Courtesy UNPeriódico
. Universidad Nacional de Colombia
Humans have been at war since the beginning of history. Continue fighting in spite of social progress, scientific and cultural rights have been achieved through the generations. For reasons that should be explored, humans did not develop skills to solve conflicts peacefully. And still fighting despite the majority of wars have not produced stable political solutions. Most of them only have paved the way for other wars. Sometimes ended in political settlements, but more often would have been able to successfully reach these agreements before the war and, indeed, without them. The 1973 war between Israel and Egypt is a perfect example. A year before the war, Egyptian and Israeli representatives negotiated a peace agreement in Washington.
The talks ended when Israel refused to withdraw from the Sinai Peninsula. War broke out and, despite having emerged victorious, Israel withdrew from Sinai, just as it had been ordered before the war. Meanwhile, however, 2,700 Israelis and about 10,000 Egyptians were killed. Was his death necessary? Probably not. Would it have been avoided? I think so. Unimediosclara vision, deep, distinct, human beings, their needs, hopes and desires, by both sides, he could point to different options, options that do not lead to death. Writers can offer a similar view. Sometimes human beings are in a deep and sensitive and can write what they see. They can open our eyes to these options before we launch into the war. I am not suggesting that writers should be involved in political negotiations. I say that if the writers are struggling to expose the social, psychological and mythic political conflict will show that there are these other options and you can avoid war.
Yes It's true. Many of us think that humans are bloodthirsty. That man is a beast hunting. Zealously protecting his tribe, his people, his race. Do not hesitate to kill millions of people for them. Do not hesitate to shed his own blood. Despite this, I can not live without the hope that people can change. Your bloodlust may end. It can be tolerant, more understanding, more forgiving, much wiser.
What may then become a writer to make us more tolerant, more understanding, to forgive more, be more prudent?
1. The first thing a writer can do is denounce the cultural lies about the nature of war. Throughout history, we have glorified war. Even Shakespeare, in the famous speech of Henry V (Act 4, Scene 3) wrote about the honor of fighting and the honor of dying: "Anyone who lives their day and see old age, each year in its wake, held with its neighbors and say: Tomorrow is the day of St. Crispin. Then undress her arms, bare his scars and say, These wounds I received them the day of St. Crispin. " This is a completely false description of how the war is remembered regularly. Most people remember the war as the most terrible experience, horrendous and humiliating to have had. When you think it's invading the horror and disgust. No pride. Or satisfaction. The pain of war will never go away. Hundreds of thousands of Israelis can not live a normal life because of his experiences in the various wars in which they participated. Among our neighbors, the nightmares are the same. The writer should remind us, for those who have never experienced a war is not offered with much enthusiasm to fight.
2. The writer should put emphasis on the price of war: people die. Men, women, children, young and old, soldiers and civilians. In everyday life we \u200b\u200btend to simplify the consequences of war and we just count the dead. When death is just a number, it becomes neutral. It contains no pain or a danger. The writer must customize the numbers to focus on people who die, and those who are alone with their loss. This endless pain should be specifically presented in public discourse, not only on Memorial Day. Should be especially present before declare war. Compare the price war with its benefits is a necessary act of survival in any healthy society. I will quote a few lines of my play, The Murder of Isaac. A war veteran tells his friends that "I opened the newspaper this morning and, on the first page, I saw the smiling faces of young soldiers. Now I know how to look at these faces. They are not smiling. Are shattered. Their bodies buried in the ground have begun to decompose. Only those who have been rotting bodies know how horrible it is. A human body is no different from a dog or a cat run over in the street. Take the hand of your commander, and get rid of yours ... And the hardworking worms are quick to find another piece of meat to feed ... And open eyes are empty ... What really justifies such a death? What is it bigger than life that deserves to die like this? ".
3. Many politicians offer simplistic answers to its people's fear of his enemies. They say they can prevent war through deterrence. These leaders do not see that, to accumulate power, only encourage his enemies to gain more power. A destructive power. A reckless power. The writer must show his people the most complex and far more effective. If you want to prevent war, it is necessary to eliminate the reasons for war. While there are still reasons for war, the danger will continue. I said earlier that the writers can explain the reasons for war by exposing the social, psychological and mythic political conflict that can lead to war. Bring the reasons for war to the public discourse can show people that there are other options, options should be exhausted before the war. In recent years we have witnessed, according to Samuel Huntington, a clash between civilizations. West against East. Unfortunately, world leaders have not invested anything in trying to solve the reasons for this confrontation among civilizations, cultural reasons, economic and religious-and try, rather, to force a new balance of power in terrible wars. The writers who contribute to shaping these civilizations should invest all its efforts to transform the confrontation between civilizations in a constructive competition that leads to progress and peace.
