Did I mention, in all my attempts to dispute the CNNified violence-filled version of Israeli life, that the culture isn't exactly the same as America? Take guns, for example. Apparently, there was a bit of controversy at my new school this past year about whether seniors should be allowed to use photographs containing guns on their yearbook pages. The answer in American high schools would be obvious, but in Israel, where every citizen is required to serve at least one year in the army, this would be the equivalent of Johnny posing with his four-point buck and rifle in the Mansfield News Journal (yes, my hometown newspaper publishes such photos). The photo in question, which I tried my darnedest to get on this blog, shows three boys, two with handguns, all wearing shirts supporting a military association. However, it gets a little gangsta, as the kids like to say, because all three are wearing sunglasses, and the two boys packing heat are holding the guns more like they're going to pistol-whip someone than respectfully explain the 2nd Amendment. It was a little shocking to my American sensibilities. Even more shocking, though, was that elsewhere in the yearbook are photos of students smoking cigarettes, puffing cigars, and using hookahs. These photos were not even questioned, even though the yearbook has a policy of not printing any photos with skin, expletives, illegal substances, or other inappropriate behavior. The gun photo, on the other hand, prompted a letter from the school's dean formally outlining which types of gun photos are appropriate for the yearbook.
It got me wondering about which photo would cause more of a reaction in suburban D.C. or central Ohio. After all, both types of photos show nothing illegal: 18-year-olds can own guns and smoke cigarettes. But man, I'm almost certain that the tobacco would cause more of a stink, pun intended. So what, right? I think this example illustrates the cultures of both countries. Israeli culture has its dysfunctions, no doubt, but it seems to be consistent. You are allowed to own things that might result in your own death by cancer and other things that might result in others' deaths by bullets; and both, I might add, might come in helpful for pure survival. America, on the other hand, has a different kind of consistency: We can deny that the proliferation of guns might contribute to a higher murder rate, and we can deny that sheltering young people from vices like cigarettes might contribute to a greater allure later in life; but once again, such denial might contribute to daily survival. Now you tell me: Which one of those scenarios seems more close-minded and conservative?
I, of course, don't really think either is worse than the other. I just think that it's weird that some people would automatically assume that Israel is so much more radical. So what does this rant have to do with me going to Israel? I don't really know. That's where you come in: What do you think those yearbook photos say about Israeli culture? I guess I'm just thinking that at least it will be more interesting to work in a place where discussion about violence is encouraged -- the last issue of the school's newspaper had a front-page story about Palestinian honor killings. Now that is something I would like to get hate mail about, instead of a quote that the football team's championship berth was stupid. But that's another story.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I think your hypothesis might be flawed here. Because it was in the paper does not necessarily mean that it is encouraged. My point is that perhaps the editor caught grief for printing that article as you did for the football remark. If memory serves, that was a frustrating era for you over something as trivial as the football team. My impression of Israel is that they would feel more obligated to respond to the honor-killing article than your previous football article. Again, my read was that you were frustrated in that era. I believe you will be frustrated again. Yes you might sink your journalistic teeth a lot deeper, but my impression is that this frustration may come with additional and unexpected baggage. I remain curious about how your new educational community will view some of the other topics you addressed at your previous high school newspaper.
My guess is that the dean is trying to make a distinction between glorified violence and necessary violence. Violence as power and bravado, as documented by the kids in the picture you describe, or violence as protection and only when necessary, as documented in, say, a picture of a student with a gun in their army uniform or at "boot camp". This, of course, I find more similar to American culture than different. Or, it could be an acknowledgment of sensitivity to other cultures. Yours is an international school. So, for example, when we take pictures for our viewbook, we often use different pictures for our international versions, because those same pictures might offend our international students (the women's manner of dress is a biggie, for example.) Perhaps your dean wasn't as concerned about offending Israelis as much as offending the culture of other students attending.
Fascinating example to point out!
Post a Comment