Robbie Gringras

About Page

That's Why I'm (Still) Here

About The Oranges

The Gift and other stories

Shabbes

Consultancy

Workshops and Lectures

Contact Page

Blog

 

Why d'you wanna go and put stars in their eyes?

Written for Makom - the Israel Engagement Network.

First appeared at www.makomisrael.net

 A great song came out of Britain a few months back, full of Anglo-Saxon wit and glottal stops, lamenting the instant-celebrity culture of the early 21st century. The song contrasts the dreams of stardom pumped up by the popular media and 'reality' TV, with the modest joys of karaoke in the pub on a Saturday night.  Here in Israel we have similar issues, with TV shows such as A Star is Born, Dancing with the Stars, and The Next Big Thing doing their very best to dumb down the culture of this complex and dynamic society. Huge amounts of airtime and internet space are devoted to one of the rare forms of democracy that seems to satisfy Israel: the phone-in vote for your favourite nobody. The talented and the talentless line up expecting to realize the artificial dreams pushed on them by promoters and the surrounding culture.  Poisoned StarsThe song, Starz in Their Eyes, with its cute little 'z', gained a surprising amount of air-play on the radio here. It clearly struck a chord... In Israel collective aspirations have always been a powerful force in our society. Irrespective of the huge ratings gained by all these 'get famous quick' shows, our young people are still poisoned by the far more serious social pressures of serving in the army. The word 'poisoned' is not used here by way of comment. When a young man is eager or happy to serve in a combat unit, and will brook little critique of the army ethic, he is said to be 'poisoned'. Among Israeli youth this is not necessarily a derogatory term, often seen to be synonymous with the more ambivalent 'infected'. In Israel poison is a concept in flux, often used with pride, admiration, and feelings of belonging. Though it is also, like most poison, sometimes lethal. I came to think about this a great deal last week, when I attended the funeral of a young soldier who was killed in a battle with Islamic Jihad terrorists. The hill-side pine forest of Misgav cemetery was full of the scent of wild hyssop, and the sound of cicadas, speeches, and sobbing. A beautiful son of the Galil had 'gone to his world', as the Hebrew phrase has it. His childhood friend stumbled up to the microphone to give his eulogy. The loudspeakers amplified his heavy breathing, almost as if he'd run several miles to reach the funeral, though we all knew he was just trying not to break, still winded from the terrible emotional blow to his heart. He described a friend who had always been ahead of the pack. Just like his proud father before him, this young man had always aimed to serve in a top-notch combat unit. Initially he'd actually been refused entry, but had fought his way into the unit nevertheless. Full of love for the land of the Galil, and an admirable sense of communal responsibility, he had fought in Israel's Defense Forces with dedication. But while his best friend painted for us this picture of a strong, committed, mature young man, I began to hear a strange undertone growing under the words. The pain and the regret began to work against the story he was telling. He struggled to the end of his eulogy, bestowing on his dead friend the ultimate compliment and accusation. "You died," he stumbled, "a Hero." He almost shouted the word, and the implied ambivalence of the word 'Hero' echoed throughout the forest-clearing. He had paid the ultimate compliment to his deceased friend, while the timbre of his voice had cried: Fool. Making mistakesIt would seem that fewer and fewer young people are choosing to be 'foolish'. The innocent enthusiasm which once drew our youth to the conscription centers, is no longer. It's now official: a quarter of eligible males in Israel avoid the draft. If we include the 'ineligible' - Arabs and Ultra-Orthodox - then our People's Army is in fact only an Army of half the people, as newly-re-appointed Defense Minister Ehud Barak commented bitterly last week.  With uncanny timing, in the same week that the army released their annual conscription figures, the excellent Israeli war movie, Beaufort came out on DVD. It is an stark and striking film, set immediately prior to the Lebanon withdrawal in 2000, constantly asking 'why' and 'what for' through its action and images. An early scene features a telling dialogue between two soldiers serving at an exposed and endangered military fortress deep in enemy territory: - So are you here because you wanted to be here, or was it a mistake? - It was a mistake. But to be honest, I have no regrets. And what about you? - I wanted to be here. That was the mistake…  More than anything this disturbing film leaves us not only with questions about the motivation of the soldiers, but about the motivation of their parents. The withdrawal of Israel's army from Lebanon in 2000 was, if not brought about then certainly colored by, the grass roots movement led by four mothers. They deliberately labeled themselves as such, not as a post-feminist statement, but more so as to ensure the soldiers would in turn be labeled as 'children', rather than as military collateral. One of the more powerful moments in the film is when the father of a soldier we see killed early in the movie is interviewed on television. Speaking with excruciating honesty and vulnerability, he blames himself. He blames himself for 'not looking after' his son. Clearly the point he is making is that you don't 'look after' your children by encouraging them to be soldiers. Bombs and bullets are not the kind of starz you want to put in their eyes.  