Class Reflections

I. Class Discussions/Facilitation/Conversation

Honestly, this class was different for me in a number of ways. It’s been three years since I’ve been in an undergraduate classroom as anything other than an instructor, so generally silence isn’t an issue for me in classes in which I’m a student. Graduate students can talk for hours about anything – and nothing! – so people trying to talk over others is more frequently an issue in classes in which I’m a student. I don’t think that silence in the classroom is a bad thing, and, as someone who often needs a few moments to process before I speak, I can understand the value of it.
That said, I think that for some reason people hesitated to talk in class because they were scared of being wrong. I’m not sure what caused this. I think everyone in the class was very open and respectful and down-to-earth, so I’m not sure what was behind the hesitancy. Maybe it would be helpful to bring the blogs into the class more. I think it did help when we started going through them in class. I felt like sometimes I didn’t know if it was “fair game” to bring the blogs into discussion a lot, so maybe outlining that would help at the beginning of the quarter – like, “I noticed in your blog . . .” Also, maybe having students help formally facilitate discussion would help? For example, two students could write discussion questions for each class.

II. Video Conferencing

I’m SO glad that we got to videoconference! I was really, really bummed when it looked like we weren’t going to get to videoconference with any Palestinian students. Though it wasn’t the same as getting to talk to students at Al-Quds who are affiliated with the project, I’m very happy that we got to talk with the activists in PYALARA, in addition to the professor and students from Hebrew University. Also, Salim Tamari was hilarious! I know that in some cases we did know this, but I wish I had a better understanding of the political leanings of some of the folks we were videoconferencing with. I found myself worried about asking questions – or asking certain questions – when I wasn’t sure where their “alliances fell,” so to speak. Also, I think it would be amazing if it were possible to videoconference while you all are in Jerusalem!

III. Readings and Topics

I thought the readings were appropriate. At first I was frustrated because I felt like I didn’t have a thorough understanding of the situation in Jerusalem, before we started reading about its ancient history. However, I feel like I better understand now why the readings were ordered the way that they were. Ten weeks later, I feel like I still don’t have a thorough understanding! I have a much, much deeper knowledge of, and appreciation for, the situation in Jerusalem and Israel-Palestine, but I also have a deeper understanding of how little I still know! I think to dive right into the current situation would have been really overwhelming. However, I do think that having Dr. Hermann’s lecture earlier in the quarter – as a way to help contextualize what the historical readings were leading up to – could have been helpful. I’m not sure, though.

IV. Lecturers and Speakers

My favorite lecturer was Dr. Hermann. I found his presentation to be very, very useful and he made the situation in Israel-Palestine MUCH more accessible than other times I have the information presented to me – either in writing or in written sources. Honestly, I wish we had gotten to see more of his material/lecture, though I know it would be difficult to give up two classes. I was also impressed with the fact that he gave both the Israeli positions and the Palestinian positions attention throughout his talk, and I was very appreciative of the fact that he seemed so open to our questions.

To be completely honest, I was more frustrated than anything with the presentations by Dr. Sessa and Dr. Swartz. Dr. Fudge, in my opinion, was more accessible than the other two, though I understand that the interplay between his subject position and his subject of study is different. But, coming from Women’s Studies, I find it, well, fairly infuriating (not to mention counterproductive) when scholars won’t examine their own stakes in their work. No one is objective. We may strive toward objectivity, but we are humans, with human emotions and connections. It gets messy. And to ignore the mess only allows it to fester while we create other ones. Wow. I guess I’m still riled up by this! I’m going to stop now.

V. Blogging

I really liked having the class blog as a central place to go to. It helped me “stay in touch” with the class outside of the class, if that makes sense. As the quarter went on, it was already really nice tos people sharing articles, pictures, relevant info, etc. on the blog, and it was a good place to prepare for speakers, etc. I also like keeping my own blog. It kept me accountable to keep up with the readings, too! I did feel like blogging twice a week got to be a lot, however. And I think that it kept me from commenting on other students’ blogs as much as I would like to, because I had some blog burn-out going on. I think that maybe having it be required to do one post and one thoughtful comment on another students’ blog per week might be more manageable. It might also help with class discussions too, because we’ll be more familiar with what we’ve all written!

