Farewell to Steve Silberman
3 days ago
Sunday, January 22, 2012
"The West Wing" Holy Land Map
A Palestinian friend of mine linked to the clip above on Facebook, and I later saw it pop up on various anti-Israel sites. In case the video disappears due to copyright infringement, here's a description: The clip shows the fictional President Bartlett of "The West Wing" receiving a 1709 map of what is now Israel, which is titled "Palestine/Canaan/Holy Land", but does not mention Israel. The president loves the gift and wants to put it up on the wall, but his staff members are afraid of the political and diplomatic fall-out.
The anti-Israel crowd seems to love this clip. I love this clip, too, but not for the same reason. Anti-Zionists might see this clip as suggesting that the area doesn't belong to the Jews, because Israel didn't exist before 1948, but the geographical designation "Palestine" did. Also, they might see it as suggesting that the Israel Lobby is so powerful that the president can't put up such a benign map.
I don't think the clip is necessarily suggesting any of that. It's brilliant because it shows how politically charged history and geography can be. The way you teach history and the way you draw maps (both in how you label them and the boundaries you mark) is bound to piss someone off. It could have been a map of the UK, showing all of Ireland as part of it, or a map labeling present-day India, Pakistan and Bangladesh as one united India, or any other explosive situation. Perhaps they chose Israel as the best-known example, or because it would make sense for a Christian to want to put up a map of the Holy Land, but not of another foreign region of the world.
Labels:
geography,
History,
Israel,
maps,
Middle East,
Politics,
Television,
The West Wing
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
”Anti-Zionists might see this clip as suggesting that the area doesn't belong to the Jews, because Israel didn't exist before 1948, but the geographical designation "Palestine" did. Also, they might see it as suggesting that the Israel Lobby is so powerful that the president can't put up such a benign map.”
ReplyDeleteI doubt that that is the reason for the clip’s success in the ‘anti-Israel’ crowd.
I can’t speak for every member of that crowd of course but to me it was very fumy and clever because it was so plausible (even though it’s fiction of course). In the US the ‘pro-Israel’ crowd has developed such an over-sensitivity with respect to any real or perceived criticism of Israel, that a real scene in which presidential advisors would advise not to display such a map because the ‘pro-Israel’ crowd could take offence seems like a very real possibility. And of course the line ‘it [the map] doesn’t recognise Israel’ is just too funny.
It’s now come to a point that one of Zionist American Jewry’s drill sergeants (what’s his name, again?) has been suspected of antisemitism because of his commentary on the ‘spontaneity’ of US law makers’ applause for a Bibi speech! One of the best known leading Jewish pro-Israel pundits managed to give ‘offence’ to the point of being suspected of Jew hatred! The mind boggles.
See also the visceral hatred for Obama by quite a few Israeli Rightists. His crime? Not sure: not being as pro-Israel/anti-Palestinian as Lizzard Gingrich? A man who has done so much for Israel and so little ‘against’ her is described as a Jew hater?
That is the context of the clip and what makes it extremely funny in my eyes. In fact I’m going to watch it again now.
"It’s now come to a point that one of Zionist American Jewry’s drill sergeants (what’s his name, again?) has been suspected of antisemitism because of his commentary on the ‘spontaneity’ of US law makers’ applause for a Bibi speech! One of the best known leading Jewish pro-Israel pundits managed to give ‘offence’ to the point of being suspected of Jew hatred! The mind boggles."
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure who you're referring to. Jeffrey Goldberg maybe? Anyway, it doesn't matter. What does matter is who accused him of anti-Semitism: the Israeli government? I assume not. Probably a few individuals.
It seems we agree that the clip is funny because it is very realistic. I just don't think it is a situation unique to Israel.
No, it was Thomas Friedman in the NYT that caused the offence. And yes, it was a few individuals, but Friedman had to grovel to get back into the herd. That’s the point of the criticism, of course: much dissent the pro-Israel lobby doesn’t allow…
ReplyDelete