The battle for the armyAs Michael Billig so succinctly observed: "All societies that maintain armies maintain the belief that some things are more valuable than life itself" (Banal Nationalism, 1995). While questions still rage over whether the Israeli army itself had been sufficiently maintained during last year's war (many soldiers returned from Lebanon with demoralizing tales of going days without food or water, lacking basic equipment and ammunition) the more fundamental fight is being waged, over maintaining belief in army service itself.  Settlers who insisted on the obligation of left-wing secular soldiers to guard settlements in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) despite their ideological misgivings, now encourage religious soldiers to refuse to facilitate their evacuation. Radical leftists who urged conscientious objection to policing the occupation (Our Biblical Homeland), now watch in horror as their desire to dismantle Jewish settlements may be rendered impossible by the religious soldiers' conscientious objections of their own. And beyond all this are all those young people who simply don't care. Worn out by diplomatic dead ends, worn down by political corruption, swimming in what Zygmunt Bauman terms the liquidity of 21st century life, these young people prefer to vote for A Star is Born than in the local elections. When asking themselves what is more valuable than life itself, they find it hard to come up with an answer. And so they exploit the many loopholes available to avoid army service altogether.  The back-lash has begun. Battling not politically but culturally, those concerned about the demise of army service are attacking no other than A Star is Born. Recognizing that we now live in a community whose thinking is "aesthetically, rather than ethically, operated" (Bauman, Community, 2001), they have chosen to kick where it hurts: in the aesthetics. A significant media campaign is now being waged, calling on viewers not to vote for those contestants on A Star is Born who did not serve in the army. Four of the leading contestants have been singled out, and one has already been voted off the show. The fight is on to ensure that the eyes of our youngsters should be dazzled by heroism and sacrifice, and not by footlights and paparazzi. The escape-arena of reality TV and talent contests has itself become poisoned. As always in this place I find myself disagreeing with both sides. I know that not every Palestinian is a terrorist. I am even happy to be convinced that not every Palestinian even supports terrorism. But I also know that terrorists there are, and when an Islamic Jihadist wishes to enter Israel in order to blow up (my?) children, I am greatly reassured to know that a courageous, poisoned young Israeli boy is around to make sure that he will fail. Fictional KhakiIt has become fashionable in the Israel Engagement field to attempt to emphasize the 'normality' of life in Israel. We often hear that young people are 'tired of soldiers and wars', and so we are urged to find other topics with which to engage them. Entire educational and cultural programs are built in order to celebrate the 'normality beyond the conflict'. More and more I find myself convinced that there is no such thing. This place is fascinating, dynamic, challenging, and crucial, but it is not 'normal' in any Western sense of the word. As long as we succumb to the desires of our 'clients', and present a picture of Israel with all khaki colors filtered out, we are collaborating in a fiction, however pleasant.  Not that fictions are always a bad thing. While Beaufort is based on true events, Nina's Tragedies is a delightful and highly successful fictional feature film from 2003. It is by no means a war film, but the main plot catalyst in this whimsical, nuanced rite-of-passage movie is the visit of an army unit charged with the task of informing relatives of the death of their loved one. This unit, in its cramped car, pops up throughout the background of the film, and finally greets death with life as it stops to give a lift to a woman in labor. The army runs through Nina's Tragedies like water, invisible yet fundamental as air. If fictions are what we collaborate in, it should be in fictions like this that reveal the unseen, rather than hiding the unavoidable.   By Robbie Gringras, whose advanced age on making aliya meant he was never called up...

