Barenboim's Narrative

"A Whirlwind Named Barenboim"
AR1, Sunday 11/23/08
By Michael Kimmelman

The renowned pianist and conductor Daniel Barenboim, an Argentine-born Israeli, is the subject of this interesting feature. The piece paints a vivid picture of Barenboim's extraordinary talent, his admirers, his frenzied and varied schedule and his outspoken and undeveloped views on Israel's conflict with the Palestinians.

It is this last point that is endemic to Times coverage of Israeli subjects who are ostensibly unrelated to politics and the Palestinians. To be fair, it is not off-topic that Barenboim is given a voice on the subject of Israeli-Palestinian peace. More than just a celebrated Israeli music icon, Barenboim has, regarding Israel's lack of peace with its neighbors, made many critical comments – some perceptive, some not.

Towards the end of the article, Barenboim's views of the conflict are given voice following mention of the "West-Eastern Divan," the orchestra he co-founded with the late Edward Said. The noble vision of the project, remarked Barenboim, was "to give each person a forum to articulate his or her thoughts and beliefs in front of the other".

Barenboim then makes some less inspiring comments:

"I grew up in Israel in the '50s, when it was not an occupying power."

So Israel was more innocent, more the victim, before its occupation of the West Bank and Gaza began in 1967? What is problematic is that in the mainstream Arab view, Israel has since its creation been an occupying power.

"With CNN and Al-Jazeera today, it's easy to forget that we could be totally unaware then of the story of the Palestinians. We told ourselves that either the Palestinians had left because they wanted to leave, or they were encouraged to leave by other Arabs."

After the Munich massacre, Palestinian highjackings and other publicized attacks – before cable and satellite TV – who could be "totally unaware" of the story of the Palestinians? Perhaps Barenboim's comment is more nuanced. Maybe he means "the story" of the Palestinians could only be so justly articulated by CNN and Al-Jazeera.

Barenboim does have a point about Israelis hearing a sanitized version of the Palestinian flight in the 1948 War. There is more openness now in Israel in talking about the unpleasant products of that war – Israeli massacres and expulsions. Yet a big part of the Palestinian flight was encouraged by Arab leaders. This has been admitted to by prominent Palestinians.

The distorted and self-soothing narrative in the Arab world – and among Palestinians – is rarely if ever remarked on by prominent Arabs, nor featured in the Times.

Barenboim cites "Golda Meir saying: 'Who are these Palestinian people? We are the people of Palestine.' And for the first time I thought to myself, that can't be right."

Meier didn't imply that only Jews are "the people of Palestine". She criticized the publicized narrative, of which Israelis, according to Barenboim, were "totally unaware". According to Meier, this narrative spoke of a distinct Palestinian people – a nation – that was uprooted by Israel. Meier took issue – not with the existence of Palestinian Arabs or their humanity – but of this narrative that upgraded their status to that of a nation. Of course, Meier's points can be debated and rejected, yet they shouldn't be simplified, as Barenboim does.

"I'm not naïve. I know most Arabs don't see a reason for Israel to exist as a Jewish state. But in the last 20 years many have come to the conclusion that they need to make some accommodation. Meanwhile this is not the Israel I grew up with."

Here, Barenboim takes a step forward and two steps back. It reveals a sense of desperation that while acknowledging "Arabs don't see a reason for Israel to exist," he feels Arabs see a "need" to make "some accommodation". This is a point that needs further developing. Is this accommodation sufficient for a substantive, long-term peace with Israel? If Arabs are philosophically against Israel's existence, how does that work against their supposedly sober sense of accommodation?

Barenboim contrasts Arabs who feel the "need to make some accommodation" against an Israel – at least the one in which Barenboim grew up – that does not. Yet the Israel back then, according to Barenboim himself, found no Arab partner ready to make accommodation, as this accomodation has supposedly only developed within "the last 20 years". It is a poor reading of history to suggest Israel in the 50s and 60s didn't seek accomodation with the Arabs.

The Times shouldn't be faulted here for giving Barenboim a platform to express these views, nor for failing to provide a rebuttal. The Times, however, should be faulted for an unsettling pattern: often flawed and hyperbolic Arab criticism of Israel has over time been balanced only by flawed and hyperbolic Israeli criticism of Israel.