Games

Control-Alt-Delete

"One could read the battle of the walls much the way an archaeologist reads stratigraphy - layer by layer - each layer of paint indicating a partial and temporary victory in an ongoing battle." This made me think. At first I thought of onions, because they too have layers. But onions are peeled towards the center and aren't oriented from top-to-bottom. Stratigraphy really is great comparison. the past is hidden. Time erodes and time conceals. It rots and it hides. So too, it seems, does this graffiti. Yet (as the picture below shows), all that remains with graffiti is an outline of the past. A color scheme of conflict. It is as if an archaeologist dug beneath the present only to find scorched earth, an ashen past. Nonetheless, strata and graffiti pile up in a dialogue of time and space, regardless whether it's heard or not.

How is it that a layer of paint can more successfully conceal than a period of a thousand years? Does the one with the darkest paint and the quickest hand win the battle of time?

The picture below is one of my favorite works. On the surface, and at first glance, you notice the word "delete." There is no doubt that this artist wants this wall gone. But more important and profound, in my opinion, is what the keyboard command really means. CTRL-ALT-DLT on a windows computer opens the "task manager." You perform this command when a program is "not responding." Then, you are either able to troubleshoot the program or just "force quit" the program. Either way, it puts you in control, or it gives you a better chance of solving the problem than just clicking 317 times. It opens a "dialogue"window where you can see all of the programs contributing to your computer usage, which paints and picture of actors that were seemingly invisible. It might be a stretch, but the metaphor could work. It's likely, however, that the artist did not intend to evoke this image. The command has in the past been used to just denote deletion or disappearance. In that case, it could be CTRL-A-DLT. 

A Circus?

From reading about Mariam Said on the Barenboim-Said Foundation website, I found out that she is a board member for The Freedom Theater. Please visit their website. 

The project was started in a Refugee camp in Jenin. I think the above picture speaks for what it represents quite well. One fascinating thing I read about this project revolves around one of its founders, Juliano Mer-Khamis . In 2011 he was unexpectedly shot (5 times) and killed outside of the theater. Haaretz describes him as having "Jewish and native Palestinian Greek Orthodox Christian parentage," a profoundly complex mix. Apparently, soon after Juliano's death, several other members of the theater were jailed for a number of months. Juliano described his vision of the theater when he said,

“You don't have to heal the children in Jenin. We are not trying to heal their violence. We try to challenge it into more productive ways. And more productive ways are not an alternative to violence. What we are doing in the Theatre is not trying to be a replacement or an alternative to the resistance of the Palestinians in the struggle for liberation.  Just the opposite.  This must be clear.  I know it’s not good for fund-raising, because I’m not a social worker, I’m not a good Jew going to help the Arabs, and I’m not a philanthropic Palestinian who comes to feed the poor.  We are joining, by all means, the struggle for liberation of the Palestinian people, which is our liberation struggle…We’re not healers.  We’re not good Christians.  We are freedom fighters.”

I commend his honesty and bluntness. His is a fresh and hidden truth.

In a video on the theater's website commemorating his life, a speaker says of Juliano's character, "He didn't introduce himself as a revolutionary or a hero. He didn't come to promote himself or become famous. he came for a cause. He believed in the just and human Palestinian cause. If the palestine conflict were solved, Juliano would go the Sudan, Uganda, Africa or anywhere to fight for justice, and we would fight with him."

A great story.

On a lighter note, through some internet roaming I found out that there is a Palestinian Circus School. Great pictures here.

Photo Agenda

Last spring, while at DePauw, I took a course called "Politics of the Past." It was about how people use objects, symbols, and images to make claims to the past to further a political agenda. The professor, who is now at University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, is an archaeologist, so a lot of our studies related to how archaeology is used to make claims to the past. As we can all imagine, and have seen clearly from our readings, this has been and still is done extensively in Jerusalem.  In one of our classes we discussed National Geographic's use of photography and captions to further it's political and social agendas. Indigenous peoples were especially exploited in order to make a clear distinction between the American/Western, civilized world and the primitive/wild world of others. This came to mind as soon as I began reading Issam Nassar's essay. Nassar makes an interesting claim when he says, "Nineteenth-century photographs of Palestine were not only about representing the country’s landscape; they also revealed something very significant about the way in which Europeans thought of themselves and of the world around them at that particular time in history." These photographers wanted to send a message to their people at home - a message emphasizing and glorifying the realities of this biblical world while belittling and trivializing the Palestinian people. The message apparently instigated major European powers to become "protectors of the different Christian communities in Palestine, a role that further enabled them to expand their presence in the city." This is an important concept to understand, because it makes it easier to imagine how the Zionists could rationalize their entrance into the city and how the British permitted it to happen.