Tags: army, beaufort, israel, nina, soldiers, star is born


0 Comments | Add Comment | Permalink

Eurovisionland

In Eurovisionland, things like this aren't supposed to happen. In Eurovisionland everybody is smiling, all songs are catchy, and boom boom bingabang is a challenging lyric. This year, it's all going to be different. And it's all Israel's fault.

The Eurovision Song Contest is Europe's leading annual song contest, drawing huge numbers of viewers, and the continent's greatest musical talent. Every country selects their own favourite original song, and sends off their hero to compete for the crown of the best song in Europe that year. Unlike American Idol, the emphasis here is on the song-writing itself, and not necessarily on the performer.

Though most winners are catchy to the point of banal - songs that you hate yourself for unconsciously humming - some stars have emerged from Eurovisionland. For example, Abba made their international debut at Eurovision 1974. Waterloo won top marks (or what Eurovision junkies call douze points), and the rest is Broadway history. Remember that jaunty crooners' classic, Volare? Covered by everyone from Frank Sinatra to David Bowie, this infuriating Italian song was Eurovision runner-up in 1958.

Israel and a Vision of Europe

 

Nobody fully understands why, but for the last thirty years or so, Israel has competed in the Eurovision Song contest. It is, in a way, the realisation of the ultimate Zionist dream: Once a year Israel becomes European. This was, after all, the original idea. Theodore Herzl, visionary of the Jewish State and creator of 'political Zionism', had always imagined the national language of Zion would be German, not some strange obsolete desert tongue. The State of Israel was a European creation, Jerusalem town planning owes more to the British than King David, and even Tel Aviv's boulevards feel French. Why else would Tel Aviv's street planners have decided that all roads do not lead to the sea?  Because a self-respecting European city does not have beaches. While even England declares hose-pipe bans after a shortage of rain, Israelis water their grassy Swiss-like lawns throughout the parched summer. No Israeli Environment Minister could ever countenance actually admitting that sand, rocks, and cactus might be a better form of garden for Israelis. Too many European taboos are caught up in this patch of green.

Apart from Europhilia, the other even more surprising reason that Israel loves the Eurovision Song contest, is that it has a habit of winning. We have three winners to our name, and are the only country to win the event twice in a row. That Israeli classic that is now an official mitzvah to sing on Yom Ha'atzmaut with hands clasped high – Halleluyah – was a winning creation for Eurovision 1979. (Complete with the most notorious key-change in modern history).

European Arabs

 

And so when the Teapacks band was chosen to represent Israel this year, it was clear that trouble was afoot. A leading member of Israel's own Eurovision panel, Anastasia Michaeli, had warned that we should not choose as our representative a performer who 'looks Arab'. The logic would seem to be, when in Europe do as the Europeans do. But Michaeli's advice was shunned. The panel chose Teapacks, whose style is Middle Eastern, and whose lead singer-songwriter is Kobi Oz, a North African immigrant from Tunisia.

Kobi Oz (no relative of the writer, Amos) hails from that Jewish ethnic grouping that was once called Sephardi, and that in Israel we call Mizrachi. Literally this means Eastern, or oriental (which is kind of funny since Poland and Russia are both further East than Tunisia). In the end, Mizrachi Jew is just a European euphemism for Arab Jew. The majority of Israel's Jews come from Arab lands – Iraq, Morocco, Yemen. Apparently, as an 'Arab', Kobi Oz should not have been representing Israel in such a European competition.

It is one of the delightful ironies of this constantly surprising country, that Oz sings Teapacks' Eurovision entry in a mixture of English, Hebrew, and – you guessed it - French. As an immigrant from a former French colony, Oz' French is fluent and accentless. No doubt far more European-sounding than the French of Michaeli, who condemned his unsuitability.

Push the Button

 

But this is not the problem. This is not what upset Eurovisionland. The difficulty is that the song that Israel has chosen to represent her this year is a particularly non-Eurovision-sounding song. A cross between hard rock, hip hop, and circus accordion, it is musically eclectic but not beyond the bounds of acceptability. But the words. The lyrics. Now this won't do.

