"I was shocked to see these walls, it's a new apartheid, barbaric behavior: How can you impose such a collective punishment and separate people? After all, we are all living on the same planet. It seems to me the world should have already learned from what happened in South Africa. And a country that hasn't learned should be boycotted, so that's why I don't perform in your country."
This was the response offered this summer in an interview with Haaretz by internationally renowned British violinist Nigel Kennedy when asked why Israeli impresarios had yet to bring him here despite repeated attempts. Kennedy's comment hit on a facet infrequently discussed when debating the Israel boycott: The cultural boycott and, in particular, the musical boycott.
The automatic responses of boycott opponents weren't long in coming. As usual, they had a hint of insult and victimization. Prominent among them was the accusation of anti-Semitism, a charge immediately leveled against any boycotter, whomever he may be (a review of Kennedy's life and the cultural wealth in it, including the Jewish element, raises serious doubts about the possibility of his being an anti-Semite).
Targeting the wrong audience
Also apparent is mockery of the British hypocrisy (who pick on Israel, while in China and Sudan, for example, far greater crimes are perpetrated), as if the injustices happening there, and also those that Britain itself is still perpetrating, justify or cancel out the tragedy that Israel is inflicting on the Palestinians. As if hypocrisy is a crime in and of itself.
An argument was made that, specifically, musicians and music lovers are the least appropriate target for a boycott because among them are leftists who oppose the occupation. But who among this community protested the destruction of musical instruments in Ramallah during Operation Protective Shield? Or the siege of Nablus that prevented a music teacher there from going to supplementary classes and purchasing instruments? And the humiliation of musicians at checkpoints, the detention and eventual deportation of a piano tuner at Ben-Gurion Airport; the restrictions on movement that led to the dismantling of the children's choir in Bethlehem; the bus of music students on the way to a summer camp whose path was blocked? The willful refusal to see such injustices among the musical community in Israel makes it no less responsible than any other.
Whether or not to involve music in the boycott was debated: After all, music is inherently based on dialogue, inner expression and listening to others simultaneously. The fact that is also an abstract art, lacking words, ostensibly endows it with the power to bridge both sides, leading to cooperation and understanding between the parties. An Israeli violinist and a Syrian violinist sitting together in front of the same sheet of Beethoven in the Diwan East West Orchestra are having a dialogue. But, by definition, dialogue takes place between equals; it is hard to say Israeli and Palestinian sides are in equals in this situation.
Classical musicians have engrained in them a kind of conservatism. They are an oppressed minority; therefore, their voice is silent in boycott matters. An exception is the English singer Emma Kirkby who, despite her courageous contacts with the Israeli music scene and the mutual love between her and the audience and musical institutions here, in 2000 announced a boycott "until the occupation ends."
Other visiting musicians expressed discomfort with appearing in Israel but are less well-known for their refusal to play in Israel. Consequently, their political reasons will be less significant. Who cares and how will their boycott contribute to the end of the occupation, if they are simply replaced by others and their protest is not heard?
Therefore, these musicians, and primarily the famous among them, such as Kennedy and Kirkby, can seemingly use a more effective method: Instead of boycotting and then being forgotten, they can actually come and talk. They can make their visit contingent on a performing in the Palestinian areas as well: in concerts, master classes, workshops or lectures and thereby give voice, publicly and privately, to the issues. Awareness will trickle down to the Israeli public, that Palestinians, like us, love classical music and hold a Mozart festival and contemporary music workshops. That they, too, have conservatories and youth orchestras and chamber music series. And that they, too, can fill a concert hall with a festive audience for a symphony orchestra concert.
Mandated parity
Israelis are still shocked when they hear that musicians are playing the violin in Jenin or that Ramallah has a youth symphony orchestra. What better way to get it to sink in than by declaring that every musician visiting Israel will perform there also?
This will create a dialogue between impresarios and institutions on both sides about exchanges of musicians among them. The increased number of performances is likely to reduce the funding burden on each institution.
In this way, many musicians will also be exposed to the problems in the region and perhaps also develop an independent opinion on them. And Palestinians will develop new contacts, expand the international community's support for them and enjoy an increased number of international performers who come to Israel. Here is a situation in which grassroots organizers have a chance to influence the decision makers above them.
"It is not in the Palestinians' interest to welcome pilgrimages by musicians to Israel just because we will perhaps benefit," a Palestinian artist, one of the leaders of the boycott against Israel, said in response. According to him, "this is local treatment of the problem, and that is not how it will be resolved. The cost the Israelis pay for the occupation must be raised by widening the boycott, and, at the same time, an original and independent relationship of our own with the international community must be created, not through or via Israel.
"I'm not interested in Sting performing in Ramallah because it was a condition for performing in Israel, but because that is what he chose to do, of his own free will and out of an authentic and joint initiative with us. You will have to resolve via another means the distortion by which you see us as half-humans."
