Monday, 5 December, 2011

It came to me when I was reporting the mad uproar over Bill Henson’s photographs a couple of years ago that I’ve been writing about panics all my career: how they are whipped up, do their worst and disappear leaving only wreckage behind. Perhaps I’m alert to the subject because I’m gay. When I was growing up, preachers, police, politicians and the press were still keeping panic alive about people like me. It has left me despising panic merchants, particularly those Tory fear-mongers who represent themselves as guardians of decency. The politicians I most admire are those who hold their nerve in the face of irrational fear on the rampage. I’ve come to believe the fundamental contest in Australian politics is not so much between Right and Left as panic and calm.

Labor drove the early fear of the Chinese, and Labor has been up to its neck at times in panics about Blacks and Reds, poofs and dirty books. Labor can’t claim to be always on the side of calm. This is an issue that goes deeper than division between the parties. It’s about the odd willingness of Australia’s leaders to beat up on the nation’s fears. They coarsen politics. They narrow our sympathies. They make careers for themselves in this peaceful and good-hearted country by managing, from time to time, to make us afraid. The last fifteen years have seen this country in states of exaggerated alarm over native title, Muslim preachers, Muslim rapists, drugs, terrorists both foreign and home grown, demonstrators in the streets and pictures of naked children on gallery walls. But we end the decade as we began in a full-scale panic over refugees coming here – as they reach countries all over the world – uninvited in little boats.

— David Marr, Panic, 2011

(Source: blackincbooks.com)

Thursday, 13 October, 2011

The snapshots are thrust at us urgently, as if they were passports being shown at a border crossing, official proofs of national identity. Mostly, they are prosaic pictures of family members or houses. Sometimes a diploma will be offered up instead, or theater reviews clipped from newspapers or a membership card to a duck-hunting club. Later, other, more frightening, pictures will be shown, but they all serve the same function.
For the men and women assembled in “Aftermath,” the smart and sobering documentary drama that opened on Tuesday night at the New York Theater Workshop, these flimsy objects have more than sentimental value. They are confirmations that all of the characters onstage are citizens of a country called Iraq, a place that they haven’t visited recently, but one that they love and that still exists. Or does it?
Assembled by its creators, Jessica Blank and Erik Jensen, from interviews with Iraqi refugees living in Jordan, “Aftermath” might be said to be set in limbo. Its performers, first seen sitting rigid on benches with their backs to us, seem to exist in an eternal waiting room.
When they turn around to tell their stories, with a courtly politeness that eventually shades into a sorrowing, baffled rage, there’s no doubt that it is we, the Americans in the dark, to whom they’re speaking. It was our country invading theirs, in 2003, that brought them to the point that, as one puts it, “I am floating between here and nowhere.”

From the New York Times’ review of Aftermath, by Jessica Blank and Erik Jensen. I saw this earlier in the week as part of the Melbourne Festival, and was floored.

The snapshots are thrust at us urgently, as if they were passports being shown at a border crossing, official proofs of national identity. Mostly, they are prosaic pictures of family members or houses. Sometimes a diploma will be offered up instead, or theater reviews clipped from newspapers or a membership card to a duck-hunting club. Later, other, more frightening, pictures will be shown, but they all serve the same function.

For the men and women assembled in “Aftermath,” the smart and sobering documentary drama that opened on Tuesday night at the New York Theater Workshop, these flimsy objects have more than sentimental value. They are confirmations that all of the characters onstage are citizens of a country called Iraq, a place that they haven’t visited recently, but one that they love and that still exists. Or does it?

Assembled by its creators, Jessica Blank and Erik Jensen, from interviews with Iraqi refugees living in Jordan, “Aftermath” might be said to be set in limbo. Its performers, first seen sitting rigid on benches with their backs to us, seem to exist in an eternal waiting room.

When they turn around to tell their stories, with a courtly politeness that eventually shades into a sorrowing, baffled rage, there’s no doubt that it is we, the Americans in the dark, to whom they’re speaking. It was our country invading theirs, in 2003, that brought them to the point that, as one puts it, “I am floating between here and nowhere.”

From the New York Times’ review of Aftermath, by Jessica Blank and Erik Jensen. I saw this earlier in the week as part of the Melbourne Festival, and was floored.

Friday, 2 September, 2011
[W]e increasingly talk about “zero” tolerance. But in case we think this means we should abandon tolerance we are reminded that globalization, which we must enthusiastically embrace, is to be supported because it brings freedom, opportunity and liberalisation to the whole world. Globalisation annihilates tradition, smashes the borders of the nation state, allows the free flow of capital, ideas and trade. Globalisation celebrates diversity and tolerance. This most ruthless form of capitalism, in promising us the freedom to identify as part of a global community, makes the nation state itself obsolete; and through the marriage of capital and digital technology we are even promised that we can transcend the limitations of physical and temporal space. But when it comes to dealing with the most manifest development of this globalisation, the displacement and homelessness of millions of people around the globe, we are then told that we must secure our borders, that we have to affirm our nationhood.

Christos Tsiolkas, “On the Concept of Tolerance,” from Tolerance, Prejudice, Fear, 2008.

(Altered excerpt available on ABC’s The Drum.)