VI. Syllabus

I struggled with the syllabus. I think it was largely a format thing, and I don’t know if part of this is because it was uploaded to googledocs. I don’t generally use googledocs, so I don’t know what whacky things it might to do formatting. But, I just felt like things were clumped together and it was easy to miss parts of assignments. I think it would be helpful to have things listed by day, rather than by week, and maybe bullet-pointed rather than written in narrative format.

VII. Final Project

I loved the final project!! Okay, there were moments were I didn’t love it – like when the sun was burning the retinas out of my eyes because I didn’t want to wear sunglasses when interviewing people, or when I had trouble finding people to interview who were wearing clothing that covered more than just the bare essentials. But, doing a media project was a really, really good learning experience for me. I study digital technologies, but I’m actually not very technologically saavy myself. Doing this project forced me to start using some of the technologies that I talk about – not only editing software, but also uploading my videos to my blog, youtube, etc. I feel like I picked up skills as well as knowledge in working on this final projetct. I also think it’s good that there was a paper option for students as well. Sometimes papers are what we need to produce, or they’re simply the right format for what we’re trying to do, so it’s good to have that option.

I’m also really glad that we shared our final projects with each other. It was really nice to see the work that everyone else was producing, especially in a class that’s normally so quiet! I thought the sharing of our project was very, very valuable. I was also impressed with the wide array of topics that people chose, and the different approaches that people took. It was a good way to end the class because it really showed me how MUCH more there is to learn and how many more sites of inquiry there are in this area.

VIII. Personal Reflections

I’ll admit it. I was nervous about this class. Mostly, I was nervous because Israel-Palestine is a very heated topic in the U.S., and in the past I’ve often found myself critiquing a majority opinion. I’ve also been called an anti-Semite for questioning the policies of the Israeli government, which was incredibly hurtful. Perhaps because of these past experiences, most of the recent conversations I’ve had with people have been with colleagues/friends, etc., who I know have viewpoints that are similar to mine. Additionally, as I’ve delved further into Middle East studies and Arabic – as well as transnational feminism – I simply interact more with people who are Arab and/or Muslim than people who are Jewish, so again, the conversations that do not necessarily cross cultural or political borders. While I think that kind of cross-dialogue is important, I was nervous about re-engaging with it!

I think one thing that putting myself back into this dialogic process has taught me is that I seriously need to work on separating the Israeli government and the Israeli people. I’m actually deeply ashamed to admit this. I feel like I work very hard to separate governments and people and to avoid generalizations and stereotypes. But, I think that perhaps I had gotten so swept up in the Palestinian side of the debate that I forgot that, well, there are people in Israel too. It is not this big, monolithic, aggressive, abusive monster. (I feel very ironic being a U.S. citizen and saying all of this.) This class has helped me to remember that – in every situation – compassionate listening, engagement, critique, and dialogue with all sides is what is most productive, even if it’s often the most difficult!

Reflections

Okay, so the reflections videos were too big for blogger to handle well, so I went ahead and uploaded them to youtube. And here they are!

Day 1 Reflections:

"Final" Reflections:

DVD extras. :-)

Here are some of the extras from my DVD. The first is just some supplemental interview material about conflict at OSU, and the second is my brief outtakes reel. Enjoy!





I'm going to post my reflections tomorrow because they're taking a long time to upload since they're longer. They might have to be two separate blog posts. Stay tuned!

Christian Representations of Jerusalem

So, I've been thinking about/noticing Christian references to Jerusalem, and I thought I'd share them. Well, one references Jerusalem; the others reference the Jordan River.

You can't really hear the lyrics super well to this next one, but I wanted to post it b/c it's such an awesome rendition! The chorus of this song goes "I'm gonna lay down my burden / down by the riverside, down by the riverside, down by the riverside / I'm gonna lay down my sword and shield / down by the riverside/ gonna study war no more." (Quakers LOVE this one!)




And this last one - well, I'm not a huge fan of Beyonce's rendition. But I think it's really interesting that she did a recording of this!