Bibliomania / A bit about me.

I love books more than I love reading (and I love to read!). This is known as bibliomania.  Although, my condition is far from that of Stephen Blumberg's. During my high school years and as a freshman in college I collected books incessantly. Over a period of two and a half years I collected around two-thousand volumes on every subject from gardening to Buddhism to foreign diplomacy. I was obsessed. Mind you, most of my purchases were used books under a buck or two. And in many cases they were free books from a number of odd sources. Nonetheless, I was spending way too much money, time, and energy buying books I had not time to read. Weird, huh?

I have always loved being around books. I worked at a library in Indianapolis throughout my high school career and worked in the archives at DePauw when I was in school there. I love visiting libraries when travel. I'm not sure where or why this fixation sprouted. Maybe its hereditary? My grandmother collected books as well. Regardless, for a while it was a big part of my life. Other people benefited from it too at times. I would get books for loved ones that I knew they would enjoy. About ninety-nine percent of my gifts to people during this time was books.

But this past summer I kind of snapped out of it. It began to feel like a burden. A weight. I stepped back and saw how unhealthy (and expensive) this obsession was. I realized I can love and appreciate books without suffering the expense of excessively obtaining them. And I realized that in my buying frenzy I bought a lot of books I knew I never even wanted to read. So, without second thoughts, I sold all but a small portion of my books. I kept the ones I knew I'd read and a few from my antiquarian collection. And boy did it feel good! 

I'm not sure why I chose to share this. I guess it's the first thing that came to mind.

Below is my bookshelf here at school. This is probably about a third of my remaining collection. Also in the picture: Cat food/water bowl (I'm a cat guy), salt rock (it glows!), my lovely sweaters, and a beautiful painting made by my grandfather. Check out his artwork here! 

Interesting videos on bibliomania (not that you're particularly interested):

"A mild case of bibliomania"
"Bibliomania" -crazy. weird.  hilarious. if you watch one, watch this.
"Bibliomania - documentary by ABAA

Dual Identity / Reading Response

Salim Tamari gives a fresh perspective on the pre-mandate and mandate periods in Palestine. Reading about his analysis of various ethnographic and literary studies paints a picture of what the transition was like from late ottoman life to occupation under the mandate. What went through the minds of these people, how they coped with a constantly changing demographic and confused identities, and the increasingly communal manifestations of nationalist, historical claims to land are all conveyed through the writings of Tamari. I am excited to hear what he has to say. I have known about the Center for Palestine Studies for a little while and I am honored that someone from it will speak to us. I have read some articles from the center's journal and appreciate their contributions to the subject.

"How God must weep and frown upon this city."

Throughout my reading of this book, there is one thought that has relentlessly prevailed over all others. "How God must weep and frown upon this city." What does that mean to you?

This is a tough post for me. This is not because I have nothing to say but because I have perhaps too much to say and it's after nine.

The bulk of the trouble I encountered with this book has had little to do with never ending detail. (Although my frustrations were not free of this.) No. At the center of my struggle, my jihad, lies the continuous fight against the deterioration of hope. I don't think I'll elaborate.

I applaud Armstrong's choice in titling the last chapter "Zion?" in an initially ambiguous comparison to the first. It soon became clear to me that that question mark has more meanings than I can count. In the final chapter, Armstrong questions in many ways the current status of the city - on the shaky grounds Jerusalem gained its current status, on its leaders' treatment of its inhabitants, on the fast-changing degrees and parameters of devotion to its sacred spaces, on the confusion of identity and the inconsistencies that identity engenders, among other things - and juxtaposes or familiarizes these concepts with its status throughout the past.

Some quotes from "Zion?" that I found stimulating:

"Secular young paratroopers clung to the stones and wept ... atheist officers embraced one another" (398-9) A renewed appreciation for God?

"Some Jews were embarrassed when Arabs knocked at the door and politely asked for permission to look inside their family houses" (404) Would you have let them in? Would you have let them stay?

"Prayer had become a weapon in a holy war against Islam" (408) Again and again in this city.

"...the idea of a Third temple had been taboo. Like God it was dangerous to speak of it or give plans for its rebuilding. But now that taboo was being erroded and people were becoming familiar with its idea as a plausible project"(416). Similar to Orthodox Jews' eventual acceptance of Zionism?

"As we reflect on the current unhappy situation, it becomes a sad irony that on two occasions in the past, it was an Islamic conquest of Jerusalem that made it possible for Jews to return to their holy city." (420) Everyone gather around and embrace the page number.

"Jerusalem has been a nervous, defenseless city." (420-421) Yes'm.

"The religion of hatred does not work; it so easily becomes self-destructive." (423) I wonder why.

