It might make me unpopular but… I’m willing to stand up for Brian Eno (even if some people say he’s anti-Semitic).
Liberal activism in entertainment is so standard that no one batted an eye when 623,000 celebs come out for Obama, but what happens when someone says something that could actually inspire outrage? In the infamous case of the Dixie Chicks’ anti-Bush outburst or the ousting of pop politicos like Bill Maher and Donahue for “un-American” actions, unsanctioned activism got them berated and summarily blacklisted.
Why is it then that legendary UK producer and performer Brian Eno’s recent screed on the Israel/Palestinian conflict — an infinitely more controversial and untouchable issue — has elicited fairly middle-of-the-road response?
While its tone is fairly respectful, saying “Israelis are a gifted and resourceful people who fully deserve the right to live in peace,” the 357-word statement for political newsletter Counterpunch — like its title, “Stealing Gaza” — is unambiguous: Eno believes the situation is nothing short of an “experiment in provocation.”
“Stuff one and a half million people into a tiny space, stifle their access to water, electricity, food and medical treatment, destroy their livelihoods, and humiliate them regularly…and, surprise, surprise — they turn hostile. Now why would you want to make that experiment? Because the hostility you provoke is the whole point.”
In an age when disagreement with Israeli (or certain US) policy is often immediately likened to anti-Semitism, how is it that pro-Israeli pundits haven’t risen in outrage? Sure, the story has been reported and rehashed, but with mostly muted commentary, and even the expected counter-articles have largely avoided attacking Eno outright. It could be that he simply isn’t all that popular or influential, but I don’t think that’s the issue (unpopular, or marginal celebrities are made into straw men all the time).
While it seems rather elusive, the reality is simple: when it comes to this issue, the Western world (including the UK and US) isn’t as one-sided as it seems. Just as opinion polls in both regions of the conflict show a much more tenuous support for the continued conflict than actions on either side would indicate, a lot of people in the rest of the world are open to intelligent argument. Or perhaps better said, they’ll indulge a nuanced discussion or unpopular opinion when it’s coming from someone with some semblance of objective intellectual and moral authority.
Sure, Eno is a musician and entertainer, but he’s one that (no disrespect to the Dixie Chicks or Bill Maher) has built a career based on artistic innovation. He’s simply too intelligent, progressive, likable, and open-minded to be easily branded a bigot. And, if I might make a leap based on the intellectual rigor of his music, it seems his fan base is composed of those with a similar interest in exploring the subtleties of human interaction.
So, perhaps the muted response actually indicates a silent, and rare, acceptance (and in many case quiet endorsement) of his right to an unpopular opinion. Sure this lack-of-response-as-response idea seems pretty strange, but when it comes to this issue, many are afraid that even expressing a probing, academic approach to what’s become a shamefully binary argument could land them in hot water. And in that way, it’s refreshing, regardless of whether or not you stand on one side. Most musicians have avoided taking any side on the issue — a seemingly smart career move. In saying something that others aren’t, and maintaining his position, Eno has proven that dissent is still possible.
To take things a step further, I think it also indicates that contemporary musicians don’t need to be as wary of expressing controversial political opinions as they are (at least not certain celebrities). Do we care what Britney Spears thinks about America’s controversial role in, say, South America? Certainly not, but I would be interested in David Byrne’s opinion. After all, he’s a pretty serious student of the continent and its culture.
I’m not saying he or Eno are experts; that isn’t the point. What I’m really after is that, even in the ultra-liberal world of modern music, we need more, and much more open, argument, and that starts with our cultural authorities. Music and musicians are more than a mirror reflection of society; they’re an engine that interacts. And we need more open interaction.
I’m reminded of a recent discussion I had at a show: I was discussing the current conflict with one friend from the US in the presence of another from Norway. We were talking about how you can’t talk about the Israeli-Palestine conflict in public. What we said isn’t all that important — it was really just an abstract, academic probe more than an argument. What was is the Norwegian’s response: “Do you realize you guys are whispering?”
Comments (11)
anti-zionism is not anti-semitism. anti-semitism is a bigoted and irrational hatred of jews. anti-zionism is an inclusive and rational hatred of colonization.
He's neither. He doesn't talk about how the Hebrews aren't really supposed to settle anywhere and have a government and national language, etc., nor does he say anything remotely negative about Judaism or Israelis (in fact, he comments out of his way to make sure people don't think this is his stance). He was as objective about this crisis because he mentions both sides of the conflict. It always feels like we have to walk on eggshells when discussing Israel… it's a sad thing if people find this article controversial.
This does not inspire outrage. What it does inspire is a sense of owe at how stupid and ignorant some people can be–to think that Hamas (a terrorist organization) wants peace or that Israel should put up with attacks from an enemy who wants nothing more than the destruction of the Jewish state. Brian Eno should focus on what he knows best–music–and leave geopolitics alone. The moronic statement that Israel is doing to the Palestinians what the Nazis did to them is both intellectually dishonest and unworthy of comment because it pisses on the truth. It has become imperative in some intellectual circles to paint Jews as the executioners in a world of Kamikazes and butchers. But here is my question to Eno: Yes, the Palestinians are an oppressed people and certainly victims of history and bad leadership–but don't you think victims can be killers as well? Or does Eno really think the world is black and white [good guy versus bad guy] as our illustrious President George W. Bush believes? What should Israel do in his opinion? Just because Jews are no longer victims but rulers of their own nation and willing to defend it at all cost imply that they hold life in contempt or that they are now like the Nazi butchers? For me, the subconscious language is obviously anti-Semitic because the criticism and the way in which it was framed–by evoking the Shoah and Nazi genocide to draw a comparison to the Gaza conflict in order to discredit Israel in the worst possible way by putting Jews in the same category with the animals who ran Auchwitz. This dilutes the truth and make a mockery of all us. The gas chambers were the ultimate genocide and as Bernard Henry-Levy said "the standard of the genre" because of the systematization in which it was conducted. Genocide should never be trivialized because it loses its meaning like it has for Sudan. No one is trying to erase the Palestinian people from history. No one! This conflict is a tragedy and it takes multiple actors to start a war. And in war the innocent always die. It's horrific and that's why we should not have wars, but make no mistake Hamas is not an innocent victim. If Eno had a genuine interest in the truth he would not have spoken such moronic words.
