In Sweden, the Israeli ambassador lately went beserk and almost smashed up what was presented as a piece of art. This kind of behaviour is quite unheard of in Scandinavia, and in diplomatic cirles in general I believe, and it sent me wondering.
I have not seen the work in question, but so far as I understand, it presented the photo of a known female Palestine "terrorist." Her picture was attached to a frail boat of paper, and it sailed around in a pool of red liquid.
The artist, I believe, is of Jewish parentage himself, and he maintained that the installation was in no way intended to be antisemitic.
When I was first presented with this case, I was puzzled. If the ambassador had just ignored it and gone away, the installation would almost certainly have been instantly forgotten. Yet, he he must have been seized with a fit of anger that made him react so violently.
As I see it, a picture of a terrorist sailing on a sea of blood, could hardly be a tribute, leave alone an antisemitic statement. In fact, it seems to me that the officials of Israel these days are acting increasingly right-wing and oppresive. I suppose we all ought to distinguish between criticism of the Israel government and of Jews in general.
But sometimes, I find the line hard to draw. Can we really tolerate an official of Israel to destroy something he deems to be antisemtic, and not dare to criticize him for it for the fear of being anti-semitic.
In general, can we really support an obviously right-wing and oppresive government in Israel just because each and every critisism of it will be termed as antisemitic?
I have not seen the work in question, but so far as I understand, it presented the photo of a known female Palestine "terrorist." Her picture was attached to a frail boat of paper, and it sailed around in a pool of red liquid.
The artist, I believe, is of Jewish parentage himself, and he maintained that the installation was in no way intended to be antisemitic.
When I was first presented with this case, I was puzzled. If the ambassador had just ignored it and gone away, the installation would almost certainly have been instantly forgotten. Yet, he he must have been seized with a fit of anger that made him react so violently.
As I see it, a picture of a terrorist sailing on a sea of blood, could hardly be a tribute, leave alone an antisemitic statement. In fact, it seems to me that the officials of Israel these days are acting increasingly right-wing and oppresive. I suppose we all ought to distinguish between criticism of the Israel government and of Jews in general.
But sometimes, I find the line hard to draw. Can we really tolerate an official of Israel to destroy something he deems to be antisemtic, and not dare to criticize him for it for the fear of being anti-semitic.
In general, can we really support an obviously right-wing and oppresive government in Israel just because each and every critisism of it will be termed as antisemitic?
Comment