Politics – January 2013
Support is sought to facilitate the work of the Middle East Study Group. Information at http://www2.hull.ac.uk/fass/
I also welcome promoting the two-state solution. See http://www.hull.ac.uk/rca/
~ President Obama Inaugural Speech (January 21, 2013)
One scratch on the wall is just a scratch. Many thousands of scratches, however, may change the shape of the wall.
~Raphael Cohen-Almagor
I have started a petition for a two-state solution. Please consider signing: http://www.change.org/en-GB/
Please feel free to circulate.
Comments on Petition for Two-state Solution
Views of the Israeli Public on Israeli Security
Syria
Jordan
Documentary – The Gatekeepers
My New Article - “Two-State Solution – The Way Forward”
Book Review – Israel’s Palestinians
New Books
Gem of the Month – One Man, Two Guvnors
Monthly Poems
Light Side
Israeli Elections
On January 22, 2013 (my wedding anniversary), elections were held for the 19th
Knesset. 32 political lists competed for seats. With the proviso that
not all votes were counted until the time of writing, 12 of them entered
the Knesset. The clear winner was PM Netanyahu, whose party Likud
Beitenu, received 31 seats.
Second
came Yesh Atid (There Is Future), the wild card of the elections with
19 seats. Yesh Atid is headed by Yair Lapid, a journalist and television
personality, who followed the footsteps of his father Tomy Lapid who
had a similar career: journalist, then TV personality, then politician.
Lapid brings a refreshing face, youth appealing to youth and to women,
flexible agenda, zero experience in politics, eighteen new faces to the
Knesset, and a social agenda that relates to education and
state/religion issues. Lapid said before the elections that he was quite
willing to sit in Netanyahu’s government.
Yair Lapid
Yesh
Atid was victorious in several cities in Israel. Lapid should invest in
opening branches in those cities and compete in coming local elections.
His list includes two local leaders.
Third came the disappointed Labour, with 15 seats. Shelli Yehimovich hoped for at least 20 mandates. Apparently 5 of them went to Lapid and Livni (below).
Jewish
Home, the hard-line, nationalistic and religious party, headed by
another new (and quite scary) face and very old, chauvinistic agenda -- Naftali Bennett,
came a joint fourth with 11 seats. I think many of the former moderate
and sensible leaders of the Mafdal would turn in their graves hearing Mr
Bennett. The only moderate thing in Mr Bennett is his haircut. Wise he
is not.
Shas, the Sephardi ultra religious party, also received 11 seats.
Ultra religious Yahaduth Hatorah received 7 seats.
Hatnuah, Tzipi Livni’s party, and my party, Meretz-the Civil Rights Party, received 6 seats each.
Three Palestinian parties – Raam, Hadash and Balad received 5, 4 and 3 seats. There combined power is 12.
Lastly,
Kadima, headed by Shaul Mofaz, barely made it with 2 seats (the
entrance threshold is 2% of the vote). Ariel Sharon’s Forward (Kadima in
Hebrew) certainly went backwards. A question for Mofaz: What is better:
to be a leader of a 2-seat party, or to be second in a 9-seat party?
First observations:
Netanyahu will most probably be the next prime minister.
I
find it hard to believe that he won’t continue his very successful
partnership with Shas and Yahaduth Hatorah. The three parties together
give him 49 seats. He needs at least 61 seats, but will aim for a large
coalition. History showed that narrow coalitions of 61-65 seats tend to
be unstable and open to blackmail as the opposition attempts to lure
some of the shaky members to change allegiance.
Netanyahu
will probably aim to bring Yesh Atid into the coalition. I think he
will be successful. He will then have 68 seats in the Knesset, a stable
coalition. Yesh Atid has plenty of energy and ideas but zero political
experience. With all due respect, Lapid has a lot to learn from
Netanyahu.
Thus,
I expect that for the right rewards, Lapid and the religious parties
will be able to overcome their obvious differences. When there is will
there is a way. This, of course, is bad news for Israel as it means
deadlock. Problematic issues relating to women status in society,
private and personal matters in the most intimate matters of marriage,
divorce, conversion and death will remain in the hands of the few.
Exemption from army service to Yeshiva buchers will remain intact. No
separation between State and religion.
Coalition partnership with other parties is a bonus.
