This formulation presents itself as a golden mean, with all the moral and philosophical legitimacy that accrues to such a position in the Western cultural tradition. There is absolutely no epistemological warrant for the claim that “the truth” of any matter lies midway between two opposing claims. But Morris’ appeal to this apparently reasonable, if fallacious, notion has contributed to positioning The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem as the standard work on the topic in Europe and North America. His later works have solidified his reputation as the voice of reason—and, for some, an embodiment of hope for a more liberal Israel that can come to terms with its past.
Beinin goes on to say that Morris' comments during the Second Intifada had shattered his reputation in polite circles. Yale press and David Remnick seem to disagree. But they are late to the party. After Israels 'Disengagement' from the Gaza Strip the NYT went to Morris for an op-ed and The New Republic has made Morris their Israel/Palestine book reviewer for the last few years. He has a recent review that I refuse to read after remembering how his crititique of the Walt/Mershimer LRB essay was completley inconsistent with his own work in Righteous Victims. There seems to be little reason for a University Press to put out 1948 or for Remnick to be so deferential towards Morris' scholarship in his review. What the reviewer sees as throughtful balance historical judgement is really just Morris' own contribution to Israeli propaganda. When addressing Morris' comments that Palestinians are "barbarians" who should be "put in cages" and that Islam is a religion that does not value human life to the same extent that he and his Westerner bretheren do Remnick writes that the Second Intifada had driven the historian to "the point of embitterment." Most would call Morris' thoughts bigoted and I cannot see why Remnick would not.
It is remarkable that Morris has managed to stay in the mainstream and manage to receive respectful reviews of his books while many of his peers have not been given the same entitlements. In the last few years the level of scholarly discussion on Israel/Palestine has been upgraded substantially by the regular offerings on the subject in the NYRB and LRB as well as a few noteworthy books such as Norman Finkelstein's Beyond Chutzpa, Sara Roy's Failing Peace, Ilan Pappe's The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, and Sa'di and Lughod\s Nakba. However, as far as a know none of these books have been reviewed in a popular or mainstream publication (Finkelstein and Lughod are on record voicing their dismay with this fact) and the content of the NYRB LRB has not penetrated a broad audience. Yet somehow Benny Morris remains a fascination for the cultural managers because he was once a proud member of the Israeli Left who turned to Right and because he can sell his own self-indulgnt fiction to to others that his work is 'balanced.' Do either of these claims have any merit? Morris' political biography is not all that clear. He refused to serve in combat duty during the first Intifada but as Ilan Pappe has pointed out he has always dismissed Palestinian sources out of contempt. In a rejoinder to a negative review Morris wrote one of his books Pappe had this to say,
Secondly, there was no Palestinian feminism or women's participation in the national struggle; nor were they organized. Morris does not only lack Arabic, he does not as a rule read or quote any work of Palestinian women — or for that matter other women's work or Palestinian male historians. 'There are no good Palestinian historians' he told a crowded hall sitting next to me and Edward Said in 1998. My knowledge and reading, and indeed working with feminist historians, is a 'factual' mistake.
I'll deal with Morris' alleged in "balance" in my next post.
But I will leave you with this NLR essay by Gabriel Pitterberg on "How the founding myths of Israel dictated conceptual removal of Palestinians, during and after physical removal. The invention of ‘retroactive transfer’ and ‘present absentees’ as the glacial euphemisms of ethnic cleansing." I haven't read it, but it might be useful for your research paper.
Peace.
It is remarkable that Morris has managed to stay in the mainstream and manage to receive respectful reviews of his books while many of his peers have not been given the same entitlements. In the last few years the level of scholarly discussion on Israel/Palestine has been upgraded substantially by the regular offerings on the subject in the NYRB and LRB as well as a few noteworthy books such as Norman Finkelstein's Beyond Chutzpa, Sara Roy's Failing Peace, Ilan Pappe's The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, and Sa'di and Lughod\s Nakba. However, as far as a know none of these books have been reviewed in a popular or mainstream publication (Finkelstein and Lughod are on record voicing their dismay with this fact) and the content of the NYRB LRB has not penetrated a broad audience. Yet somehow Benny Morris remains a fascination for the cultural managers because he was once a proud member of the Israeli Left who turned to Right and because he can sell his own self-indulgnt fiction to to others that his work is 'balanced.' Do either of these claims have any merit? Morris' political biography is not all that clear. He refused to serve in combat duty during the first Intifada but as Ilan Pappe has pointed out he has always dismissed Palestinian sources out of contempt. In a rejoinder to a negative review Morris wrote one of his books Pappe had this to say,
Secondly, there was no Palestinian feminism or women's participation in the national struggle; nor were they organized. Morris does not only lack Arabic, he does not as a rule read or quote any work of Palestinian women — or for that matter other women's work or Palestinian male historians. 'There are no good Palestinian historians' he told a crowded hall sitting next to me and Edward Said in 1998. My knowledge and reading, and indeed working with feminist historians, is a 'factual' mistake.
I'll deal with Morris' alleged in "balance" in my next post.
But I will leave you with this NLR essay by Gabriel Pitterberg on "How the founding myths of Israel dictated conceptual removal of Palestinians, during and after physical removal. The invention of ‘retroactive transfer’ and ‘present absentees’ as the glacial euphemisms of ethnic cleansing." I haven't read it, but it might be useful for your research paper.
Peace.
No comments:
Post a Comment