Why Facebook Connect?
Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.
- Latest
- Most Viewed
- Most Rated
- Open all
Do you think that S can 'talk sense'? Look at his #25... I don't make any effort to 'appear terribly interested' in understanding your position. I content myself with being interested. When raising a mirror in front of a Zionist, it's difficult not to appear to him at best as a propagandist. So, why worry? Besides, I've already read the way you are 'interested in understanding anyone's position': 'Mr Kennedy can protest all he wants, but he, too, will have music play handmaiden to politics. He is no better than Hitler in this regard, and should be ashamed!' (Morris Valentine #14) And you wrote this without being ashamed! 'Israel is not above criticism': the shortest, cheapest and poorest way to get rid of your trouble.
"Apparently, just apparently, we share also political views, not only love of music." S, Yes, we share our politics, music, and, lest we forget, food as well: a deep and abiding respect for the fine cuisine and dining atmosphere at Hooters. Kind regards, and a most Happy New Year. MV
Apparently, just apparently, we share also political views, not only love of music.
Yair, I have made my points as best I can, and have obviously failed to get them across to you. Before getting terribly upset by my failure, however, I note S has seemingly failed as well to talk sense with you. At least I may console myself for being in S's good company. You do not appear terribly interested in understanding anyone's position, "step by step", but simply in supporting any propagandist, in any disguise, for whatever motive, in criticising Israel. Israel is not above criticism, and you may find, on various webpages here, my own critiques. But I am very wary of anyone mixing politics - particularly the accusatory sort - with art. Hitler made art the handmaiden of politics in Germany, and the result can best be described as propaganda. Mr Kennedy, unfortunately, is not in as good company as I. MV
I wonder whether the butchers of Kfar Qassem or Qibya had i-Pod flooding their delicate ears with Mozart?s concertos. I myself am as interested in Nigel?s violin playing as in my singing Oy Vey Maria. I?ve never listened to him and never heard myself singing Oy Vey Maria. Remember Aesop?s ?The Fox and the Grapes?, S?
I am as interested in Nigel's violin playing as in your singing Oy Vey Maria.
You say that Rubinstein ?tried to salvage his dignity and that of the Jewish people?. Do you really believe Rubinstein had to ?salvage his dignity and that of the Jewish people? and that this ?dignity? was at stake? (Note that I do not criticize the choice Rubinstein made. I just try to understand your position. Step by step) By the way: now that Rubinstein doesn't play anymore, how do we manage to ?salvage the dignity of the Jewish people? while the State of Israel makes all it can to tarnish the ?dignity of the (so called) Jewish people?? Help! Mr Kennedy! Help us to ?salvage the dignity of the Jewish people?! Even against Morris?s will.
Yair, There's a world of difference between a musician who'd lost family in the Holocaust (Rubenstein), yet tried to salvage his dignity and that of the Jewish people; and one who's got nearly everything, yet tries to gain cheap press coverage by taking shots at Israel (Kennedy). If Mr Kennedy wishes to take up politics - especially the cheap and easy sort - he should put down his violin.
"if the Israelis have not methodically and wilfully exterminated some six millions of Palestinians, it's OK: the Zionists may methodically and wilfully make whatever they like?" (Yair) Of course not Yair. The "Zionists" should just sit in the concert hall, while buses and restaurants are being exploded by terrorists, listening to Mr Kennedy's Mozart concertos, who would then graciously play for the Jews in Israel.
I just try to understand. Step by step. Imagine Rubinstein had accepted to play in Germany. What about ?his Muse?? Didn?t he ?prostitute his Muse? by playing in border towns where half the public was German? Do you want me to conclude that if the Israelis have not ?methodically and wilfully exterminated some six millions of Palestinians?, it?s OK: the Zionists may ?methodically and wilfully? make whatever they like ? And there?s no sense in denouncing it the way Kennedy makes it? If a violist comes and plays Mozart in Israel, is there a way for him not to ?prostitute his Muse?? If you don?t have ?lost family members in the Holocaust?, then you may not say anything about the Israeli abjections?
Yair, How many family members has Mr Kennedy lost to the Israelis? Certainly far fewer than Artur Rubenstein lost to the Germans. How many death camps have the Israelis? Have they methodically and willfully exterminated some six millions of Palestinians. We both know the answer. Please distinguish between the suffering of actual pain and tragedy of loss on the one hand, and prostituting one's art for cheap press coverage on the other. They are as different as human emotions can be. MV
"Did Arthur Rubinstein "prostitute his Muse" by refusing to play in Germany?" Of course NOT! First, he lost family members in the Holocaust. Second, He was RUBINSTEIN, not a certain Mr. nigel kennedy...
