Freedom of Speech
Jan 18, 2004
Two days ago, the Israelian ambassador in Sweden, Zvi Mazel, attacked a work of art at a Swedish museum. The work of art, entitled Snow White, can be described as a pool of blood, in the middle of which floats a small white ship with a sail. On the sail is a picture of the young female palestinian lawyer, Hanadi Jaradat, who killed herself and at least 19 other people in a suicide attack in October.
The Israelian ambassador explains his attack by saying that the work of art glorified and seeked to justify the acts of the depicted massmurderer.
I have only seen this work of art in a picture, and only because the Israelian ambassador attempted to destroy it (it has been restored). I don't know if the work of art really seeks to glorify or justify the actions of Hanadi Jaradat, or if the Israelian ambassador just interpreted it that way.
The Israelian prime minister, Ariel Sharon, supports the ambassador, saying that he "stood up against the rising anti-semitism" and that "the Israeli government supports his actions". I doubt the work of art really was an embodiment or expression of anti-semitism though, since one of the two artists is Israelian himself.
Artist Dror Feiler, an Israeli who lives in Sweden and created the [work of art] with his wife, Gunilla Skold Feiler, told an Israeli newspaper that the artwork wasn't intended to glorify the suicide bomber but to "call attention to how weak people left alone can be capable of horrible things." CNN
Ariel Sharon has threatened for Israel to not attend the upcoming international Genocide Prevention Conference, to be hosted in Stockholm, Sweden, unless the Swedish government removes the exhibit from the museum. The Swedish government has denied to do so, because Sweden is a democracy, the concept of which Ariel Sharon seems eerily unfamiliar with.
Update:
Zvi Mazel has publically claimed that his attack on the work of art was spontaneous. However, according to The Independent the attack was premeditated, which is conclusive with eye witness reports which say the Israelian ambassador walked directly from the entrance of the museum to the exhibit and attacked it without hesitation.
Some think that the attack was planned ahead to give Israel a "reason" to not attend the upcoming conference on genocides and how to prevent them, for fear of being challanged regarding the way Israel handles the conflict with Palestinians.
Comments
Sharon supports it? I guess that this was state-sanctioned terrorism, then.
How I wish the rest of the world would stop allowing Israel to time and time again use its "blame the Holocaust and get out of jail free" card...
Comment by Johan Svensson at 14:26, 19 Jan, 2004 #
Sad to say it, but no wonder anti-semitism is growing around the world when the Israeli government and its international diplomats keep throwing this word in the face of anyone who dares to criticise their own brutal methods, even when the critics are Israeli jews themselves. That piece of art may be provocative, but it's neither anti-Israeli nor pro-Palestinian. It simply expresses what horrific acts human beings are capable of in a state of severe desperation. Anyone who can claim that the situation in Palestine isn't desperate must be completely blind...
Comment by Pat at 17:43, 19 Jan, 2004 #
The artist should rotate the photo on the sail to feature killers on both sides of the conflict. Then lets see Sharon's reaction.
Comment by Greg at 18:25, 19 Jan, 2004 #
Personally, I found the piece of art quite grotesque. A pool of pure red 'blood' in the middle of pure white innocent Swedish winter. Well, the thing is, it's _supposed_ to be grotesque.
If I feel affronted, or sick, by seeing it, I do think the creator relayed the feeling with crystal clarity. And as far as the Israeli go, well, there's a limit to how far you can take things personally. :)
Comment by Lego at 09:42, 24 Jan, 2004 #
I should like to think that the art world would not be subjected to these heavy handed political demonstrations. Who is Mazel trying to fool. The question that should be asked is why was he wanting to limit Isreal's participation in the Genocide Prevention Conference?
Comment by Dan at 21:01, 27 Jan, 2004 #
The discussion has been closed on this entry. Thanks to everybody who participated.