So Alice Walker has squashed efforts by Israeli publisher Yediot to publish her novel The Color Purple; see the Letter from Alice Walker to Publishers at Yediot Books at Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel.
I generally don't really understand these refusals to print/make available cultural or intellectual property -- I'm not exactly sure how this works out to be a boycott of Israel, and Walker's letter doesn't really explain it to me -- and certainly always vote for the widespread dissemination of any and all cultural goods, since it seems to me that can just help efforts at international and mutual understanding (something I think would be a really good thing to fan and foster). (Of course, the whole openness-to-cultural-exchange-idea works both ways: the whole we-won't-play-Wagner situation in Israel is no less baffling to me)
(Of course writers can do as they please with their work, and occasionally there are good reasons not to publish abroad: the compensation isn't adequate; the translation isn't adequate; the book has been butchered by an editor -- but none of these situations seem to apply here.)
This case is a bit more baffling than most because of the existence of this:
![The Color Purple - Hebrew edition]()
Yes, הצבע ארגמן -- a Hebrew translation of The Color Purple -- exists. First published in 1984, it may well not be in print any longer -- but it exists.
Walker unfortunately also does not explain what has changed between 1984 (when she apparently allowed a translation to be published in Israel) and now.
Meanwhile, Walker's actions naturally immediately led to reactions such as Jonathan S. Tobin's 'Contentions'-column in Commentary, Alice Walker: The Color of Anti-Semitism. Tobin almost immediately disqualifies himself from possibly being taken seriously by relying on and linking to a Jewish Telegraphic Agency report, rather than Walker's actual (and easily found online) letter. (In the insanity that is the debate about these subject matters, I imagine he and Commentary possibly wrap themselves in ideological-editorial excuses about not linking to 'such' a site; sorry, I have no patience for that. Of course, the alternative -- that they're just too lazy or inept to seek out the link and letter -- isn't journalistically much more impressive.)
From not relying on or consulting Walker's actual letter -- i.e. her actual words -- it's an easy step to the wild claims and denouncements Tobin makes. It may seem nit-picking, but you can't say: "in saying she doesn't even wish her work to appear in Hebrew" if she doesn't say it -- and she doesn't. In fact, Walker's letter is terribly vague; it's clear, however, that what she's not permitting is, specifically, publication of the book in Israel -- which is not the same thing. (It would be interesting to put it to the test and see if Walker would permit publication of a Hebrew edition in, say, the United States; as is, however, the jump Tobin takes -- equating a refusal to allow an Israeli publisher to make the book available in Israel with a refusal to allow the book to appear in Hebrew -- is far too great a leap.)
One reason for such nit-picking is that Tobin takes that misstatement and runs with it. Boy, does he run with it:
But Tobin sees his claim all the way through:
I generally don't really understand these refusals to print/make available cultural or intellectual property -- I'm not exactly sure how this works out to be a boycott of Israel, and Walker's letter doesn't really explain it to me -- and certainly always vote for the widespread dissemination of any and all cultural goods, since it seems to me that can just help efforts at international and mutual understanding (something I think would be a really good thing to fan and foster). (Of course, the whole openness-to-cultural-exchange-idea works both ways: the whole we-won't-play-Wagner situation in Israel is no less baffling to me)
(Of course writers can do as they please with their work, and occasionally there are good reasons not to publish abroad: the compensation isn't adequate; the translation isn't adequate; the book has been butchered by an editor -- but none of these situations seem to apply here.)
This case is a bit more baffling than most because of the existence of this:
Yes, הצבע ארגמן -- a Hebrew translation of The Color Purple -- exists. First published in 1984, it may well not be in print any longer -- but it exists.
Walker unfortunately also does not explain what has changed between 1984 (when she apparently allowed a translation to be published in Israel) and now.
Meanwhile, Walker's actions naturally immediately led to reactions such as Jonathan S. Tobin's 'Contentions'-column in Commentary, Alice Walker: The Color of Anti-Semitism. Tobin almost immediately disqualifies himself from possibly being taken seriously by relying on and linking to a Jewish Telegraphic Agency report, rather than Walker's actual (and easily found online) letter. (In the insanity that is the debate about these subject matters, I imagine he and Commentary possibly wrap themselves in ideological-editorial excuses about not linking to 'such' a site; sorry, I have no patience for that. Of course, the alternative -- that they're just too lazy or inept to seek out the link and letter -- isn't journalistically much more impressive.)
From not relying on or consulting Walker's actual letter -- i.e. her actual words -- it's an easy step to the wild claims and denouncements Tobin makes. It may seem nit-picking, but you can't say: "in saying she doesn't even wish her work to appear in Hebrew" if she doesn't say it -- and she doesn't. In fact, Walker's letter is terribly vague; it's clear, however, that what she's not permitting is, specifically, publication of the book in Israel -- which is not the same thing. (It would be interesting to put it to the test and see if Walker would permit publication of a Hebrew edition in, say, the United States; as is, however, the jump Tobin takes -- equating a refusal to allow an Israeli publisher to make the book available in Israel with a refusal to allow the book to appear in Hebrew -- is far too great a leap.)
One reason for such nit-picking is that Tobin takes that misstatement and runs with it. Boy, does he run with it:
In Walker's world, Israelis are not just the bad guys in a fictional morality play in which the Palestinians are victims, but the very language they speak -- the language of the Bible and the foundation of Western religion, values and morality -- is to be treated as unworthy of being spoken or read.That seems like an enormous stretch from what Walker actually writes in her letter. And, again, the existence of הצבע ארגמן (and other Hebrew translations of her work) surely suggests otherwise.
But Tobin sees his claim all the way through:
But to discriminate against the language of the Jewish people in this manner is pure anti-Semitism.I don't see Walker as having discriminated against Hebrew in this manner (she's 'discriminating' -- if that's the proper term ... -- against Israel, but that's a whole different ball game), and I don't see how her actions can be interpreted in this way. While I think her choice is an unfortunate one -- and one that one can certainly both disagree with and denounce (with a rather different set of arguments) -- I think those who are critical of it should be considerably more careful with their criticism. (But intellectual rigor of any and all sort seems to have fallen completely by the wayside in discussion of any of these issues, doesn't it ?)