4. How can the writer explain the social infrastructure, psychological and mythic political conflict that can lead to war? You can do this by writing about protagonists who confront the conflict. You can focus on their lives, their families, their relationships and their tragedies. Should explore their conscious and subconscious. Somewhere in the depths of their characters, discover fear, despair, hatred, malice and bigotry that must be confronted to remove the reasons for war. As we know, the hero of the tragedy always fails in his struggle. It is likely that the same happens to our heroes who try to confront the political conflict in which they live. Also fail. Can not stop the warring superpowers are released to the war. But the failure of our players is not a warning to the reader. Quite the contrary. This failure reinforces the reader and encourages him. As with the viewer who sees the failure of Romeo and Juliet in love, and not leave the theater with the decision not in love anymore in life. On the contrary. The failure of Romeo and Juliet strengthens the viewer to look for love.
5. The writer should not only explore the political conflict from the narrow perspective of national interests, but from a broader global perspective, specifically from the perspective of justice. Justice, in the most basic and simple definition that can be found in the Talmud, the ancient code of Jewish law: "Do not do unto your neighbor as you hate to do unto you." Justice is not only a moral value. Justice is probably the most useful instrument to resolve international conflicts. We already know that the agreements do not provide justice on all sides do not survive long. Only those agreements which are agreements on offer lasting justice. Probably use this expression "relative justice" in a way too easy. It is a complex expression that requires clarification: an agreement that provides relative justice is one that allows me stronger sense of justice that can be achieved, but also allow my opponent to achieve the same deep sense of justice. Some people say that mathematicians are needed to calculate the relative justice in a complex conflict. I would say you need empathy, compassion and goodwill.
6. The writer may create a political dialogue, social, ideological and even religious conflict between the parties before they go to war. You can do this by presenting the "other" on the written page and on stage. Once introduced to this "other" as a human being, as a three-dimensional character, creates empathy with the "Other." Start a dialogue with "other", a dialogue based on understanding their needs, their sorrows, ambitions and fears. Such dialogue is the beginning of reconciliation. As an example of this, I would mention the South African playwright Athol Fugard, who with great courage, presented black characters in white stage in South Africa during apartheid. At present on stage, gave white people the opportunity for dialogue that most of it never had a dialogue based on empathy.
I'm sure many of you agree with what I said, but it is likely that many of you wonder: is it possible to require the writer such responsibility? I think the answer is yes.
7. We must remember there has always been an alliance between the writer and his audience. Sometimes we tend to forget that people do not read books or go to the theater just for fun. Lee and go to the theater because you want to know what to do his life. How to live. Await responses from writers. Expect answers to hard questions that sometimes do not dare to ask. We tend to be cynical to deny the need for inspiration is people, not just jokes. It's our fault have turned the art of entertainment. It's our fault you have created just waiting for public entertainment. It's our fault continue to offer entertainment, saying that otherwise would not survive. As people see that something important is said in books and theater, read these books and attend in large numbers to these theaters. This has been demonstrated beyond doubt in the Israeli theater. When the plays relate to matters of importance, they sell a huge number of tickets. A good major political drama can easily sell 300,000 tickets.
8. The easiest thing for an artist in wartime is to join the consensus, to feel the brotherhood of spoken by King Henry V in the speech I mentioned earlier. But what really has to join the consensus? I'm sure the answer is no. On the contrary, the writer must create opposition to the consensus. The writer must provide a different perspective of reality that allows the war. How do we create a different perspective on this reality? As I said before, exploring characters trying to survive in this reality. Therein lies our effective power: the power to create characters who confront the reality and live with the consequences of this confrontation. It is our responsibility to create stories and plays with these characters.
comments apply principally to the theater, because this is a collaborative art. When not offered to theaters such works, which confront reality, or when the works offered at the theaters are not good enough, is the responsibility of the directors of the opera lead the process of creating works of this kind, bringing together writers, directors, actors and designers and challenge them to confront the reality that allows war. It may not be enough meet this challenge only those involved in the theater. At times, the theater must resort to other resources: writers, historians, philosophers, human rights activists, and use their vision to initiate the process. This is true not only in times of war. Theatre managers must understand that the theater should always be a laboratory that examines the ingredients of our reality through the powerful tools of plot, characters, conflicts, and images. This reality is not necessarily an external reality that we see when we look out the window at the garden, or when we read the newspapers or watch television. The theater should explore the reality behind this external reality. The hidden reality. The reality that is not voluntarily exposed to the eyes of the beholder. How can the theater? The answer is depth. The theater must explore the characters through their inner worlds and not only through their external actions. How do you get to this depth? Creating deeper characters, relationships and actions engaged in deeper.
To be more specific, I explore some specific issues to be writers manage in times of war. Unfortunately, I'm just a guest in this part of the world, and I can not offer specific feedback to writers living here. Therefore confine myself to a few observations about the 100 years war in the Middle East between Israel and Palestine.
