Journal Entry #2

The Arab-Israeli conflict has so much more to it than I originally thought before doing the readings for this class. I am the first to say, I believe I was far too judgemental on topics I now see I wasn't educated enough on. For so long now I have put so much pressure on religions as the sole cause for all of the issues in the conflict. I was the first to blame religion for every reason the conflict began and continues to exist. While I still believe that the religious aspect of the conflict in deeply rooted to the problem, I now see that there is so much more to it. I think that as humans, there is a tendency to take claim things that we maybe don't have the right we thought we had. As much faith as I like to keep in humanity, the further our values lean to dividing people based on their differences, the more developed the issue is going to be. We have to be able to first close the gap between minorities and the majority by looking at issues such as employment, education, and new opportunities for those in the lower class of Jerusalem both Arab and Israeli. The more educated a young public is on social issues and history, the easier it is going to be to find a solution. I know that it seems very broad and I wish I could elaborate more on how I think that could happen, but I don't have those solutions because in reality this is the solution to many world problems I think. I look forward to keep reading Armstrong and the other readings, as well as hearing more from my classmates and guest speakers.

On another note, I was wondering if anyone else is interested in film? There are a number of extraordinary films on the topic and maybe we could start a movie night or something and search for some of these films. Maybe that sounds really nerdy, but I would like to meet more people in our class in a different environment.

I wish I had the answer to the problem, I really did, but I think a lot of people have worked at it for a long time. However, we just have to keep trying to make progress, and maybe one day the world will see peace.

EXILE: Reading Response

I think it is interesting how at the very beginning of the chapter, Armstrong writes about Yahweh deserting the city and describes the destruction as  "an act of de-creation, like the flood that overwhelmed the world at the time of Noah." It is here apparent to me again how she views most people to understand and believe the story of Noah and the flood. Growing up in a Christian faith, this story was one of my favorites, but I wouldn't ever give it a literal meaning. I don't think that the earth was actually covered in water while Noah and the animals waited it out on a boat. I guess however if you look at it more like a parable the exile of the Jewish people in Jerusalem could have been a de-creation,  taking them back instead of pulling them forward. I'm sure that when once returned to their city, they felt as though they had to recreate their former home, similarly to how the Bible teaches us that Noah and the animals had to restart in their home. I can't imagine being taken from a place, a home, and then returning after so much destruction and ruin. Then again, sometimes it is refreshing to have a new start.

In this same paragraph she speaks on how the destruction of the temple and the city, was similar to the end of the world. It's such a cool concept to me that everyone has a different concept of what the world is. Is it just a geographic map? Is it your family and friends? Your faith and your background? When people talk about the end of "the world", it's all up to interpretation. My world and your world could be very different places, and while something could happen that could be the end of your world, could be the beginning of my world. Yeah, I know that's getting pretty deep. But, I feel like the more I learn about this situation, the more I realize there is not so much of a solution to the problem, because there is so many different angles that the problems could be viewed as.

I liked Karen's writing a tad more than I did in the beginning  I felt myself trying to open up and learn from her interpretations and compare them with my own. I respect her for bouncing out of her comfort zone and taking a dab at writing this book.

Armstrong's Interpretation

Wow. I'm slightly confused, I came to look at my blog and found that the blog I had written wasn't there. Part of the reason I don't trust the internet. But I'll try and rewrite what I had previously written.

I try not to be too cynical when reading books that have such a broad history, but I was not a fan of Armstrong's introduction to the book. I often found myself "grouped" in her generalizations about how people saw the world or how she thought everyone saw the world.  I think that it's interesting that she is a Catholic nun, how ever it really throws my interest off again. I REALLY try to be open to the views of people from religious doctrines, but some traditions in the Catholic church really bother me, but I'm definitely not going to go into that. Please don't be offended if you are Catholic, I promise I have nothing against you. Anyways, I feel like in the introduction she uses more opinion and openness than she does in the chapters 1-4 of the book.

