Deconstructing: Globe and Mail article on the TIFF boycott


As taken from the Globe and Mail: Signing protest letter was rash, Fonda says

I deconstruct the writing in an article from the Globe and Mail regarding the Toronto Declaration, the Toronto International Film Festival and the role of the Brand Israel campaign in TIFF 2009

My remarks are in italics. Please note the bold when reading.

 

By Michael Posner

From Tuesday’s Globe and Mail

Actress Jane Fonda, one of the principal voices criticizing the Toronto International Film Festival’s special spotlight on Tel Aviv, stepped back Sunday night from her position.

In an official statement, Ms. Fonda wrote that she had “signed the letter without reading it carefully enough, without asking myself if some of the wording wouldn’t exacerbate the situation rather than bring about constructive dialogue.

“Some of the words in the protest letter did not come from my heart, words that are unnecessarily inflammatory: The simplistic depiction of Tel Aviv as a city ‘built on destroyed Palestinian villages,’ for instance, and the omission of any mention of Hamas’s 8-month-long rocket and mortar attacks on the town of Sderot and the western Negev to which Israel was responding when it launched its war on Gaza. Many citizens now suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder as a result.

“In the hyper-sensitized reality of the region,” Ms. Fonda added, “in which any criticism of Israel is swiftly and often unfairly branded as anti-Semitic, it can become counterproductive to inflame rather than explain and this means to hear the narratives of both sides, to articulate the suffering on both sides, not just the Palestinians. By neglecting to do this the letter allowed good people to close their ears and their hearts.”

The Fonda statement comes amid a flurry of pro- and anti-Israeli statements.

Yousry Nasrallah, an Egyptian filmmaker at TIFF, announced that two Egyptians films, The Traveller and Heliopolis, and one unnamed Arab short had been pulled from the festival, as part of the protest. Mr. Nasrallah said it was the producer of Heliopolis, not its director, Ahmad Abdalla, who wanted that film pulled.

(Is this necessary to point out? Is it stated so as to illustrate that this was an executive decision? Irrelevant expenditure of words on the author’s part)

The coalition of artist and activists opposed to the TIFF focus on Tel Aviv – because it seems to coincide with an Israeli government plan to promote Israeli arts and sciences – held a public meeting at Ryerson University, attended by some 300 people.

(It “seems” to “coincide” with…”plan to promote Israeli arts and sciences.” Au contraire: The second URL on a quick Google search of “Brand Israel” reveals an article in the Jerusalem Post where Israeli consul-general Amir Gissin states,  “Explaining why we are right is not enough,” says Gissin. “Our goal is to make Israel relevant and attractive to Canadians and to refocus attention away from the conflict.” Therefore, the “plan” was not focused on Israeli arts and sciences but rather focused on drawing attention away from conflict. That is the proper definition of this “plan.” I cannot comment on whether it was deliberately “planned” by the TIFF–such a useful term for vagueness in this case–but the author saying it ’seems’ to ‘coincide’ is being very friendly to an incomplete and therefore inaccurate definition)

They gave standing ovations to Palestinian filmmaker Elia Suleiman and Canadian director John Greyson, whose decision last month to pull his short documentary from TIFF’s 2009 lineup was the catalyst for the current controversy, a standing ovation.

Although the protesters insist that they do not intend to boycott or censor Israeli films per se, most of the people who have signed the group’s letter of protest are part of the much broader boycott, disinvestment and sanctions campaign aimed at weakening the Israeli state.

(This subject requires more detail, more references to the goals and efforts of these groups rather than simply labeling them a boycott and protest–both words considered aggressive–and then tying it in with ‘weakening’ the Israeli state. A subtle war with words. This makes the divestment campaign appear hand-in-hand with anti-Semitism, or maybe Ahmadinejad’s past comments on wiping Israel off the map–both weapons against protestors. The divestment campaign is not focused on that, and this lack of information is misleading for that reason. Simply starting the sentence with “Although” shows the author is adding opinion and contesting the insistence of the protesters in that they are not boycotting and censoring the films themselves.)

However, Mr. Suleiman warned the audience to be careful of the boycott weapon, saying it has to be applied selectively.

The protesters so-called Toronto Declaration, posted online with an open request for additional signatories, has so far drawn 1,500 supporters.

(Why is this “so-called”? Is it not referred to as such? Perhaps the author disagrees with the title because it refers to the city of Toronto and it is therefore unrepresentative of his views; but, in that same thread and to put his use of “so-called” into perspective, supporters of this Toronto Declaration could refer to the Toronto International Film Festival as the so-called “Toronto International Film Festival” because they do not feel it is representative of them. Unless the Toronto Declaration needed a copyright of some sort;) Using “so-called” in this context is pejorative and mocking.)

The two-hour meeting, which included videotaped and written statements from Canadian activist Naomi Klein, filmmaker Ken Loach, novelist Alice Walker and Israeli filmmaker Uri Aloni was on one occasion – when Mr. Greyson was speaking – interrupted by hecklers from the Jewish Defence League. After repeated warnings, the hecklers were escorted out by security personnel.

On the other side, some major names in show business, including Natalie Portman, Sacha Baron Cohen, Jerry Seinfeld, Jason Alexander, Lenny Kravitz and Lisa Kudrow Monday signed their names to a statement applauding TIFF for “including the Israeli film community in the Festival’s City to City program. Anyone who has actually seen recent Israeli cinema … knows they are in no way a propaganda arm for any government policy. Blacklisting them only stifles the exchange of cultural knowledge that artists should be the first to defend and protect.”

Share/Save/Bookmark



3 Responses to “Deconstructing: Globe and Mail article on the TIFF boycott”

  1. Polprav Says:

    Hello from Russia!
    Can I quote a post in your blog with the link to you?

  2. caroline Says:

    Sure…why not?

  3. public adjuster Says:

    I understand that Israel has it’s own lobbyist group in washington (AIPAC – gee I wish the citizens of our country had a lobbyist group of their own), and that Israel also receives over 2 billion dollars from the USA annually. Perhaps throwing this insulting monkey wrench into the peace process, was just their way of saying “thanks”. After all this, there are still some people who say “they’re our closest ally in the region”. Want another tired old saying? …With friends like these…and I am Israeli!

Leave a Reply