One of the things that really strikes me about this is that a lot of the songs that reference Jerusalem and The Jordan River (at least in the U.S. context) are African-American spirituals, many of which were born out of slavery. I have my own theories here, but why do you all think this might be the case?

Reflections on Dr. Hermann's Visit

I found this particular image of the wall in Israel-Palestine particularly moving, so I thought I'd share it.

For me, at least, Dr. Hermann's visit to the class was incredibly, incredibly helpful. I feel like I have a much better understanding of the contemporary situation in both Jerusalem and larger Israel-Palestine. I was also impressed by the way that he was able to present multiple viewpoints. I felt like his presentation much more balanced than we often see in the media, as well as in activist circles. I'd love to hear even a fuller history from him!

We're just imagining it . . . or are we?

Dr. Hermann alluded to the idea of the nation as an imagined community in his presentation to our class last week. This concept is something that I've been kind of obsessed with since I initially came across it, and it's also something that the readings this week caused me to revisit. Basically, the idea of the imagined community - Benedict Anderson's term - is that nations are not inherent communities, and they are imagined because they are not based on any sort of concrete interactions. Okay. I'm going to link to wikipedia right now. I know this is not particularly scholarly, but it gives a good run-down of the concept: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imagined_communities

All in all, I buy this argument. It makes sense to me. And yet, we invoke this idea of the nation as home, the nation as some sort of *real* community all the time. I even think of it when I go home to Maine for a visit; I feel that I am part of a real community. And yet, I don't know most people in that community based on state borders. The community is imagined. Ali Qleibo also draws on the idea of the nation - or at least, location - a some sort of real, concrete community. He writes, "They do not have to know me personally, nor do I need to know them on a personal level. The warm feeling of belonging as registered by the little twinkle in the eyes, the polite lifting of the hand in salute, the warm evening greeting, masa' al-kheir, still dispel the deepest feeling of loneliness from my heart."

So, I guess my question about this reading would be . . . Is this his imagination? Is this actually something about Jerusalem that offers this sense of community, of belonging? Or, rather, is it simply that it an upbringing, a way of life that causes this sense of community? For example, if he grew up there, could Tulsa, Oklahoma be Jerusalem? Is this more about believing and/or imagining that Jerusalem (or Palestine, or Israel) is a community than it is about nations/states actually *being* communities?

Still dreaming . . .

This is the original post (the one that started it all!) that I wrote about the festival, so I thought I'd repost it since we're discussing that again today. :-)

I'm thinking a lot about dialogue. To be honest, I'm thinking about dialogue on a fairly constant basis, but I am thinking about it especially after doing this week's readings and because of the subject matter and nature of this class in general.

In Women's Studies (as well as in some other disciplines in the humanities), we LOVE to talk about dialogue. We love it. We see it as very core to what we - as scholars, academics, activists - do. For example,the Women's Studies classroom - and the feminist movement(s) more broadly - is really centered around dialogue. We speak of bringing a "multitude" or a "diversity" of voices into a space in order to displace the idea of a singular, over-arching authority figure. It's a way of legitimizing and honoring different people's knowledges and experiences. It's also a gesture toward embracing and including voices that have been marginalized.

In my own work, I too talk about dialogue. Grad students (for better or worse) become very good and spitting out our research interests in two sentences or less. When I speak of mine, I talk about looking at conflict narratives and "putting them in dialogue with each other." Even as I type this, I have trouble clearly conceptualizing what that means. It's the part of my research that still seems a bit fuzzy. I think that this project of looking for dialogue will mean reading women's narratives with, through, and against each other in order to see if there is any "conversation" taking place, to see if these narratives "speak" to each other in any way.

I'd love to hear what we each are personally hoping to get out of this project of dialogue. Why enter into this sort of transnational dialogue? What are our aims? How do we enter into this dialogue productive and realistically? Is it okay to be idealistic and hope that dialogue truly does have the power to transform? Does it?

Wow. I'll stop asking questions now. These are just some of the questions I've been carrying with me. I thought perhaps I'd share them.

Final Project

So, for my final project, I plan to go around the campus and ask people at random (probably largely on the Oval and in the Union) the following questions:

- What are you studying?

- What's your age?

- Where are you from?

- How do you identify yourself politically, if you do identify yourself politically?