When I got to reading the actual chapters of the book, I found myself rereading pages, a lot. I am not the biggest history fan, and without a big enough knowledge of Jerusalem's history already I found myself pretty lost trying to keep up with all the names, dates, and people. I feel like it's necessary for her to cover it all, but it makes for a read that isn't to appealing to me. I am really going to have to find a new way of reading these chapters, whether it is jotting down notes in the book as I am reading or notes in a notebook. It's not that I don't get what she is explaining and telling us about, it's more that I have attention problems, so sometimes my comprehension isn't where I would like it to be.

I am sounding extremely negative, wow. I have really got to work on that, I'm really not usually this bad. I guess this book will need to grow on me, or we will grow together. I'm not gonna give up on it.

Journal #1

So far, I enjoy this class. I'm normally not the biggest fan of posting my thoughts and feelings about issues online. I like to be old fashioned and write a diary in a notebook or somewhere that it couldn't potentially be lost. But, I guess that's life. Technology happened and I have to jump on the bandwagon. I like the idea that the class discussions are so open and that I get to reflect on my own perceptions of the conflict but also with other people's perceptions. I hope that we get to do more small group work, I really like my group and feel like I could learn a lot from them.

I think that if the festival actually happened, it would be amazing. Bringing together of such different groups of people with such a crazy past. If the festival were tomorrow I would want to go and talk to as many people as I could from all the different backgrounds and eat a lot of HUMMUS ! yum. It seems to me that this conflict has too much too it for the festival to ever actually be supported. People are far too selfish, especially now a days. Sometimes I lose hope that there's still good people out there. But then you read about the people that organized the festival and realize that there are, and you do service work and realize that there are more, but sometimes in class and on campus people can be really disheartening.

 I can't imagine what it would be like to feel like my home was taken from me, or I didn't have home in the right place. The Zionists wanted to redefine their home in Jerusalem, for the fear that they no longer had a place in their own home. If I one day came to my house in Indianapolis to find that my parents no longer lived there, I would feel like a nomad, like I didn't belong anywhere. But my question is if I went back to my home like the Zionists did and try to expel a new family that had made their own home there, would I ask them too to give up their home? They might have also felt a strong connection to that home. The Palestinians removed from homes and displaced to Jordan, Syria, and Egypt might have found a home in one of those places, but still longed for a home in Jerusalem. But now, the Zionists were back in their homeland, and that is what made them happy.

Sometimes when I am doing the readings I really get confused. The thing is I understand the back and forth fight for something you believe is yours, but it seems like it can never fully be resolved because once some place is your home, you have an everlasting connection to that place, and it can be really hard to leave or be forced to leave. I feel like the United States and the United States didn't do enough. It was like they were always choosing a side that needed help at that particular instance. Couldn't they have tried to deal with the conflict more head on, instead of once it was already in a place where thousands of people were displaced? It kills me to read things like the 6 Day war ISrael started, and the number of tragedies that came with it. I just wish all the time that people could come to terms with compromise.

Ramblings and Readings #2

You know how in grade school everyone has their "seat" in class, even if the "seat" isn't assigned by the teacher. If you have been sitting there everyday for a while, and then one day you walk in and another girl is sitting in your seat, your probably got pretty angry. A sense of ownership was connected with that seat, your friends sat around you that you had things in common with, you felt comfortable engaging from there, it was your comfort zone and someone else had the nerve to take it? But, what if thier old seat had also been taken? Or they too felt a connection and more engaged while sitting in that seat, it should only be fair that they get a turn too. Customs and traditions are important to people, for comfort, morality, and a slew of other important reasons. The fight for the sacred city of Jerusalem as described by Mick Dumper seems to be in the same realm as the chair. All three religions; Islam, Judaism, and Christianity have history in the city, religious and cultural history. Because of the history and connection they each feel with the city, they feel a sense of ownership without making room to share the seat or switch up the seat occasionally. This change can interupt your whole life, or it seems like it would. As Mick describes the tensions that have erupted from East and West Jerusalem and the ownership that each religion has to each part of the city, seems to have a valid reason. Yet, that's the problem and that's why it has been a problem for so long. It's easy to see that all three religions have valid connection to the city, and it's nearly impossible to fight against one of the validations.