Sunday, 10 July, 2011
[T]he word [macadam] isn’t French. In fact, the word is derived from John McAdam of Glasgow, the eighteenth-century inventor of modern paving surface. It may be the first word in that language that twentieth-century Frenchmen have satirically named Franglais: it paves the way for le parking, le shopping, le weekend, le drugstore, le mobile-home, and far more. This language is so vital and compelling because it is the international language of modernization. Its new words are powerful vehicles of new modes of life and motion. The words may sound dissonant and jarring, but it is as futile to resist them as to resist the momentum of modernization itself. It is true that many nations and ruling classes feel—and have reason to feel—threatened by the flow of new words and things from other shores. There is a wonderful paranoid Soviet word that expresses this fear: infiltrazya. We should notice, however, that what nations have normally done…is, after a wave (or at least a show) of resistance, not only to accept the new thing but to create their own word for it, in the hope of blotting out embarrassing memories of underdevelopment. (Thus the Académie Française, after refusing all through the 1960s to admit le parking meter to the French language, coined and quickly canonized le parcmetre in the 1970s.) — Marshall Berman, All That Is Solid Melts Into Air: The Experience of Modernity
Tuesday, 21 December, 2010
Exile and belonging must not be seen as opposites which are exclusive of each other, for there is not just a physical border which both joins and separates these states but also a dialectical tension that informs and constitutes their meaning. Neither term can be grasped in isolation – the word nationalism for instance, first written by an exiled French priest, was the result of the conflict between the love of the particular and the love of the general. — Nikos Papastergiadis, Modernity in Exile: The Stranger in John Berger’s Writing
Tuesday, 2 November, 2010
In the drear space of waiting, of slow elapse, Alice was unsure of how to spend her time. She tried to read the newspapers, but found herself sickened. War, refugees. Asylum seekers in Australia held in cruel detention. She was succumbing to the havoc of her many emotional misalignments. The country felt physically the same, but otherwise depressed her. History had given them this: the wounded and dispossessed held behind razor wire, contiguous, somehow, with green tracer lights at night preceding explosions, nineteen-year-old soldiers shooting nervously in the dark, tanks, bombers, missiles, grenades. Television collapsed distance: loss and war was everywhere, filling up eyeballs all over the planet. There was no limit, it seemed, to what might be shown, what thinnest apparitions might come to haunt you, what remote event, what fucked-up invasion, might veer into assaulting, hideous proximity. On the sofa, unrelaxed, Alice felt overwhelmed. — Gail Jones, Dreams of Speaking, 2006.
Monday, 18 October, 2010

[Pain is] a destruction experienced spatially as either the contraction of the universe down to the immediate vicinity of the body or as the body swelling to fill the entire universe. Intense pain is also language-destroying: as the content of one’s world disintegrates, so the content of one’s language disintegrates; as the self disintegrates, so that which would express and project the self is robbed of its source and its subject.

[…] The first, the most essential, aspect of pain is its sheer aversiveness. While other sensations have content that may be positive, neutral, or negative the very content of pain is itself negation. Pain is a pure physical experience of negation, an immediate sensory rendering of “against,” of something being against one, and of something one must be against. Even though it occurs within oneself, it is at once identified as “not oneself,” “not me,” as something so alien that it must right now be gotten rid of.

— Elaine Scarry, The Body in Pain
Thursday, 30 September, 2010

House guest

The morning after she leaves, I am rinsing out the teapot when I realise she had filled it almost to the brim with loose tea: as though to prepare mess-hall servings, or to stimulate an appetite for its strong black flavour. I am taken back to the previous day when she sung out, “Don’t mind me, I’ll just make a cup of tea and then I’ll be out of your way,” and then squeakily tiptoed around the living room, humming to herself.

Friday, 27 August, 2010
Delicately, analytically, Freud does not speak of foreigners: he teaches us how to detect foreignness in ourselves. That is perhaps the only way not to hound it outside of us. — Julia Kristeva, Strangers to Ourselves
Wednesday, 14 July, 2010
She sits, ruminating. Staring at the rain, thinking of home. Other customers glance across at her. She is already that exotic creature: a foreign woman, alone, and not looking for help. The Day We Had Hitler Home, by Rodney Hall
Tuesday, 1 September, 2009

It was as if the events of that year had set out to demonstrate that history could not be confined to historical places.

In the same spring as the towers fell, boats making their way to Australia foundered on the treachery of currents and destiny. People looking for sanctuary drowned. They might have been found; they might have been saved. But what prevailed was the protection of a line drawn in the water.

Night after night, images of the refugees appeared. Tom saw death flicker in the furtive glow of TV and knew the guilty rage of those who have crossed to safety. Time toppled like a wave. He was a falling thing, spiralling down to wait forever in a room as blue as an ocean. He felt the convergence of public and private dread.

Buried deep in Australian memories was the knowledge that strangers had once sailed to these shores and destroyed what they found. How could that nightmare be remembered? How could it be unselfishly forgotten? A trauma that had never been laid to rest, it went on disturbing a nation’s dreams. In the rejection of the latest newcomers, Tom glimpsed the past convulsing like a faulty film. It was a confession coded as denial. It was as if a fiend had paused in its ravaging to cover its face and howl.

**

From The Lost Dog, by Michelle de Kretser.