Old Wine in New Bottles Tekumah, an Israeli Resurrection of Social Change? Dorit Naaman

Old Wine in New Bottles Tekumah, an Israeli resurrection of social change? Dorit Naaman The relationship between historical events, historical narratives and documentary cinema are complex, and at times problematic. Historical narratives give verbal accounts to events, while films represent those events visually, in a medium that is generally considered more authentic, or veridical than language. In the case of documentary films about the past, the documentarist must choose how to construct the visual data in the film, that is, from what material to draw, as she has not been there to document the events as they took place. The choices of found-footage, photographs, maps, etc., and their organization within the context of interviews and other materials create the evidential tone of the film. While historical biases are currently an issue of hot debate in historical narratives, the issues become even more 37 October19.p65 37 09/08/24, 10:31 Õ complex when the agenda of the filmmakers In 1998, the Israeli government-sponsored is masked under the cinematic conventions of TV station (Channel 1) produced the documentary film practices, amongst them documentary series, Tekumah, to assumptions about the veridical indexical commemorate, summarize and critically value of images. examine the 50 years of existence of the state of Israel. The series (comprised of 22 one- In Israel, these issues came to the fore when hour episodes) had a chief editor and was public debate exploded over Tekumah, a directed by 19 directors, each responsible for television documentary series an episode or two. Aesthetically and formally, commemorating the 50th anniversary of the episodes are somewhat different from one Israel. The production of Tekumah capped ten another, giving the impression that Israel years of debate over Israel's historical exists in a state of multi-cultural bliss. But the narrative, a narrative vigorously challenged series was directed only by Israeli Jews (even by the new historians and their scholarship. those episodes on Palestinians and Israeli In 1988, following the publication of two Arabs), and the content was heavy-handedly books - Benny Morris' The Birth of the controlled by Gideon Drori, chief editor and Palestinian Refugee Problem, 1947-19491 initiator of the series. While definitely not a and Ilan Pappe's Britain and the Arab-Israeli linear narrative, the series as a whole Conflict, 1947-1951,2 - an academic debate crystallizes some of the historical and erupted. The debate was historical at heart, political discussions in contemporary Israeli and pertained mostly to information released society, including the debate over the new in the 1980s by Israel's foreign ministry, historians and post-Zionism. The producers which shed light on the events of the 1948 anticipated a three to four percent viewing war.3 The debate took an interesting turn, ratio, but within a few weeks it was clear that however, when in 1994, Israeli fiction author the two weekly broadcasts of each episode Aharon Megged published an attack on these were attracting the attention of about 30 "new historians" (entitled "The Israeli Suicide percent of the nation. Drive") in the weekly magazine of the daily In the press too, the series was widely newspaper Ha'aretz.4 The move to the daily reviewed, criticized, and discussed. While press by an academic author took the debate initially hailed as a very important project, as well out of its original historical bounds. the series progressed, its content managed to What started as a debate about facts and aggravate the right wing to the point that two interpretation was now a political controversy ministers were asking that the series be about the identity of the nation. The result removed from the airwaves.6 For instance, was the emergence of post-Zionism, a after the screening of the episode "The movement towards divorcing modern Israel Opsimist" on Palestinians with Israeli from the very national movement that gave citizenship, and in anticipation of the episode birth to it.5 Unfortunately, post-Zionism and featuring the Palestine Liberation what became known as the "new historians’ Organization's Lebanon years, "Biladi debate" are now often collapsed in public Biladi," some critics called the series discourse into one and the same thing - a Palestinian propaganda,7 and connected it rejection of Israel's right to exist. Megged's directly to the new historian and post-Zionist article is one example of such conflation, and debates. since his article, disputes have continued to flare up in the general press. I argue that Tekumah (literally meaning "resurrection") manages to incorporate a 38 October19.p65 38 09/08/24, 10:31 Õ pluralistic appearance, but in essence still The essence of the old history is that reiterates the same old Israeli myths about the Zionism's birth was an inevitable result foundation of the state, and its moral of Gentile pressures and