There
are some good news for the Israel center-left. It seems that the
Israeli society returned to have equilibrium between the two blocs. The
combined power of Yesh Atid, Labour, Livni, Meretz, Kadima and the
Palestinian parties is 60 seats, exactly half of the Knesset, to match
the 60 seats of the right – Likud Beitenu, Jewish Home, Shas and
Yahaduth Hatorah.
Theoretically,
if Lapid, Labour and Livni were to run together, they would have come
victorious, and President Peres would have called upon them to comprise
the coalition. This should be a lesson for future elections, and the
challenge for the next leader of the Israeli center-left.
These
are great news because it shows that there are enough sane voices in
Israeli society who see beyond sheer force, the building of settlements,
and Am Levadad Yishkon (meaning in Hebrew, and please excuse the
language, Fuck the Goyim; we will do what we want and we don’t care what
the world is saying). This should be a clear enough message for
Netanyahu.
A
leader, any elected leader, represents the entire society, not only
those who elected him. The challenge for any leader, and the recipe for a
continued leadership, is to achieve unity. Let me quote President
Obama:
You
and I, as citizens, have the power to set this country's course. You
and I, as citizens, have the obligation to shape the debates of our time
-- not only with the votes we cast, but with the voices we lift in
defense of our most ancient values and enduring ideals.
Let
us, each of us, now embrace with solemn duty and awesome joy what is
our lasting birthright. With common effort and common purpose, with
passion and dedication, let us answer the call of history and carry into
an uncertain future that precious light of freedom.
In
his inspiring Inaugural Speech made a day prior the Israeli elections
(January 21, 2013), President Obama also said the following words that
ring true to many liberal Israelis, who share the same values of the
great Judeo-Christian tradition:
For
our journey is not complete until our wives, our mothers and daughters
can earn a living equal to their efforts. Our journey is not complete
until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under
the law -- for if we are truly created equal, then surely the love we
commit to one another must be equal as well... Our journey is not
complete until we find a better way to welcome the striving, hopeful
immigrants… until bright young students and engineers are enlisted in
our workforce rather than expelled from our country. Our journey is not
complete until all our children… know that they are cared for and
cherished and always safe from harm.
And lastly, it is worth reiterating:
We, the people, still believe that enduring security and lasting peace do not require perpetual war.
Amen.
Comments on Petition for Two-state Solution
Professor Naomi Chazan wrote from Jerusalem that I should change the phrase “Palestinian Authority” to Palestine.
I did.
I was asked:
A
2-state-solution could, theoretically, entail a Palestinian state in,
say, Jericho, and an Israeli state that encompasses all the rest,
correct? Or is the ambiguity part of the plan?
To which I answered:
Petitions
are concise. It is about promoting an idea. I agree with you that the
devil is in the details, but this will come later. It is not that I am
ignoring details. I am not. Just one step at the time. At the moment we
are far away from any reconciliation.
The question is simple: Do you foresee any other solution but a two-state solution?
If
you think another solution is preferable (one state; three states;
continued occupation; transfer; Palestine in Jordan; the Iranian option
or any other option), do not sign. If you think that the most viable
option is a two-state solution, please consider signing.
Michal Anosh wrote:
Shalom Rafi, I think the situation in the ME is too unstable at this time to push for such a statement. I personally believe that many Palestinians would prefer to get on with their lives and would appreciate the more stable and accountable form of democratic government within Israel, but this is not the reality in either the West Bank or Gaza. My own recommendation would be a 3 state solution - wherein Gaza becomes its own entity and could make a great economic development of its own serving tourists and greenhouse garden products for Europe. Meanwhile the West Bank and Israel could be the financial and economic development platform for the rest of the moribund economies of the ME where an estimated 80 million unemployed Arabs will come of age by 2020 in a context where there is no possibility of entrepreneurship to create jobs of them. We just need to get rid of Hamas and Fatah...or maybe the people will be able to do that as the economic situations get more dire and Arab states renege on funding. So...here's how crazy I am...comments welcome. M
We could wait for the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan to collapse. Then you will have a de-facto Palestinian State on the east Bank of the Jordan River
When the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan collapses (and it's inevitable) there will be a de-Facto Palestinian State on the east bank of the Jordan River. The question is, what obligations will they have towards their brethren on the West Bank of the Jordan River. Hopefully they can be persuaded to offer them citizenship in the new Palestinian State of Jordan. Then Palestinians of the West Bank (if they don't opt to move) can simply be permanent residents of Israel, and citizens of Jordan. What Israel ought to be doing is creating structures and institutions on the ground that can facilitate this eventuality.