The song is called Push The Button, and it refers to nuclear war. It makes mention of the fact that terrorism is a factor in our lives, and that crazy fanatics have gotten hold of the bomb. In short, it relates to real life.

And Eurovisionland doesn't like relating to real life.

Hence the talk throughout the internet world, of a possible disqualification of this 'political' song. Whether or not Eurovision ever really contemplated banning the song is moot. Reading carefully between the statements from the official Eurovision committee, one gets the impression that public debate over a potential 'ban' and 'censorship' may well have been the creation of a clever Teapacks public relations campaign. What is more interesting to me, is not the response of the Eurovision, but more what this choice of song tells us about the cultural and emotional state of Israel.

A Candle in the Darkness

 

Israel has been happy to play the Eurovision game. In 2002 the 'queen' of popular music in Israel, Sarit Hadad, set off to Estonia to sing her anthem Light a Candle. Written and presented at the height of (and perhaps in response to) the second Intifada, the song schmaltzily called for hope and togetherness. Sarit Hadad was there, flanked by two violinists, clad all in angelic white, and sang Western-style about lighting a million candles in the dark.

Our stereotypes of Israelis might make us wonder how this macho nation could permit such a song to represent the nation's aspirations. But Light a Candle revealed the hidden side to Israeli cultural taste. Don't tell anyone, but Israelis are big on sentimentality. Pathos, tragedy, and bravely smiling through the tears is a resonant mode in this inherently melodramatic place. We will shout rudely, and we will push in line, but we will also shed a tear and raise a lighter with the best of them. In particular if the sadness is related to Israeli suffering. We are good at self-pity, and as we all know, receive more than enough reasons to wallow in it.

We would seem to be a very binary nation. Maybe it's in the water. I'm convinced that it's no coincidence that the black-and-white, dichotomous aspect of the Talmud - the Mishnah - was compiled in Israel, while the more folksy, nuanced and meandering Gemarra grew mostly in exile. There's something about this place that needs, or demands, one thing or the other. And so it is in our taste for art. We consume either sentimentality or satire. It is either white, or it is black. After the experience of Sarit Hadad and other schmaltzers after her, this time we have decided to go black.

Push the Button does not only rage about the threat of nuclear war. It also rants about corruption in Israel, about rockets falling from Gaza, about crime, and even about the weather. Everything is, according to the song, very nearly unbearable. At points the song yearns for peace and quiet, wishing to have "lots of fun just sitting in the sun", but even these breaks in the song are performed ironically, almost parodically. As if these kinds of aspirations, of watching "flowers bloom", are already a silly laughable fantasy. Instead, an ever-accelerating rap of rage interrupts the reverie, almost overtaking its own rhythms, so fast and furious come the images of despair.

Making Nice

 

So what is going on? Why such an aggressive challenge to all things Eurovisional? Well, for one, Israel has had enough of 'making nice' to Europe. The full story of Sarit Hadad's reception still resonates here. There she was, all white and sweet, and at least two broadcasters scoffed at her intentions. "She may be wearing white, but don't be fooled into thinking that Israel wants peace," snarled the Belgian announcer to his viewers. Sarit Singing a Soppy Song had suddenly become a symbol for Israel's genocidal tendencies. While any objective observer might have concluded that the song lost because it was rubbish, every Jew in Eurovisionland was convinced that Yasser Arafat had rigged the voting that year.

So Israel is getting real this year. Kobi Oz, the writer and singer of the song, has never been one to shy away from controversial topics, and proudly maintains that his role as an artist is to raise difficult subjects and to provoke debate. For Oz and his band Teapacks, this is no passing phase. Their work has always pushed buttons, and challenged Israeli audiences – lyrically and musically. Teapacks is seen as the key pioneer of fusions between Middle Eastern (read – Arab) music with more Western styles, and is famed for its nuanced and intelligent outcry at ethnic and economic discrimination in Israel.

But Kobi Oz is capable of writing the sappy stuff, too. He is the one who originally brought Sarit Hadad to fame, writing two of her greatest hits, none of which were great brain-teasers. My favourite features the immortal chorus: "Yalla, go home Motti/Thank you and goodbye /Don't try to call me/ I'll not answer…/So get yourself a life/Cos you ain't got no choice!"

