zenpundit.com » 2015 » January

Archive for January, 2015

A very brief brief on black banners

Thursday, January 8th, 2015

[ by Charles Cameron — wherein black flag patches run riot ]
.

Just a quick something I gleaned via Leah Farrall‘s recent blog post:

Abu Bakr on IS and JaN flags

That’s the gist of an excerpt I transcribed from an Aussie Insight video last year, which featured host Jenny Brockie and the gentleman depicted, one Abu Bakr. Bakr was arrested just before Christmas and charged with “possession of documents designed to facilitate a terrorist attack”. The exchange went like this:

Jenny Brockie: I see you’re wearing the ISIS flag on your shirt

Abu Bakr: It doesn’t really come down to what sort of flag because this flag, here, people might say you’re a supporter of Jabhat al-Nusra, and this flag here, people might say you’re a supporter of ISIS, but these flags are all one, they’re all the same flag, one Muslim nation and that’s it.

**

It’s great to see you back and blogging, Leah —

Arabs at War

— and we’re keenly awaiting the arrival of your book!

Paris: reminders

Thursday, January 8th, 2015

[ by Charles Cameron — personally, i’d rather grieve than hate ]
.

You can’t dull one mass of senseless pain with another, they don’t cancel out, nor are they additive — but FWIW:

**

The last serious European Christian violence in response to perceived blasphemy that I recall was the rioting surrounding the release of Scorsese’s The Last Temptation of Christ in 1988. I would have been 45 or thereabouts, and was friends with Scorsese‘s friend, the late film-maker Michael Henry Wilson, who was involved with the publicity for the film, and I remember the tension in the air as I obtained my tickets for an LA pre-screening.

In an earlier post, Of films, riots and hatred III: Scorsese and Verhoeven, I quoted The Encyclopedia of Religion and Film:

Overseas, at the September 28 opening in Paris, demonstrators who had gathered for a prayer vigil threw tear gas canisters at the theater’s entrance. Catholic clergy led rock-throwing and fire-bombing assaults on theaters in many French municipalities. A thousand rioters in Athens trashed the Opera cinema, ripping apart the screen and destroying the projection equipment.

and Wikipedia:

On October 22, 1988, a French Christian fundamentalist group launched Molotov cocktails inside the Parisian Saint Michel movie theater while it was showing the film. This attack injured thirteen people, four of whom were severely burned. The Saint Michel theater was heavily damaged, and reopened 3 years later after restoration. Following the attack, a representative of the film’s distributor, United International Pictures, said, “The opponents of the film have largely won. They have massacred the film’s success, and they have scared the public.” Jack Lang, France’s Minister of Culture, went to the St.-Michel theater after the fire, and said, “Freedom of speech is threatened, and we must not be intimidated by such acts.”

In the case of Last Temptation there was a potential for fatal violence, but no death. Today’s massacre at Charlie Hebdo was less spontaneous, more concentrated, carefully planned and executed, and deadly.

Paris: what’s the optimal media response?

Thursday, January 8th, 2015

[ by Charles Cameron — “publish and be damned” is one thing, “publish and be dead” is quite another! ]
.

Sigh. There are two ways or the media to respond in a situation like this, one of which is to defend freedom of speech by asserting it, while the other seeks to minimize the inflammation. Here they are, as examplified in two tweets from two journalists today:

Does the question of which approach is better seem too obvious to require an answer?

Which approach do you prefer, and why?

**

I’m an Old School Brit and wouldn’t use this language at the office, but I tend to agree with John Schindler‘s sentiments here:

More generally, I don’t think we think nearly enough about the second and third order effects of our media responses to acts of terror.

Smiley on defeating ideologues

Thursday, January 8th, 2015

[ by Charles Cameron — with application to today’s tragic massacre in Paris, to IS, AQ, Breivik, whoever ]
.

fanatic secret doubt Tinker Tailor
.

That’s George Smiley describing Karla‘s fatal flaw, in the crucial scene from Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, the film version with Gary Oldman as George Smiley.

We are not so very different, you and I. We’ve both spent our lives looking for the weaknesses in one another’s systems. Don’t you think it’s time to recognize there is as little worth on your side as there is on mine? Never said a word. Not one word.

And that’s how I know he can be beaten. Because he’s a fanatic. And the fanatic is always concealing a secret doubt.

The Le Carré book version has it a little differently, FWIW:

And if you want a sermon, Karla is not fireproof, because he’s a fanatic. And one day, if I have anything to do with it, that lack of moderation will be his downfall.

**

Bonus: Smiley on symmetry and asymmetry:

Smiley speaks to Karla<, wishing to turn him:

We are not so very different, you and I. We’ve both spent our lives looking for the weaknesses in one another’s systems. Don’t you think it’s time to recognize there is as little worth on your side as there is on mine? Never said a word. Not one word.

Paris: pen and sword

Thursday, January 8th, 2015

[ by Charles Cameron — my father was a gunnery officer & I’m a writer — sword > word > world? ]
.

The pen and sword issue is fundamentally that of word and deed, isn’t it? Only in this case, the “pen” is “pen and paint”.

**

and then again:

**

Will we ever get to the bottom of this complex of koans, in which our thoughts are part of the very reality they purport to represent?

You remember Goethe‘s Faust wanted to translate In the beginning was the Word as In the beginning was the deed?

In the beginning was the..

  • hush
  • thought

  • image

  • word

  • deed

  • fact
  • The relationship between thought and world — word and world, image and world — is of utmost importance and, I suspect, far from easily grasped by anything less than battering one’s head against reality.


    Switch to our mobile site