Did Arthur Rubinstein "prostitute his Muse" by refusing to play in Germany ?
Cipora, Perhaps it's faddish these days for the glitterati to bash Israel. A true artist, though, believes in the purity and sanctity of his Muse, and will never prostitute her for a crumb of passing noteriety or a column of broadsheet print. Mr Kennedy should put down his violin if he wishes to play politics instead of Mozart. Kind regards.
Extremely well put, thank you.
No need for ?a review of Kennedy's life and the cultural wealth in it??. Even if, in Kennedy?s case, Ben Zeev concludes that there are ?serious doubts about the possibility of his being an anti-Semite?, the very fact that Ben Zeev worries about that ?possibility? is already stinking. What about Kirkby, then? Is there any ?possibility of her being an anti-Semite?? Ben Zeev doesn?t tell us. Noam, tell us or else G. F. Haendel will not sleep any more.
"there is a looong list of great (even legendary) soloists" There is a looong list of great (even legendary) blindfolded soloists.
Israel is insistent that Iran be boycotted for things they have not done. Why should Israel be exempt from boycotts when she is an illegitimate state without borders or constitution that is the most deliberately vicious on earth?
Anyone who disagrees in any way, to any extent, at any time, with anything that the current Israeli government does or says, is clearly anti-Semitic and also a terrorist sympathizer. And probably a terrorist too. After all, there are countless Jewish Nobel laureates.
I'm from a similar national and cultural background as Mr Kennedy; and like him, I am a great lover of classical music. We both support the creation of a Palestinian state. That's where our similarities end. Mr Kennedy should understand he is walking in the same repulsive footsteps as history's most murderous anti-Semite. When the Schumann Violin Concerto came to light after being lost for eighty years, the German music publisher Schott sent the score to Yehudi Menuhin, so that the great violinist could premiere the work in San Francisco. Hitler intervened, and since Germany held the music copyright, he arranged instead for a German violinist to premiere the piece, on German soil. But the German violinist's "superior" nationality failed to compensate for his inferiority as a musician to a "mere" Jew. Mr Kennedy can protest all he wants, but he, too, will have music play handmaiden to politics. He is no better than Hitler in this regard, and should be ashamed! MV
"a review of Kennedy's life and the cultural wealth in it, including the Jewish element, raises serious doubts about the possibility of his being an anti-Semite" - yes and the proof of that is the German 20th century rejection of antisemitism as a result of the heavy Jewish contribution to their culture. Is Haaretz really that stupid, or does their anti Israili anti Jewish stance trump all their intelligence?
No wonder, after all the brainwashing he gets at home. Thank God, there is a looong list of great (even legendary) soloists, Jews and non Jews who love to play in Israel. Let him play in Ramallah.
Thanks for reminding us, Boris. The Sbarro muderer carried his bomb in a guitar case.
Why on earth invite people like this?
in order to appease some musician. Nigel himself has fund a refuge in Poland,a country which has expelled all its minorities,all,be it Jewish,Germanor Ukrainian. Now he preaches all-encompassing love from his pure-Slavic paradise. Cheap hypocrite
That was in your mind only. Arthur Rubinstein didn't want to play in Germany until very very late. But Nigel isn't Rubinstein. Good, even very, but not great. Can he do what Maxim Vengerov does? And even Maxim is only about to reach greatness.
As usually N. Kennedy is GREAT!!! Great and free in its music as in its politic stance!!! BRAVISSIMO!! ...nothing else to add!!!
... was carrying a case for a musical instrument. He killed 21 young people and maimed countless others - enough for a large orchestra.
... was carrying a case for a musical instrument. He killed 21 young people and maimed countless others - enough for a large orchestra.
On the contrary, a musician should play wherever he or she chooses to play. Their performance is the exploitation of their own talent, crafted through years of hard work, so of course they should choose where or not they play. If they prefer not to appear in a barbaric country perpetrating daily human rights abuses, so be it.
What an excellent article:just shows how strong Israel's democratic instincts are,in that you are not afraid to criticise your own policies. I write as a Brit. who is constantly exasperated by the sanctimonious boycotters,whoever they may be. I never hear calls for boycotts of Hamas,or the Ayatollahs. Your recommendations are sound:musicians should come,and play,and encourage dialogue and contacts on an equal basis between Israelis and Palestinians.
Once again the terrible legacy of anti-semitism is watered down... so anyone with an independent mind or a bit of complexity to their thought is labeled an anti-semite. Shame.
Music is an expression of beauty, NOT of politics. Beauty should be given to all. Good music can only improve souls while it can't hurt anyone. That's why Wagner is exquisitely beautiful although he himself was an antisemite. Only marches may be suspect... Nigel Kennedy is obviously a prejudiced person. I heard him often; very good but quite strange behaviour. Somehow, a Menuhin or Oistrakh he is NOT.