As my mom once told me when, as a 6 year old I asked for sprinkles AND whipped cream on my Ice Cream, "Nehemia, you can't always get what you want".
Exchange with Lindsay Talmud
Dear Raphael,
I don't know if you remember me. We met at a conference in Turkey a few
years ago. I have been reading your regular e-letters with interest since
then.
I want to express my view with regard to your current campaign to obtain
signatures in order to petition the "Governments of Israel and the
Palestinian Authority: Sign a peace treaty on the basis of two-state
solution."
While I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiment that "enough blood has been
shed," I believe there are problems with your approach at two levels.
First, the idea of a "solution" is misconceived. The resolution of the
Palestine/Israel conflict needs to be process-oriented and not
solution-oriented. All sort of solutions, plans and road maps have been
proposed in the past and they have not worked. The alternative is the South
African and the Irish conflict resolution model: once both parties to the
conflict, the Palestinians and the Israelis, reach the point where they are
determined to resolve the conflict between them, they will enter a process
of negotiations where issues will be resolved. And all preconceptions about
the outcome will only stymie the process.
Second, the division of the land between the Mediterranean Sea and the
Jordan River into two viable, sovereign states is no longer possible. It
might have been possible once; it no longer is. We have missed that train. I
will not elaborate. I'll refer you instead to writings, etc. of Eyal
Weizman, Meron Benvenisti, Rashid Khalidi, Sari Nusseibeh, Omar Barghouti,
Ruby Rivlin and Moshe Ahrens.
We all recognize that this is an intractable conflict. However, it can be
resolved, but only when the two parties finally decide to do so. Until then
nothing will stop the bloodshed.
Regards,
Lindsay Talmud
I don't know if you remember me. We met at a conference in Turkey a few
years ago. I have been reading your regular e-letters with interest since
then.
I want to express my view with regard to your current campaign to obtain
signatures in order to petition the "Governments of Israel and the
Palestinian Authority: Sign a peace treaty on the basis of two-state
solution."
While I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiment that "enough blood has been
shed," I believe there are problems with your approach at two levels.
First, the idea of a "solution" is misconceived. The resolution of the
Palestine/Israel conflict needs to be process-oriented and not
solution-oriented. All sort of solutions, plans and road maps have been
proposed in the past and they have not worked. The alternative is the South
African and the Irish conflict resolution model: once both parties to the
conflict, the Palestinians and the Israelis, reach the point where they are
determined to resolve the conflict between them, they will enter a process
of negotiations where issues will be resolved. And all preconceptions about
the outcome will only stymie the process.
Second, the division of the land between the Mediterranean Sea and the
Jordan River into two viable, sovereign states is no longer possible. It
might have been possible once; it no longer is. We have missed that train. I
will not elaborate. I'll refer you instead to writings, etc. of Eyal
Weizman, Meron Benvenisti, Rashid Khalidi, Sari Nusseibeh, Omar Barghouti,
Ruby Rivlin and Moshe Ahrens.
We all recognize that this is an intractable conflict. However, it can be
resolved, but only when the two parties finally decide to do so. Until then
nothing will stop the bloodshed.
Regards,
Lindsay Talmud
Dear Lindsay,
I
agree that the conflict can be resolved only when the two parties
finally decide to do so. I think this petition is a step in the right
direction, leading to the parties agreeing to do so. We should not be
passive. I believe that one scratch on the wall is only a scratch. Many
thousands of scratches, however, may change the shape of the wall.
Best wishes
Rafi
As much as I respect your sense that "We should not be passive," I cannot sign your petition and that is why I wrote to you.
I
do not want to support petitions or perpetuate attitudes that entrench
what I see as a misguided mind-set and that stand in the way of
potential change. I believe that continued talk of the chimerical
"two-state solution" serves essentially as an escape from current
reality for some people and a reinforcement of the status quo for others. From my perspective it's counter-productive, not a scratch on the wall.
To my mind the unacceptable status quo
will remain unchanged unless there is a fundamental paradigm shift
within the ruling elites in Israel/Palestine. Accepting that the
"two-state solution" is no longer possible is a necessary step in the
direction of that shift.