I think you missed the point of the article. And I always love when people say "Shut up and sing." Thats like walking up to the guys at the watercooler and saying, you have no business talking about politics, you're engineers, you can only talk about engineering.
Let me requote the article here:
"I’m not saying he or Eno are experts; that isn’t the point. What I’m really after is that, even in the ultra-liberal world of modern music, we need more, and much more open, argument, and that starts with our cultural authorities. Music and musicians are more than a mirror reflection of society; they’re an engine that interacts. And we need more open interaction."
Oh, I got the point. But if you are going to engage in this subject do it with honesty, no? Otherwise stick to what you do best–that was my point. But a little expertise in the middle east would not hurt anyone don't you think? BTW: I'm yet to meet an engineer who understands marketing.
Ignore Max. He is using the same tired tactics: Claiming that we should not listen to someone's articulate, compassionate statement, because the writer is not an expert on the Middle East. Max is not an expert and yet he is far less articulate, far less compassionate, and is certainly not the gatekeeper on discussions involving Israel. Ignore him.
The suffering being inflicted on Gaza is beyond understanding. We are not wrong for feeling sadness and outrage.
Was trying not to weigh in too much on the actual content of the article, but since i have critiques of both side's arguments, what the hey? Just for the sake of discussion…
First off, let's not ignore anybody — that was the point of my piece (and to some extent Eno's)!! That said, I think that Max's two-players-to-start-a-war point does falter a bit, in that part of eno's statement was to a large extent a call to the Jewish people's infinite compassion compassion more than placement of absolute fault. I don't think he denies the situation has cause hardship for both sides or that there are two players, simply that both sides need to recognize that, regardless of where moral authority lies, any action (whether justified or not) breeds a direct and often opposite reaction. I don't think anyone on either side would disagree with that.
That said, i do find the Nazi comparison problematic; while any sort of ghettoization or displacement shares some similarities by its very nature, drawing a parallel does inflate the issue a bit. Still, I think the point of those kinds of comparisons (and he was comparing Gaza to ghettos, mind you, not talking about concentration camps or extermination) isn't to say that Jews are like Nazis; it's more a backwards way of articulating (and this is often badly articulated) that given their tragic history, the Jewish people are in a particular position to empathize with the sort of displacement the Palestinians are faced with.
Basically I see, even if eno doesn't, where both sides are coming from, and how, to some extent, each side continues to perpetuate its own hardships. That said, I also think that in this case the debate is a lot more difficult, because a lot of the usual arguments on both sides are complicated by the fact that the ratio of dead in this current conflict is so skewed (something like 100 to 1).
Two things: 1) Like in other political arenas (comparing various world leaders to Hitler, for example), the Nazi analogies are both completely ludicrous and counterproductive. If you want to piss off one whole side of the argument, a surefire way to do it is to bring that ridiculous comparison into the mix. 2) Beard, you say the following in your piece: "While it seems rather elusive, the reality is simple: when it comes to this issue, the Western world (including the UK and US) isn’t as one-sided as it seems."
I just wanted to point out that in the UK, popular opinion on this issue is very, very different than in the US. Check out newspaper coverage of this conflict and you'll see that the one-sidedness there actually goes the other way… pro-Palestinian is the reflexive stance. The US is the only Western country, I'd say, where the default position (among the country's population, that is) is in support of Israel. That fact may have had something to do with the muted response to Eno's commentary.
An interesting hypothetical situation: What if Israel–instead of investing the country's money into all of the immediate commodities needed for a war (which are indisputably expensive to put it mildly)–had used the exact monetary amount spent so far in this aggressive initiative and given it to Palestine to invest in sanitation, education, housing, trade, medicine, food, et-cetera for their country?
Maybe I can add something with my testimony.
Even if you take off all the political side of it whatever that might be, the fact is that there are hundreds of innocent people dying, massacred everyday with the use of non conventional weapons like white phosphor bombs, cluster bombs and many other, in a way the defies all rules and conventions
Don't forget people that the habitants of Gaza are human beings just like you, with hope, dreams, and disappointments, and no one deserve to die like that, to be treated like that, there are massacres goin on everyday, Israel is even shooting on Ambulances, and letting the wounded die slowly without help
I am Lebanese, I know how it feels to be bombarded day and night by F16, Helicopters, tanks, boats etc they did that to us in 2006, and it was the most horrible, traumatic experience I ever went through, you feel that you have no control whatsoever on your faith, bombs are killing blindly everywhere around you, you can just pray or sing for the next bomb not attain your house.
It gives you the feeling that life is absurd, nothing has a meaning, why were we as the Gaza people are now being attacked so blindly and so savagely, I have nothing to do with terrorism, I am totally against it, I"m actually an indie rock composer/signer…
I listen to Portishead, Vampire week end, MGMT, MIA or whatever, as are a lot of people in Gaza, what I"m saying is that they're just like you, and nothing justify that such people get so brutally attacked, and killed, and no Nation seem to react to that as they should be!
The accusation of anti-semitism is used consistently to discredit any objections to the unlawful and disgusting crimes being committed by the state of Israel.
Are anti-zionist jews anti-semitic too? It would seem so.
Post a new comment