I know it's a bit late.
It's taken me awhile to get clear on how I feel, and to apologize for my initial reactions.
It’s interesting times, being an American Francophile. Most
of my friends who are fans of the French or of France jumped on the “Je suis
Charlie” campaign ASAP. I waited a few days, absorbed in a retreat I was
teaching, only able to read on my phone, never able to read deeply enough. I
kept everyone I know in France and all those I don’t know in my practices –
Metta, Tonglen – the victims, the terrorists, everyone. I posted little-to-nothing
on Facebook, which is my main social media outlet.
Then some folks I trust and respect started pointing out
more critical articles, pointing to Hebdo being a “not innocent” institution.
While I am usually wary of this line of thinking (“She asked for it, judge, she
was wearing a skirt!”), I never particularly – nor do I now – liked Charlie
Hebdo. Living in France, traveling in France over the last twenty some years of
my life, I generally leafed through the issue, repulsed by its images while also
knowing their satirical nature. However, in my moments of reactiveness, of
feeling I needed to say SOMETHING. Why did I feel I need to say something?
Friends who know me as Francophile were asking how I felt, wanted to know how
they should feel, for better or worse. I reacted and posted based on those old reactions. I broke
a cardinal French rule: neglecting Voltaire’s maxim (paraphrased: I may not
like what you say but I will defend your right to say it) I based my reactions
on not liking Charlie Hebdo.
I started re-posting articles that criticized the
publication, even as they clearly stated they were not saying the cartoonists
or magazine asked for it. They still imply it.
The French, generally, are pro-criticism and pro-critical
thinking. This is what I betrayed in my need to say something: I dropped my own
more subtle awareness of Charlie Hebdo’s satire in favor of reactivity. Why?
I understand full well why they use racist
images/cartoons in their issues. (Here’s a good article on Al-Jezeera about how satire is sacred in France. Here's one on vox that explains how double-layer satireworks in the French culture, including a great statement: "satire that indulges racism along the way:) In short, Hebdo doesn't actually create many of its ideas. It uses images already described in media. For instance, this heavily reproduced image is made from the Front National's leader's description. It is used to make her out to be the racist, in a direct way that the majority of readers would understand. This is a part of the double-layer satire I mention above. I know that a lot of American media missed this. I didn't miss it.
However, I
still think it is problematic. It is not as simple as "Hebdo is racist" for me. For me,
satire does not justify perpetuating aggression. I simply think there are other
ways to do it. I don’t agree with them, in other words. But it’s a subtle not-agreeing. A not agreeing with a particular tack, angle. Not a disagreeing with
a world view. The cartoons are racist, even though they are using racism to leverage against those who initially expressed it. I don’t think the cartoonists are racist, or
the magazine is. That takes awhile to explain. I feel like I can finally state
it clearly.
As Ta-Nehisi Coates points out in this careful post to Atlantic Monthly (which also has, as always, very intelligent discussion
following, for once on the internet!), he took heed in Paris as this was happening
and listened to all sides and parts, like a good student of any foreign culture
does. After reading his post and the comments, I finally felt I could write
what I have been experiencing. And part of it is something akin to guilt. Guilt
that I let ignorance fill me, first, literally trying to ignore it was
happening, then letting much simpler posts and articles speak for me, when I
could be responsible for my own more nuanced view.
My mother always hated it when we said, like teenagers and
kids do, “I’m so-rry,” with no actual apology behind it. She warned us, like
other mothers might warn kids to eat their veggies, to not apologize without
real feeling. Save it for what we meant. For what we actually felt sorrow for.
Later, in my teens, she taught me Mea Culpa: Latin, a more
formal way of saying, This is My Fault. Reserved for very specific and special
circumstances, I feel it is appropriate here. It is appropriate for me to say I am sorry for not expressing myself more clearly about Hebdo, earlier, with so many people waiting on me to have a read on what is happening.
Because the fact is, Charlie
Hebdo, which I do not identify with and never will, did not ask for this action.
And the fact also is that the state of being any minority – visual or verbal –
in France is pretty awful right now: Jewish, Muslim, African, Middle Eastern.
There’s a lot of anger and aggression going around there and it’s extremely
confusing and scary. Adding blame to that game is not helpful.
The “I am
Charlie” manifestation is expressing solidarity – a key feature of French
society – that means far more than identifying with the publication. And yet I
couldn’t say it. Maybe because I am not there right now, not connected enough,
not reading enough. Maybe because my knee-jerk inner French-leanings ironically
got in the way of me doing a very American thing: jumping on the band wagon and
saying that I am Charlie. And yet, my very American habits then kicked in and
put me on an opposing bandwagon.
I won’t say I am Charlie. As Coates says “I may be
Charlie?” I don't actually think it's my place to say. I am not French. I may, despite all my study and sympathy, be missing
something. Likely I am. But I am also not not Charlie. It saddens me to see the
French government tightening up in a potentially post-911 manner, ala Patriot
Act. I worry about reactivity everywhere, including those in Coates' post who say
that “Je Suis Charlie” means the future of Europe.
After a tragedy, we are all
subject to quick reactivity – whether it is jumping to support or denigrate, it
tends to be dualistic. I promise to spend more time in the coming weeks and
months, connecting with my French folks, going more deeply into myself. This
means I will never be able to say in one line how I feel about it, and
certainly can’t tell anyone else how they should feel. That’s just not how I
roll. But at least I can admit nuance and take the time to commit to only
knowing my own confusion.
Finally, let us not forget that while all of this has been happening in France, awful and for the most part overlooked massacres have been happening in Africa. Not enough of us are considering saying "Je suis Afrique," an especially challenging possibility considering France's post-colonial relationship with Africa.
Slavoj Zizek
Amy Hollowell
Roxane Gay
Olivier Cyran
Joe Sacco
No comments:
Post a Comment