1. The first thing I would recommend to our writers is to explore the role of God in the conflict between Israel and Palestine. God has been used by both sides in a destructive manner. The Israelis have used not only as a source of their right to every inch of the holy land, some of which have also been used to God and his Messiah as inspiration for an unlimited arrogance, cruelty and racism. The religious activists among us have spread the belief that we are in a time of redemption. Soon comes Messiah and solve all our problems. Do not try to reconcile with our enemies, but will destroy them all, every last one of them. What kind of God is this? What happened to the merciful God that we met for so many years of history? How did you become a God of vengeance that has no mercy at all? Muslims have created a similar God. The God of Jihad. The God who rewards to suicide bombers. The God who wants the destruction of entire civilizations. Is this the God whom we worship? If we let the image of God in the hands of these fundamentalists, this God will devour us all.
2. The second thing I recommend our writers is to explore the evolution of our historical narrative. This narrative has been created by politicians, historians, teachers and writers who thought that such a narrative would serve the purpose of survival. One of the main elements of the Israeli narrative is the description of the events that led to the creation of the Palestinian refugee problem. The Israeli narrative is very clear. When war broke out in 1948, and seven Arab nations attacked the newly created state, Israel defended itself. A 700 thousand Palestinians living in Israel, their leaders ordered them to pack their belongings and leave. They were promised they would return victorious after the war. But this narrative is not the whole truth. Many Palestinians were expelled by the Israeli army. Many fled to the threat of guns. The Israeli narrative serves the Israeli government's policy agenda. But not at the service of peace. If Israel wants peace, it must recognize its responsibility in the creation of the Palestinian tragedy. Everyone should learn to apply the principle of Truth and Reconciliation that was used quite successfully in South Africa. True reconciliation can be achieved only based on a real analysis of the conflict. Israeli writers must explore this chapter of 1948 in our narrative, should help to correct, should educate their readers to confront the truth of the past to be prepared for peace.
3. The third phenomenon that I want our writers to explore in Israel is the rise of militarism. Admiration for the army, which was a survival mechanism sixty years ago has become a value-destructive in our society. Once we were a state that had an army. Now it seems that we are an army with a state. Former generals hold key positions everywhere, in industry, in education, in the municipalities, the regional council and government offices. The army itself has become one of the main sources of inspiration for the society, but also for the government. The army is able to pressure the political system to adopt policies that serve their interests but not necessarily in the interests of the state. I suspect that our last war in Lebanon, which exceeded all proportion, was the result of the army's influence over a weak prime minister and defense minister with no experience. I'm sure many Israeli writers were able to see this done at the beginning of the war. Unfortunately, very few of them spoke out against it. Another example of the influence of militarism in Israeli society is our attitude to Iran's nuclear ambitions, not considered any other option but to use force.
4. Perhaps the most important phenomenon that would encourage our writers to consider is what has happened to our moral values \u200b\u200bover the hundred years war. Do we have corrupted our military? Have not reduced the value of our life and that of others? How do we use military power we have accumulated? "We use it in its true proportions, or use it excessively? Has the use of power distorted the other values \u200b\u200bthat we have? How has affected the occupation of the Palestinians? For example, is there a connection between this long occupation and the increase in various crimes in Israel? Is there a connection between the occupation and rising suicide rates, and increased sexual abuse in our society? Is there a connection between the occupation of Palestine and our attitude towards the weak and the poor in our society? Is there a connection between the occupation of Palestine and the attitude towards foreign workers in Israel? In other words, if we compare the benefits of this war with the damage the war has caused, is it worth to keep fighting, or rather should invest greater efforts to make peace? Maybe we should be willing to give more to achieve peace. I'm sure you make these questions is essential to our survival.
Last but not least, despite everything I've said, I must confess that I'm still not totally convinced that the writers could change the political reality in times of war. Every day I come new doubts about this, but every day I struggle to persuade me that the influence of writers on the political reality is not just illusion
Every day I tell myself that the writers can not produce an immediate change. Maybe even a change that can be detected when it is given. But I certainly would like to believe that can be detected during a longer period, perhaps only a few decades. Every day I tell myself that the writers of Israel failed to stop this war a hundred years, but have contributed significantly to the progress that has been achieved so far. For example, were able to create a deeper opening to the recognition of a Palestinian state and the rights of its people, an idea that was totally rejected by most Israelis in the 1970 and now has the support of most part of the population. This is certainly an incredible achievement.
is unfortunate that the contribution of writers to political discourse in Israel, which was so evident in the decades of the seventies, eighties and nineties, is not so obvious now. Many writers have been too quiet and escapist. Maybe they got tired. I do not think we can afford to get tired. Certainly do not think we can afford to be escapist. I hope to grow a new generation of writers who contribute to resolving this tragic conflict over what we did. Writers must understand that they have a strong commitment to the society in which they live. Should be aware of their responsibility to heal. Should be aware that their skills and talents they are given mainly for this purpose. Must always remember the covenant between them and their audience. Must always remember that people read books not only entertain, but also because it seeks an explanation to grow, to heal, to understand themselves and to understand their society.
Writers must play its part in this alliance. Must cling to the illusion that they can save their society through their art, they can heal. Yes It's probably an illusion. We have had enough experience to know. But do not forget the power of dreams and the power of vision. Without vision, without illusions, nothing would change. Nothing would heal.
0 comments:
Post a Comment