 

So given Kobi Oz' ability to do 'cheesy', why go black and satirical now? More to the point, out of the four songs that Teapacks offered for selection, it was the Israeli public that chose Push the Button. Gentler messages were available, but this year Israel chose despair. Nuclear despair.

Openly or secretly, fears of an Iranian nuclear holocaust have seeped into the Israeli psyche. Last summer's failed war in Lebanon shamed us, and the continued missile attacks from evacuated Gaza have frustrated and confused us, but the Iranian threat is something else.

Iranian Holocaust

 

Israel is a country whose true European roots are not in song contests, but in the Holocaust. The Holocaust, not Herzl, is the real founding myth of Israel. Children are weaned on Holocaust. Entirely ignoring all developmental educational wisdom (perhaps deliberately), there are Holocaust Remembrance events in Israeli nursery schools. Israel's Holocaust narrative insists that from the ashes of the gas chambers was born Israel, and that the question posed by the Holocaust is answered by the existence of Israel's Defence Force. The national Holocaust Memorial service is a military event. Uniforms are worn. In Israel 'Never Again' is not a rally slogan, but military policy.

Israel's military might has always been the pacifier of our Holocaust nightmares. (Indeed, some suggest our Holocaust obsession has distorted our relationship to the IDF. As novelist Sara Shilo commented: "We have yet to internalise the fact that the Israeli army can never be strong enough to defeat the Nazis.") But here we are, faced with possible annihilation from Iran, yet all our military strength – even nuclear – can not save us from destruction. It is not just Bibi Netanyahu who makes comparisons between the current situation and pre-war Germany. Even Benny Morris, pioneer of the New Historians, who would be the first with his back against the wall were Bibi to get his way, even Benny Morris wrote last week that the Iranian Holocaust of the Jews is only a matter of time.

So is it no wonder that Teapacks is screaming. The fascinating aspect is that Teapacks is screaming outside of Israel. In Eurovisionland, of all places. It seems there is an element of defiance in in all. 'So don't vote for us,' the choice of song seems to say, 'See if we care.'

It is difficult to think of a song less likely to win over Eurovisionland. Quite apart from its harsh view of the future, it does not go out of its way to communicate. While the chorus "They're going to Push the Button!" rings out loud and clear, much of the lyrics are almost opaque, filled to bursting with private in-jokes. The song begins with Kobi Oz singing in heavily-accented English. His own English is far better than this: he is parodying Tevye in Fiddler on the Roof. But who would know? Only those who would then laugh at his If-I-Were-A-Rich-Man fear that the world will be "blown to biddy biddy kingdom come." It's difficult to imagine that many Europeans are so familiar with Israeli life as to pick up the references to kidnapped soldiers, corruption in high places, and the discomfort of our hot dry sharav. And for sure they won't pick up the repeated allusion to Israel's 1974 Eurovision entry – Natati La Chayay – I gave her my life.

More and more I begin to look at the creation and choice of this song as a true representation of the Israel I know and admire. Not only because it is a musical overview of all this country's styles, from folk-dance style accordion, to Oriental rhythms, to Western hip hop. But also for the way in which it is true to its cultural context. Push The Button is daring, disturbing, fascinating, and thick with meaning. Like Israel. It seems to say – "I am Israel. I am conflicted, I am scared, I will not lie, and even at the cost of losing your friendship and support I refuse to give up my own authenticity. I will not 'make nice', and I will explain myself only on my own terms. If you want to know me better, you're just going to have to make more of an effort."

Eurovisionland has, for the moment, made its choice. The song will be allowed in the competition. But what about in North America? In our Jewish communities? I wonder whether we have allowed ourselves to ressemble Eurovisionland, stubbornly insisting on singing Halleluya with our eyes closed? Do we have the will and the daring to take on Push the Button as well, in all its uncompromising honesty? For if we do, it will be inside the nuance and echoes of the song that we will find a deeper Israel that is worth getting to know.

<ISML TYPE="counter">


2 Comments | Add Comment | Permalink

Recent Posts

Archives