And then we go on to read Rashid's view of Jerusalem territory and in the first section he strikes a bell with me, "When dealing with Jerusalem, however, much of what is considered to be "history" is simply not historically verifiable. This is true about most sources, whether in the Bible, the Gospels, the Quran, or most other traditions." This statement is kind of what I was just trying to explain. While each of the traditions relies heavily on their religious book for clarification and validity, each to his own has as much merit, but the others have none. So which one can we believe? However when we hear of the crusades destroying previous rule and area, it only seems logical that the fighting has continued to repeat itself in history. The more Jerusalem was taken away from each group, the more they seemed to covet it, and the harsher the dispute grew. And through these disputes and takeovers, are when things were built or brought to make the city what it is today. Whether it was the Ottomans architectural tiles or the Jewish quarters in the old city, they all define a part of what Jerusalem is, despite being from different backgrounds.

Roman rule, Bible Rule, Mohammad rule, Solomon rule, rule, rule, rule. All this ruling is making me confused and I'm wondering why I gotta do all this math.... (haha) The power devoted by each group trying to dominate the city is eventually over powered by someone else. Someone is always bigger and stronger, and ready to destroy those different from them. That's what I learned especially in the last two articles. There is a lot of names and a lot of people that cared a lot about getting what was best for their own interest.

Class Project

In class on Thursday we talked about all of the different areas of Jerusalem that we were interested in doing a project in on class. It's  awesome that so many people had such different topics that they were willing to work on. It's nice to know people care and have knowledge on these things. I think the fact that we all have such different backgrounds is going to make for great class discussions. I really wouldn't mind doing a project on any of the things that we discussed in class. I have interests in learning about all aspects of the city. I'm really into non-profit and service work, so it would be really cool if someone would wanna find out more about humanitarian issues and work in the area of effected communities. However, all of y'all seem like you would be cool to work with, so I'm not opposed to other ideas at all.

Response #1

It's always been extremely interesting to me the way that people respond to issues or problems in the world. I have concluded that usually it has much to do with how people were raised from their childhood to where it has brought them today. I know this statement isn't completely valid and some people turn out to be everything but their past. Here in these articles I find myself respecting the history that each writer has in connection to such a huge dispute in the world. Religious discourse has been an incredible part of violence in our world's history. To me, I am interested in finding a people with middle ground, respect for their history, but with the ability to embrace religious and social differences. That is why I am so impressed by the idea of the project.

Being a Palestinian or an Israeli in recent history could be anything but easy. For Suad Amiry, I am compelled by her story of working on this project. I admire her for ignoring intolerance, which is never easy. In the end from her we learn that once again the weight of money over-powers the weight of harmony. While we find people who are willing to end a world of problems through breaking personal traditions and history through no personal gain, we are haunted still by the power money has over our happiness and control.

That's what I have been able to realize through all of the accounts of people working on the project; the complete selflessness to work so hard for peace.

The study of ethnography that we learn from Amy Horowitz's account is completely interesting to me. People that devote so much to the effort of folklore and customs are really the people that understand the world. It's hard to explain why I see it this way, but I feel like if we could all mutually respect our own choices with the choices of others, there would be a lot less problems in the world. To me, the work that she did in the project along with the others is the answer, more people just need to realize it. It seems so simple.

PS. I have heard sometimes my writing is not easily understood because I just tend to write whatever comes to mind. So, I'm sorry if it seems a tad confusing and not so fluid.

Introduction

Hey, My name is Maggie Adams (formally Margaret, but it doesn't really fit me) . I am from Indianapolis, IN and grew up on the near east side of town in Irvington. I am majoring in Communications and Culture and minoring in International Studies. I like music.I prefer to be outdoors.  I started studying the Israeli- Palestinian conflict when I was 14 in a global issues class, and have been interested in it ever since. I have served on a Model United Nations committee as a part of the Israeli Joint Cabinet Crisis. In the past few years I haven't been as actively engaged as I would like to be, so I am eager for this class project.