cooperate - while never forgetting that we forged an American Empire for a damn good reason.
"The Satanic Video" was written by Bill Keller, and published by the New York Times. "America's Inevitable Retreat From the Middle East" was written by Pankay Mishra and also published by the NYT.
Labels:
culture war,
free speech,
humor,
Middle East,
NYT,
tolerance
Location:
Toronto, ON, Canada
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)