The concern about Caryl Churchill's play is that it is anti-Semitic, yet the only shortcoming that Healy presents to readers is the "incendiary comments about Palestinians...with one character saying, 'I wouldn't care if we wiped them out.'" Such a genocidal remark, attributed to a Jewish character, actually reflects more negatively on Jews than Palestinians, undermining Patrick Healy's forced point.
Moreover, Healy writes vaguely about the play's topic. It is about a how a Jewish family views "violence affecting them, from the Holocaust to the Palestinian uprisings and the Israeli military campaign in Gaza this winter."
"How to view violence affecting them" seems to suggest violence against them, but Healy's usage leaves the matter unclear. In short, Healy's report is murky in order to deemphasize the play's offensive portrayal of Jews.
Posts
I think your analysis is murky. I don't mean to offend, but I am not grasping your argument here. What are Healy's implications here? I understand how the first comment you mention reflects poorly on Jews. I'm lost on the last two paragraphs.
ReplyDeleteRespectfully,
Jewish Gal
Jewish Gal,
ReplyDeleteWhat Healy should have written is that the play is about the role of violence in the life of this Jewish family - violence in the form of the Holocaust, Palestinian uprisings, and the Israeli military campaign.
To write that "violence [affects] them" suggests that the family is the victim of violence.
Abes