Regards,
Lindsay
Dear Lindsay
I am campaigning for a two-state solution precisely because I wish to change the status quo, certainly not to enforce it. The status quo
disserves both Israeli and Palestinian interests. While Abu Mazen tries
to change it in a way that would lead to the creation of a Palestinian
state, my government is bolstering settlements.
The
Israeli government thinks that somehow Israel could continue the
occupation forever; that the Palestinians will have some sort of
sovereignty in the Ramallah area, and that parts of the West Bank will
eventually be annexed to Israel with as few Palestinians as possible.
This is a recipe for an endless cycle of violence.
I
do not think the Israeli government is determined to resolve the
conflict. This is even truer for Hamas. I am not sure about Abu Mazen.
Should we just wait for the Israeli and Hamas leaders to wake up?
Passivity is not my nature. I believe in action, in doing. We must
contribute our share and act upon our beliefs.
It
is unclear to me what solution you have in mind. I suspect it is a
one-state solution. As a Zionist who cares deeply for the continued
existence of one Jewish state in the world, I prefer two-state solution.
Best wishes
Rafi
Views of the Israeli Public on Israeli Security and Resolution of the Arab-Israeli Conflict
Poll conducted in December 2012 by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs / Dahaf Institute Survey shows:
76% of Israelis (83% of Jews) believe that a withdrawal to the 1967 lines and a division of Jerusalem would not bring about an end of the conflict.
61% of the Jewish population believes that defensible borders are more important than peace for assuring Israel’s security (up from 49% in 2005).
78% of Jews indicated they would change their vote if the party they intended to support indicated that it was prepared to relinquish sovereignty in east Jerusalem. 59% of Jews said the same about the Jordan Valley.
Syria
I
have been calling for international involvement in Syria for more than a
year now. President Obama seems to fail to understand that things do
not remain in vacuum and that it is better for western influence to fill
the void than al Qaeda.
Jordan
The Hashemite Kingdom is shaky. Watch for developments. They may happen any day now.
Documentary – The Gatekeepers
Dror Moreh’s film, which won the U.S. National Society of Film Critics' award for best documentary, extracts frank admissions and fascinating analysis from the former Shin Bet chiefs.
Moreh
interviews them on delicate issues: fighting terrorism; suicide
bombing; targeted assassinations; the Jewish Underground; Bus 300
Affair; the Palestinian Intifada; Yitzhak Rabin’s assassination.
The
six people who were interviewed for "The Gatekeepers" (about 12 hours
interview each; the film is 90 minutes long) dispatched people at risk
to their own lives into enemy territory. The six approved brutal
interrogations of security detainees. They convinced people to betray
their own homelands and ordered a number of assassinations. In the film,
they speak openly about the implications of the occupation on Israeli
society; the penetration of violent norms into Israeli life. One of them
compared the IDF to the German army in occupied Europe. They speak of
the need to speak to our enemies and resolve the conflict before it
reaches a point of no return, when it would be too late. This, they
acknowledge, requires boldness and resolute decision-making process,
willingness to hold the bull by the horns and pay the price. Does Israel
have the required leadership to do this? Is peace more than wishful
thinking? Are Israeli and Palestinian children doom to suffer for the
rest of their lives?
Watch the trailer at http://www.algemeiner.com/
My New Article
“Two-State Solution – The Way Forward”, Annual Review of Law and Ethics, Vol. 20 (2012), pp. 381-395.
Abstract
In
November 2011, I launched my fourth campaign which is arguably the most
difficult of all but like the former three is much needed. This campaign calls for a two state solution. I believe this is the only true option for both Israel and Palestine. I believe it is a just and necessary solution.
Only
a fair solution for both sides will be successful. A partial solution,
or a solution that favours one side over another would leave the other
side frustrated and angry. It won’t work.
The article is available at http://www.hull.ac.uk/rca/
I am indebted to my good friend, Professor Jan Joerden, for facilitating this publication.
Part of this article was already republished: Regional Study RS86B: A two state solution: an Israeli view with Palestinian perspectives. “Beyond the Taba Promise”, The UK Defence Forum (2013), http://www.ukdf.org.uk/assets/
Book Review – Israel’s Palestinians
Ilan Peleg and Dov Waxman, Israel's Palestinians (NY: Cambridge University Press, 2011), 272 pages. $28.00. ISBN: 978-0521157025.