- How do you identify yourself religiously, if you do identify yourself religiously?

- What do you know of the situation in Israel-Palestine?

- How do you think Jerusalem is crucial to the conflict?

- Do you think there is any possible resolution to the conflict?

I'm then going to make a video of the responses (or, at least some of the responses). I'm interested to see if any patterns emerge as well!

Jerusalem International Chamber Music Festival

Well, in exploring the web and looking for musical events in Jerusalem, I found The Jerusalem International Chamber Music Festival.

This caught my attention for a number of reasons, but the first was that the site is available in English and Hebrew, but not Arabic. So, it seems to me that it's clearly meant for a particular audience. Then, I looked at the sponsors and benefactors, and many (most) of the sponsors and benefactors are based in the U.S. and Europe, and my guess (based on names) is that many of those who provide funding for the festival are Jewish or connected to Judaism in some way. Also, it's interesting to note that the music being featured is mostly European.

I wonder, what are the political ramifications about a festival like this that seems to be intentionally exclusionary? (And this is not to say that Palestinians don't have festivals that are exclusionary as well.) What might the Arab Jews in Jerusalem think of this? I find that question particularly interesting since they can at least access and read the website, etc. yet it seems that "Europeanness" is very important in this festival.

Nativism and The "Holy Land"

I’m wrestling a bit with the term “nativism,” especially in regard to the conflict in Israel-Palestine. I have heard “nativism” used in both the positive and the negative ways that Dr. Tamari outlines in his article – as an identity-based political tactic aimed at restoring land, economic, and cultural rights, and I have also heard the term use in pejorative, essentialist, and colonizing ways. In some ways, I see the value of nativism. In the U.S. context, for example I think that American Indians, as native to the land, are absolutely entitled to land rights that reach far beyond the tokenized, oppressive gesture of reservations. But then I wonder, which nations could really call themselves native? Certainly some American Indian nations have suppressed – or even killed off – other nations in order to secure land. In those situations, does nativism apply?

This quickly becomes a slippery slope. If Palestinians claim nativism, yet are suppressed by Israelis, are Israelis then “the next in line?” And, if a dominant force doesn’t buy into claims of nativism, what, then, is its use value? In the Palestine-Israel situation, claims of nativism can be met by claims of a “Promised Land,” so it seems to quickly reach a kind of stalemate. In the U.S., European colonizing forces made claims that what they were doing was for the American Indians’ “own good.” So, it seems doubtful that during these periods of conflict and occupation that claims of nativism would sway the dominant forces, and could risk essentializing and belittling the cultural practices of native communities. But, outside of the direct conflict – either temporally or geographically – perhaps nativist claims can still be a legitimizing force.

Is idolatry by any other name still . . . idolotry?

Right near the end of her book, Armstrong writes, "In montheistic terms, it is idolatry to see a shrine or a city as the ultimate goal of religion. Throughout, we have seen that they are symbols that point beyond themselves to a greater Reality. Jerusalem and its sacred sites have been experienced as numinous" (423).

This is SUCH an interesting perspective - and one I hadn't thought of before. But, it totally makes sense. This is idolatry, really. I'm surprised that I didn't see it, because I can go on and on (but I won't!) about the ways in which the contemporary practice of the monotheistic religions is thick with idolatry (sometimes it even seems that idolatry reigns).

So, I do have some questions about this. First, do you think that practitioners of the monotheistic religions do see Jerusalem as "the ultimate goal of religion?" I don't think that Christians do, and Dr. Sessa solidified that on Tuesday. What about Jews and Muslims? Is Jerusalem the end-goal? Or, is it cast as the religious goal in order to give "weight" to political and territorial claims?

Also, how is this vying for Jerusalem as idolatry not a more common thread in the discussions of it? Now that I've read it in Armstrong, it seems so obvious. Yet, I don't know that I've ever heard this come up in a conversation about contemporary Jerusalem and the conflict there. It seems that perhaps this is another example of religion "picking and choosing" in order to advance political claims. (i.e. Using Leviticus to claim that homosexuality is "wrong," but ignoring other laws presented in this same book of the Bible, some of which are QUITE disturbing.)