persecution, justification. Since the new historian debate and that it offered at least a partial pertains particularly to the 1948 War, I solution to the 'Jewish Problem' in examine the first three episodes of the Europe; that the Zionists intended no documentary, those discussing the War of ill to the Arabs of Palestine, and that Independence, in greater detail than others. I Zionist settlement alongside the Arabs will show how the films allow for the did not, from the Jews' point of view, expression of voices previously unheard, but necessitate a clash or displacement, also how the diversity of opinions is but that Israel was born into an eventually subordinated to a non-threatening uncharitable, predatory environment; hegemonic perspective. Aesthetically then, that Zionist efforts at compromise and the series incorporates a pluralistic (multi- conciliation were rejected by the cultural) look, a postmodern view of history, Arabs; and that the Palestinians and and an awareness of identity politics. But the neighbouring Arab states, selfish these aesthetics only mask a positivist, non- and ignoble, refused to accede to the problematic view of Zionist ideology. While burgeoning Zionist presence and in the new historians debate has actually made a 1947-48 attacked the Yishuv with the difference in the Israeli political map,8 the aim of nipping the Jewish state in the show enables the average Israeli to ignore bud. serious challenges to their traditional A crucial aspect of the old history is that the ideological and political assumptions. Despite Palestinian refugee problem was born from the charges that it is a post-Zionist, pro- Arab calls for Palestinians to abandon their Palestinian show, Tekumah actually only homes, clear the path for the Arab armies and repackages old Israeli wine in new bottles. therefore that Jewish militias (and later the army) cannot be blamed for the expulsion. In other words, the old historian account paints a The New Historian Debate picture in which Israel and its institutions Israel was established in 1948 after the were not morally wrong, and were not in United Nations voted on November 29, 1947 ethical conflict with regards to the Palestinian in favour of partitioning British Mandate inhabitants of the country. At every crucial Palestine into Israeli and Palestinian states. point, says the old Israeli narrative, the Arabs Merely three years after the end of WWII, were the ones to make a choice for which and the realization of the horrors of the they would pay dearly, while the Israelis were Holocaust, many Jews and Gentiles found a eager to live amicably together. Jewish state necessary as a safe haven. While Zionism as a national movement had existed The new historians set out to challenge at since the late 19th century (it emerged in least some of these assertions. Morris, in tandem with other European national particular, is a key researcher in exposing the movements), and while the Zionist movement semi-systematic expulsion policy, which has been actively settling the "Land of Israel" Jewish forces did not officially embrace or since 1881 (then a part of the Ottoman impose, but more than occasionally Empire, and after 1917 under British rule), exercised.9 In addition, Morris charges that Israel's establishment effectively resulted Israel at the end of the 1948 War, and leader from the Holocaust. Benny Morris writes: Ben Gurion in particular, rejected peace 39 October19.p65 39 09/08/24, 10:31 Õ efforts from other Arab countries.10 Morris does not include enough Arabic sources, and not only paints the war in a new light, but most importantly, that the new historians are also casts a shadow on Israel's moral set on a trendy Israeli-bashing trip, one standards, and its self-image as peace seeking influenced by the anti-Orientalist work of or always defending itself rather than Edward Said. While throughout the book initiating aggression. Karsh argues with the positions, documents and interpretation of Morris, Pappe, Shlaim But the new historians not only provided a and other new historians, his criticism boils new account of history, but also criticized the down not to historiography (good or bad), but old historians' methodology. While excusing to ideology and politics. Karsh writes: the old historians for not having access to the archival material released in the 1980s, they In other words, more than anything still had other problems with the group. else the "new historiography" is a state Morris writes of the old historians, that, "In of mind, or rather, a fashion. What reality they were chroniclers, and often unites its practitioners, by and large, is apologetic, interested chroniclers at that. subscription to the all too common They did not work from and upon a solid perception of Zionism as an offshoot of body of contemporary documentation and did European imperialism, or at the very not normally try to paint a picture that offered least as an aggressive and expansionist a variety of sides of a given historical national movement.

Load more