Israel Affairs (January 2013),
This
is to date the most comprehensive and important discussion on the
Palestinian position in Israeli society. It explains the reasons for
their discrimination by the establishment since the founding of the
state in 1948 until today, the magnitude of the discrimination, and its
consequences. The authors propose practical reforms to better the
condition of the Palestinians in Israeli society, to decrease and
eliminate discrimination, and consequently to mitigate the tension
between the Jewish majority and the Palestinian minority. The proposals
are well reasoned and constructive. Their importance cannot be
underestimated. I share with the authors the sense of moral urgency.
Discriminating some twenty percent of society on a systematic basis due
to national-religious reasons is both immoral and destructive. Such
discrimination undermines the democratic foundations of Israel of which
its leaders are so proud. Israel should strive to see that all its
citizens, without exception, feel at home in their country and that they
share enough to sustain a common creed that is believed to be valuable
and worthwhile. Necessary accommodations are in need to make Israel a
vital democracy in the international community of nations. These
accommodations will be instrumental also in resolving the wider Israeli
Palestinian conflict concerning the Palestinian brethren in the West
Bank and the Gaza Strip.
Chapter
1 analyses the Palestinian internal composition, its collective
identity and socio-economic status. Around 50 percent of the Arab
population lives in poverty. The authors note that the poverty rate
among Arab families has significantly increased since the 1990s, rising
from 35 percent in 1990 to 45 percent in 2002 (p. 35). Arabs have
generally held the low-wage jobs in Israeli economy. On average, Arab
men earn 60 percent of the national average wage, while Arab women earn
70 percent of the average wage (pp. 36-37). Arab citizens are
discriminated in having access to land, in land planning, in rural and
urban development, and in housing provisions. Arabs own only 3.5 percent
of Israel’s lands (pp. 40-41). Arab municipalities are not allocated
comparable funding granted to Jewish municipalities (p. 43).
Chapter
2 discusses the changes in the Palestinian political behaviour over
time -- from passivity to activity. Chapter 3 argues that the
Palestinians became more militant in their political conduct in recent
years. Chapter 4 shows that Jewish-Palestinian relations have
deteriorated in recent years, putting the Jewish majority and the
Palestinian minority on a collision course. Once the nature and
magnitude of the conflict within Israel is clarified, Peleg and Waxman
turn to discuss how to manage the conflict. While the discussion is
interesting and important as the authors make valuable suggestions, its
organisation can be improved. Suddenly in chapter 5, Peleg and Waxman
reflect on Israel's formative years to show how the state became a
Jewish republic. I think this discussion should have opened the book.
Then, in chapter 6, multicultural theories are discussed. Why then? Why
not earlier? What is the point in reflecting on them? The theories are
mentioned but not employed to analyse the case study at hand.
Chapter
7 is the most interesting and important part of the book, offering
practical ways to improve the status, rights and conditions of the
Israeli-Palestinians. Inter alia, the authors propose to
establish a Palestinian functional autonomy; appointing Palestinians to
significant power positions; abolish the systematic discrimination
against Palestinians; amend the Israeli anthem so that the Palestinian
citizens could identify with it; resolving the problems of land and
housing that create constant friction between Palestinians and Israeli
authorities; introducing Basic Law: Equal Citizenship, and strengthening
the status of Arabic in the nation. Finally, in chapter 8, Peleg and
Waxman map Israeli society and the Jewish population’s willingness to
accept their constructive proposals, implicitly acknowledging that their
views represent minority view of about 7 to 8 percent of the
Jewish-Israeli population. They warn that unless dramatic action is
taken to remedy the present illiberal situation, the Jewish majority and
the Palestinian minority are on a confrontation course.
At the end of the book the reader finds updated bibliography and useful index.[1]
This
book is a valuable resource to scholars, students, and policy makers
who wish to understand the Jewish-Palestinian rift in Israel and who
seek ways to resolve it.
New Books
Linda T. Darling, A History of Social Justice and Political Power in the Middle East (London and New York: Routledge, 2013).
From ancient Mesopotamia into the 20th
century, "the Circle of Justice" as a concept has pervaded Middle
Eastern political thought and underpinned the exercise of power in the
Middle East. The Circle of Justice depicts graphically how a
government’s justice toward the population generates political power,
military strength, prosperity, and good administration.