Questions for Guest Presenters

GAH! BLOGGER! Why do you despise me??

Okay. Taking a moment.

Here are my questions (that won't show up in the comment section on the class blog, for some reason):

I'm sorry if this ends up showing up twice; it got deleted the first time!

1. Where does Christianity and its followers fit in in regard to the current situation in Jerusalem? It seems that so much of the centers around the relationships between Jews/Isrealis and Muslims/Palestinians. Yet, there are Christians living in the city and Christians who pilgrimage to Jerusalem because it is a holy site. What is their impact on the current situation?

2. We talk a lot about the misconceptions that are in circulation regarding Islam and its followers - perhaps this is especially true for those of us who study the Middle East in some way. What would you say are some misconceptions of the other religions involved here, and how do those misconceptions play into the conflict in Jerusalem, as well as the global/media response to it?

Ch 10-13 Response

This may sound really weird, but for the last few chapters of Armstrong’s book, I’ve found myself wondering, “Where have all the Christians gone?” Throughout this text – well, the more recent chapters anyway – we’ve seen how the monotheistic religions and their expansion have played into this destruction-rebuilding-repeat cycle in Jerusalem. I’m sure that this will become clear as we proceed through the text, but I keep thinking about this as I’m reading – how did we get to the point where we are now, where the conflict is really between two of these monotheistic religious groups? Where are the Christians in the contemporary conflict?

I mean, obviously, they are there. Obviously, Christians also pilgrimage to, and live in, Jerusalem. But, why aren’t they vying for space in the same way that the Israelis and the Palestinians are? Or, are they aligning with Israel, since Judaism and Christianity or born out of the same tradition (or, rather, Christianity is born out of the Jewish tradition)? Armstrong’s text has shown us that no religious group was “good” or “bad.” The situation is complicated, and all of the groups have both been dominant and oppressed. But, in the more contemporary period – or maybe even since the Crusades? – Christianity has been so closely associated with imperialism, colonization, etc. So, why not in contemporary Jerusalem? (Don’t get me wrong, I’m not arguing that Christians should try to colonize Jerusalem; I’m just intrigued by the question.) At first I thought that maybe it was the fact that Jerusalem, while also a site of praise for Christians, is also a site of anguish, given the crucifixion, etc. But, then, isn’t Jerusalem clearly a “mixed” location for all of the religious groups?

Swirling Thoughts

Blogger and I are having some relationship troubles. Well, actually, it’s not blogger at all. It’s my five year old computer that feels like it should short circuit occasionally, and in the process, eat the occasional blog post. (I’m getting a new computer this week – weeee!)

Hence, my blog post that I wrote Thursday morning never got posted. So, I’m going to write three this week (sorry to inundate you; please bear with me!). Rather than redoing my post on the chapters we’ve already discussed in class, I’m going to go somewhere else with this blog entry (I hope that’s okay!). I have A LOT swirling around in my head right now, so I apologize if this seems disjointed or rambly. I’ll try to make it make as much sense as possible!

Part of what inspired this mental tangle (or, at least, part of what made it more complicated that it already was) is the fact that I watched “Promises” this weekend. Dr. Horowitz mentioned this move in class a few weeks ago, so I netflixed it to check it out. In case you haven’t seen it, here’s a trailor: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySJaH7OXzOA (Also, the whole move is on youtube if you don’t mind it being choppy.

In short – without giving anything away – the movie traces the experiences of a number of Jewish and Palestinian children who live in Jerusalem and the surrounding areas. Some of these children (two secular Israelis and a number of Palestinian children) decide that they want to meet each other. They spend a day together and then, two years later, the filmmaker asks them to reflect on their experiences. I’m not going to mention what they say, because I don’t want to spoil anything.

Watching this, for me, really resulted in a feeling of dislocation. And perhaps this is not surprising, given all of the instances of exile, destruction, rebirth, colonization, etc. that we have been reading and talking about in class. I feel like the more I learn, the less I can separate myself from world events. And the less “at home” I feel in the U.S. – yet I have no other home. I found myself feeling sad that I’m not able to go on this year’s trip to Jerusalem because I started having this feeling of . . . there must be something there. In that space. I had this feeling that Jerusalem must have something to offer, something to give in the way of explanation. And then I think, this is just me. U.S. born and raised. I have no explicit ties to Jerusalem. And I still have moments of feeling pulled to it. I can’t imagine how strong Kasa’s feelings must have been! And then to get there and . . . there is no explanation. It’s all so perplexing.

