514
PAJ!...TISAN REVIEW
a member of the strike forces, the various squadrons of
shebab
responsible
for the frequently brutal murders of "collaborators." The details of his
"life story," like that of "all Palestinians in Gaza," is "mournful, harsh,
sacred." A "big, serious man," he "knew his life was at risk but he could
not bear being apart from the intifada. The killing of collaborators was a
job for the most steadfast and loyal." Likewise, the Gazan behind the bus
incident is described by the author as possessing a face which was "hardly
[that] of a coarse, stupid butcher." He was "only a melancholy young
man with a good deal on his mind." When the Gazans are not noble
revolutionaries, they are reduced to pitiful victims, some of whom, like
"the brother of Jamal" - a member of the Democratic Front for the
Liberation of Palestine - are killed, "guilty only of having ideas and
sharing them." Emerson writes, "No insurrection ever yielded such
constant calculations. In Jerusalem and in Washington, D.
c.,
human
rights groups worked on the tallies. In Tel Aviv and Chicago, Los
Angeles and Cambridge more human rights groups were keeping ac–
counts." The author obviously sees her task as personalizing these statis–
tics. This is an important undertaking, and her failure is regrettable. In
the end,
A Year in the Intifada
seems little more than an inventory of
victimologies. The reader searches in vain for a man or woman of £lesh–
and- blood whose existence has been forged between hatred and love,
weakness and strength, all the curious mixtures of emotions that make us
believable - and perhaps even lovable - to ourselves and others.
By presenting the Palestinian uprising as just another revolution of
saints, the author avoids the real and difficult questions that must be
asked, particularly now as the big players in the Middle East seem to be
heading towards a regional conference and the Palestinians towards au–
tonomy and possibly statehood. Emerson displays no real grasp of what
happens between people and peoples locked in a relationship that is al–
ways antagonistic but at times strangely symbiotic. Instead of trying to
understand the consequences - the fear, the hatred, the violence - that
inevitably result as two nations battle over the fate of one land, the au–
thor has chosen to paint a Manichaean world of good versus evil. The
complexities and sometimes poignant contradictions of Gaza are lost. In
these ways and more, Emerson, ironically, has failed most of all the
Gazans themselves.
ANNE MARIE OLIVER AND PAUL STEINBERG