This
book traces this set of relationships from its earliest appearance in
the political writings of the Sumerians through four millennia of Middle
Eastern culture. It explores how people conceptualized and acted upon
this powerful insight, how they portrayed it in symbol, painting, and
story, and how they transmitted it from one regime to the next. Moving
towards the modern day, the author shows how, although the Circle of
Justice was largely dropped from political discourse, it did not
disappear from people’s political culture and expectations of
government. The book demonstrates the Circle’s relevance to the Iranian
Revolution and the rise of Islamist movements all over the Middle East,
and suggests how the concept remains relevant in an age of capitalism.
Contents include: Mesopotamia: "That the Strong Might Not Oppress the Weak";
Persia: "The Deeds God Likes Best are Righteousness and Justice";
The Islamic Empire: "No Prosperity without Justice and Good Administration";
The Turks and Islamic Civilization: "The Most Penetrating of Arrows is the Prayer of the Oppressed";
Mongols and Turks: "Fierce toward Offenders, and in Judgements Just";
The Middle East in the Twentieth Century: "A Regime Can Endure with Impiety but not with Injustice".
I thank Routledge for a copy of this book.
Peri Roberts and Peter Sutch, An Introduction to Political Thought (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2012).
This
book tries in 340 pages to introduce to interested people a wide range
of philosophies, from Plato and Aristotle to contemporary thinkers:
Walzer, Kymlicka and Parekh. I let you decide whether the authors were
successful in achieving their aim of providing a succinct analysis of
the complicated philosophies.
I thank EUP for a copy of this book.
Monthly Poems
Our Life and Four Seasons
Birth years and spring days
how it all begins to liven up
we see the light of day
and spring begins to lighten our days
Summer days and younger years
days are longer and we are stronger
summer blooms with the warmth of the sun
we bloom with knowledge and love
The fall and mid age
Fall arrives and tries to hold on to the warmth
of the summer
we try to hold on, to our youth and knowledge
fall felt the heat of summer
and then starts to feel, the cold freeze of winter
Mid life seen the joy of youth and hopes
to see the old age of wisdom
Old age and winter
our steps are shorter
and so are the days
winter will end and so will we
to a new beginning and in time
Or
to the holy land
forever and ever amen
Vasco M. Resendes
Birth years and spring days
how it all begins to liven up
we see the light of day
and spring begins to lighten our days
Summer days and younger years
days are longer and we are stronger
summer blooms with the warmth of the sun
we bloom with knowledge and love
The fall and mid age
Fall arrives and tries to hold on to the warmth
of the summer
we try to hold on, to our youth and knowledge
fall felt the heat of summer
and then starts to feel, the cold freeze of winter
Mid life seen the joy of youth and hopes
to see the old age of wisdom
Old age and winter
our steps are shorter
and so are the days
winter will end and so will we
to a new beginning and in time
Or
to the holy land
forever and ever amen
Vasco M. Resendes
Instants
If I could live again my life,
In the next - I'll try,
- to make more mistakes,
I won't try to be so perfect,
I'll be more relaxed,
I'll be more full - than I am now,
In fact, I'll take fewer things seriously,
I'll be less hygenic,
I'll take more risks,
I'll take more trips,
I'll watch more sunsets,
I'll climb more mountains,
I'll swim more rivers,
I'll go to more places - I've never been,
I'll eat more ice creams and less (lime) beans,
I'll have more real problems - and less imaginary
ones,
I was one of those people who live
prudent and prolific lives -
each minute of his life,
Of course that I had moments of joy - but,
if I could go back I'll try to have only good moments,
If you don't know - thats what life is made of,
Don't lose the now!
I was one of those who never goes anywhere
without a thermometer,
without a hot-water bottle,
and without an umbrella and without a parachute,
If I could live again - I will travel light,
If I could live again - I'll try to work bare feet
at the beginning of spring till
the end of autumn,
I'll ride more carts,
I'll watch more sunrises and play with more children,
If I have the life to live - but now I am 85,
- and I know that I am dying ...
Jorge Luis Borges
If I could live again my life,
In the next - I'll try,
- to make more mistakes,
I won't try to be so perfect,
I'll be more relaxed,
I'll be more full - than I am now,
In fact, I'll take fewer things seriously,
I'll be less hygenic,
I'll take more risks,
I'll take more trips,
I'll watch more sunsets,
I'll climb more mountains,
I'll swim more rivers,
I'll go to more places - I've never been,
I'll eat more ice creams and less (lime) beans,
I'll have more real problems - and less imaginary
ones,
I was one of those people who live
prudent and prolific lives -
each minute of his life,
Of course that I had moments of joy - but,
if I could go back I'll try to have only good moments,
If you don't know - thats what life is made of,
Don't lose the now!