“Promises” also made me think of a couple of other projects. One – mentioned by Dr. Horowitz on Thursday – is the Compassionate Listening project. (Started, in part, by a Quaker. Yay!) Here’s a video about it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZM69RV6OjI And their website: http://www.compassionatelistening.org/ It also made me think of the Seeds of Peace Camp, which I’m somewhat familiar with because I’m from Maine, which is where the camp is located: http://www.seedsofpeace.org/

So, all of these things bring me back to questions about dialogue. Does dialogue work? Does “humanizing,” listening too, empathizing with “the enemy” work? Is this simply idealistic?

Armstrong Reading Response: Why Jerusalem?

One of the things that I’m finding increasingly interesting about Jerusalem as a city is its history of destruction and recreation. Or, perhaps, its recreation through destruction. For example, I wonder if the final destruction of the temple that left all but the Western Wall standing actually somehow made the site even holier than it would be otherwise. I’m sure that people would still go there in droves, but would so many people make pilgrimages there if the history was not full of this destruction? (Similarly, would so many people travel to ground zero in NYC if the twin towers hadn’t fallen?)
So, again, this raises the bigger question for me of, why Jerusalem? We’ve already talked in class about how Jerusalem’s appeal is fairly surprising given that it’s geographically not in a very desirable position. (Though I do wonder how much this has to do with the fact that Jerusalem is on a hill – “the city on the hill” - and thus is so noticeable.) But, still, an endless number of cities and civilizations have come and gone. They’ve been lost in destruction and never rebuilt. They’ve faded overtime. What is it about Jerusalem that keeps it holding on? Obviously, the fact that it has deep meaning for the three main monotheistic religions is part of it, but other holy cities do not garner the attention that Jerusalem does. And other cities that have been destroyed, well . . . that’s been it. They’ve been destroyed. So, again, why Jerusalem? And why all of the attention now? Is part of Jerusalem’s ability to survive its history of destruction? Would Jerusalem be a city of such meaning if it were not currently such a contested, conflicted, explosive site?

(Mostly) No Words. Just Images. What do YOU make of me??

You May Say I'm a Dreamer . . .

(Reposted from the class blog - whoops!)

I'm thinking a lot about dialogue. To be honest, I'm thinking about dialogue on a fairly constant basis, but I am thinking about it especially after doing this week's readings and because of the subject matter and nature of this class in general.

In Women's Studies (as well as in some other disciplines in the humanities), we LOVE to talk about dialogue. We love it. We see it as very core to what we - as scholars, academics, activists - do. For example,the Women's Studies classroom - and the feminist movement(s) more broadly - is really centered around dialogue. We speak of bringing a "multitude" or a "diversity" of voices into a space in order to displace the idea of a singular, over-arching authority figure. It's a way of legitimizing and honoring different people's knowledges and experiences. It's also a gesture toward embracing and including voices that have been marginalized.

In my own work, I too talk about dialogue. Grad students (for better or worse) become very good and spitting out our research interests in two sentences or less. When I speak of mine, I talk about looking at conflict narratives and "putting them in dialogue with each other." Even as I type this, I have trouble clearly conceptualizing what that means. It's the part of my research that still seems a bit fuzzy. I think that this project of looking for dialogue will mean reading women's narratives with, through, and against each other in order to see if there is any "conversation" taking place, to see if these narratives "speak" to each other in any way.

I'd love to hear what we each are personally hoping to get out of this project of dialogue. Why enter into this sort of transnational dialogue? What are our aims? How do we enter into this dialogue productive and realistically? Is it okay to be idealistic and hope that dialogue truly does have the power to transform? Does it?

Wow. I'll stop asking questions now. These are just some of the questions I've been carrying with me. I thought perhaps I'd share them.

Also, I'm fine with either an open or a closed blog.

Signing Off,
Say