And my favorite, the quote that just about wraps it all up and lets me close the book with a sigh of relief: "nothing is permanent or guaranteed." (427)

A fascinating subject.

Recently I have been familiarizing myself with the origins of Islam. I realized that I knew next to nothing nothing about the second largest religion in the world (and still have much to learn). Little did I know that I would be so drawn to this religion and the history it has made. Never-mind its impressively rapid spread and its intellectual/scientific contributions to the world. Islam, regardless of how it has been morphed through the ages in the midst of political pollution and clout, was founded on principles of respect, equality, and charity. Islam's beauty and clarity, its devotion and responsibility are most clear in its beginnings. Muhammad and his followers sought an Arab world free of materialism and free of class inequality from tribal structure. A wonderful (albeit, inevitably subjective) introduction to the origins of Islam is portrayed in the Saudi drama series Omar . All 30 episodes of the series are on YouTube and have English subtitles. It is, of course, only one interpretation of the events and has its share of points of contention. Nonetheless, it isn't a terrible way familiarize oneself with the culture and society of seventh/eighth century Arabia and the need for a new way of life.
  
Perhaps one reason why I had never been exposed to Islam before was because (to my knowledge) I have not had a Muslim friend until about a month ago. This has not been deliberate, but I am glad that it has changed. I have always enjoyed having a diverse set of friends from all backgrounds. I am somewhat ashamed to admit that I never once considered a Muslim as being a part of that mosaic. It just didn't cross my mind. It wasn't an intentional absence by any means. I had just never thought about the religion, nor the people belonging to it. Well, that has changed. My first Muslim friend, Faisal, has been a Godsend. He serendipitously entered my life immediately after I took interest in Islam and has provided for me a wealth of knowledge and insight on many topics - Islam, the Muslim world, the Middle East, and much more. After reading most of the reading for this response, I met with him and we discussed some things I had highlighted. 

Faisal and I discussed extensively the life of Umar, Muhammad's second Rashidun ("rightly guided caliph"). We both find his modest ways of living and his respect for all peoples an exemplary model for anyone. Both in Armstrong's book and in the television series I linked above Umar (or Omar) is represented as an intelligent, mindful man. Interestingly, according to the television series, Umar was one of the last of Muhammad's original entourage and had before been a proponent of the Quraysh tribe's opposition to Muhammad. I especially enjoyed Armstrong's description of Umar's first time in Jerusalem - and the tour he received by the patriarch. Armstrong says, "Some of the Christian observers felt that the caliph was being hypocritical: they were probably uncomfortable aware that the Muslim caliph embodies the Christian ideal of holy poverty more faithfully than their own officials." Faisal was telling me how he grew up hearing stories about Umar. One such story relates that Umar would walk amongst his people as an ordinary citizen, helping those in need without feeling the need to reveal himself. For most Sunni Muslims, this is the kind of man he was. Others, of course, including some Shi'ite Muslims, do not look upon him positively. Wikipedia gives a nice comparison of the Shi'a view of Umar and the Sunni view.

Islamic origins in Jerusalem are no less interesting than those of Judaism and Christianity. The history of the Al-Quds Mosque really brings to light the effects brought about by Earthquakes in the region. The mosque had to be replaced numerous times as a result of damage from earthquakes. The same goes for many of the other holy sites in the city. I wonder if there has ever been a comprehensive study done on this - the natural disasters of Jerusalem and their effects on the city and its inhabitants. I bet that would be pretty neat.

Armstrong briefly mentions an early Jewish convert to Islam, Ka'ab ibn Ahbar. This struck a bell in me because I have always been fascinated with religious conversion. A number of people in my family are converts to Judaism - including my grandmother. She married my father's father. My grandfather was an Orthodox Jew from Romania. He moved to the states with his mother at the age of 4. My grandmother grew up on a farm in southern Georgia. They came from completely different worlds, yet my grandmother adopted the religion as her own. Even twenty years after my grandfather's death, she adheres to the many rules of orthodox Judaism - and more so than three-quarters of our family. Two other women on my father's side have converted - both of which were Catholic before. I have not formally discussed this with any of them yet, but I hope to do so very soon. I'd like to know what kind of adversity, be it internally of externally, they faced in making such a courageous and monumental life change. A few weeks ago I decided to do a little research on conversion to Islam. I found a wealth of information and testimonies. It is so interesting to read/see what people say about their experiences converting to Islam. Here is a wonderful piece on Yusuf Islam (formerly known as Cat Stevens) as he discusses his experience and transformation. Here is "Testimonies of Jewish Converts," a compilation of people from varying backgrounds discussing their experiences. And here is a wonderful collection of Malcolm X's experiences with the Islamic faith and his ideological reform.