I was one of those who never goes anywhere
without a thermometer,
without a hot-water bottle,
and without an umbrella and without a parachute,
If I could live again - I will travel light,
If I could live again - I'll try to work bare feet
at the beginning of spring till
the end of autumn,
I'll ride more carts,
I'll watch more sunrises and play with more children,
If I have the life to live - but now I am 85,
- and I know that I am dying ...
Jorge Luis Borges
I LOVE theatre. Theatre is my greatest passion. And of all genres I prefer comedy. The problem, however, that good comedies are in short supply. There are many productions that present themselves as “comedies” but most of them are funny like a graveyard. I rather watch grass grow.
Thus, when there are rumours about comedies, I check them very carefully before I decide to take my chances. One Man, Two Guvnors is a joy to watch. It is not particularly witty or refined, with the famous, dry, cynical British humour. If you insist on that, don’t bother. But if you are less picky and able to relish down-to-earth fun, this one is for you. One Man, Two Guvnors is very entertaining, with many scenes and lines in-your-face, so to speak. Not very elegant or sophisticated, but very effective.
Richard Bean, the playwright, was born in East Hull (one of the best known parts of the city, for the wrong reasons) in 1956. Bean took Carlo Goldoni’s The Servant of Two Masters (1746) and adopted it, with wild interpretation, to Brighton 1963. Bean’ s strength is in the portrayal of characters, and in setting the scenes. The characters are not deep or sophisticated. They are simple, black-and-white, easy to follow and understand. The blond is dumb. The lawyer wants money. The gangster relishes violence. The old waiter is old. The aspiring actor is aspiring. The confused servant is very confused. Everyone wants love and to be loved. Everything is melodramatic, stretched to absurdity, and old-fashioned fun.
I loved Nicholas Hytner’s impeccable production, the joy of the actors, their free spirited laugh, the unabashed slapstick, and the splendid 1960s music from “The Craze”. The band came onstage even before the show, in appropriate clothing, and continued to perform throughout.
I liked the way that the actors involved the audience, or were said to involve the audience. The confusion continues off-stage as well...
But above all, I truly and whole-heartedly enjoyed Owain Arthur’s performance as the lovable buffoon Francis Henshall, the confused servant who cannot decide whether he likes better: eating or making love, who finds himself for the first time in his life employed by two people who he thinks, quite wrongly, must be kept apart at all costs.
I warmly recommend. Two entertaining hours.
You can see some scenes, from another production, at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?
Light Side
I often feel guilty
Sheri,
a pretty nurse took her troubles to a resident psychiatrist in the
hospital where she worked. "Doctor, you must help me," she pleaded.
"It's gotten so that every time I date one of the young doctors here, I
end up sleeping with him. And then afterward, I feel guilty and
depressed for a week."
"I see," nodded the psychiatrist. "And you, no doubt, want me to strengthen your will power and resolve in this matter."
"NO!!!" exclaimed the nurse. "I want you to fix it so I won't feel guilty and depressed afterward!"
"I see," nodded the psychiatrist. "And you, no doubt, want me to strengthen your will power and resolve in this matter."
"NO!!!" exclaimed the nurse. "I want you to fix it so I won't feel guilty and depressed afterward!"
Peace and love.
Yours as ever,
Rafi
My last communications are available on http://almagor.blogspot.com/
Earlier posts at my home page: http://hcc.haifa.ac.il/~rca/
People wishing to subscribe to this Monthly Newsletter are welcome to e-mail me at r.cohen-almagor@hull.ac.uk
Earlier posts at my home page: http://hcc.haifa.ac.il/~rca/
People wishing to subscribe to this Monthly Newsletter are welcome to e-mail me at r.cohen-almagor@hull.ac.uk
Follow me on Twitter at @almagor35
[1] For further discussion, see R. Cohen-Almagor (ed.), Israeli Democracy at the Crossroads (London: Routledge, 2005); Israeli Institutions at the Crossroads (London: Routledge, 2005), and “Israel and International Human Rights”, Encyclopedia of Human Rights, ed. Frederick P. Forsythe (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009), Vol. 3, pp. 247-257.
