Susan Sontag, RIP
The Guardian reports,
Susan Sontag, the writer and activist whose powerful intellect helped shape modern American thinking for nearly half a century, died yesterday at the age of 71.
[…]“[S]he was one of the lone female Jewish voices to appear as some kind of authority in the shifting American cultural scene […] She helped introduce the voices of those who had been outsiders in American society, like the Jews, and she became part of a new cutting edge cultural elite.”
susan sontag was one of the most antijewish, anti israeli, anti western writers to embarrass jews by having jewish ancestry. ever the hater of the west, she wrote that the 9/11 mass murderers were in fact brave fighters with legitimate grievences to whom we should listen. since we dont believe in hell, i cant wish her many years there; but i can wish her many painful years having her “soul polished” awaiting her entrance to the heavan she didnt believe in
what was anti Jewish about her?
PS – you are an anti-intellectual ingnoramous. all you know is that she mis-spoke once, and for this you condemn her.
shame shame shame
Avi,
You just condemned a Jewish woman with vile slander the moment she passed away from this earth. Ergo, you are a self-hating Jew.
eli, your logic fails you: i hate some jews: noam chomspky, susan sontag, adam shapiro dead or alive precisely because they are anti jewish. i love 99.9% of my fellow jews – that makes me self hating? and jo, im tired of doing other peoples research for them, her record is very public, you can find her anti jewish statements on your own.
Other people’s research? I don’t think you’ve included a single link in the entire history of your ramblings.
Avi must be right… I mean In a December 7, 2002, radio address Ed Koch said that “Susan Sontag will occupy the Ninth Circle of Hell for her outrageous assaults on Israel.” … and since Koch speaks for all the Jews of America (especially in his support for President Bush)… clearly Avi is right…
In terms of ‘anti-jewish’ statements the worst I could find in a brief googling is *gasp* Sontag supports Rachel Corrie and the Israeli Refuseniks… now, though that perhaps borders on being ‘anti-elements-of-israeli-society-that-support-occupation’ I’m certainly not convinced it’s ‘anti-jewish.’
I also urge everyone to read the following before responding — it’s long… and Avi, if you don’t want to bother researching, you probably aren’t going to want to waste your time reading a ‘liberal rag’ like the Nation… but before you make dispicable comments about the dead, perhaps you might want to read what her actual thoughts were:
http://tinylink.com/?tjSq15sev0
Thanks for the link, Lerxst. On the basis of the article you linked alone, I can agree with Avi. Despicable comments about the dead? What about despicable comments about millions, living and dead? Sontag calls Israel “the forces of violence and oppression”. She also states, as fact, that Rachel Corrie was murdered.
For the record, the Nation is not liberal. For liberal opinion, see the New Republic, American Prospect or Washington Monthly. But it is a rag. And see Gore Vidal’s comments about the Jews published without apology by the Nation a few years back.
One quibble concerning Avi’s comment: In the New Yorker article, Sontag argued that the terrorists (my description, of course) could not be called cowards. To me, this was not objectionable – you can’t say that someone who did what they did is a coward. Evil, certainly, but not cowardly. Most of the rest of the article was repulsive, though.
It’s time we stopped distinguishing between anti-semitic Jews and anti-semitic non-Jews. Let ’em all go to hell. Good riddance, Susan Sontag.
J… could you clarify what particularly in the article causes you to believe that Sontag is ‘anti-Jewish’…
We could certainly get into semantics about the legal definition of murder (is LSAT around), but I’m not convinced that in it of itself makes Sontag ‘anti-Jewish’…
You suggest that, Sontag calls Israel “the forces of violence and oppression”.… But she doesn’t. She quotes from the description of the Oscar Romero Award… whose presentation was the purpose of her speech.
Clearly there are anti-semites who attempt to mask their bias under the guise of anti-israel sentiments… and clearly there are those that are anti-israel who (because they’re cold/calluous or because they just don’t know, or whatever) imbue their anti-israel sentiments with anti-semitic imagery… but there are times when people (jews, non-jews, self-hating jews, israelis, arabs, etc…) have legitiment concerns about the policies of the Israeli government, and they should have the right to voice these concerns without a knee-jerk reaction from others of ‘anti-semitism’ ‘anti-judaism’ etc… such a reaction cheapens the term. Diminishes its power. And at times weakens our ability as a community to fight back when real anti-semitism occurs…
So, umm, which one of you here have ever read a Susan Sontag book? Hmmm? Anyone?….. Hello? Anyone? (Except for Mo…)
Lerxst:
This is paragraph 4 of the article you linked:
“Two emblematic figures of sacrifice [one of which was Rachel Corrie], killed by the forces of violence and oppression to which they were offering nonviolent, principled, dangerous opposition.”
Although the words “violence and oppression” track the quote given in paragraph 2, in paragraph 4 no quotation marks are present, and no caveats or qualifiers are added. What should I conclude? (You may want to argue that the “forces of violence and oppression” are meant to be limited to right-wing governments, but the rest of the article undermines this notion.)
Then there’s this:
“Houses are demolished, groves are uprooted, the stalls of a village market are bulldozed, a cultural center is looted; and now, nearly every day, civilians of all ages are fired on and killed. There can be no disputing the mounting cruelty of the Israeli occupation of the 22 percent of the former territory of British Palestine on which a Palestinian state will be erected.”
And this:
“It is surely false to think that murder, expulsion, annexations, the building of walls–all that has contributed to reducing a whole people to dependence, penury and despair–will bring security and peace to the oppressors.”
And as icing on the cake, there’s this:
“These soldiers, who are Jews, take seriously the principle put forward at the Nuremberg trials in 1945-46: namely, that a soldier is not obliged to obey unjust orders, orders that contravene the laws of war–indeed, one has an obligation to disobey them. ”
You say “We could certainly get into semantics about the legal definition of murder …”
Not necessary. The general definition is “killing without sufficient, or any, justification”.
What Sontag said above is consistent with her positions over many years.
You say
“Clearly there are anti-semites who attempt to mask their bias under the guise of anti-israel sentiments… and clearly there are those that are anti-israel who (because they’re cold/calluous or because they just don’t know, or whatever) imbue their anti-israel sentiments with anti-semitic imagery… but there are times when people (jews, non-jews, self-hating jews, israelis, arabs, etc…) have legitiment concerns about the policies of the Israeli government, and they should have the right to voice these concerns without a knee-jerk reaction from others of ‘anti-semitism’ ‘anti-judaism’ etc… such a reaction cheapens the term. Diminishes its power. And at times weakens our ability as a community to fight back when real anti-semitism occurs…”
I agree entirely with that paragraph (though note that I did not deny Sontag any “right” to say what she said. I did not propose censoring her or imprisoning her. But let’s not deny me my right to denounce her).
What it boils down to is whether Sontag’s public statements were made in the good faith belief that they were right (in other words, merely being wrong would not be enough to earn someone the title of “anti-semite”). In my view, Sontag’s comments quoted above are so far out of line with reality, both in terms of fact and of interpretation of fact, that I can only reasonably conclude that such comments were made in bad faith. As a public intellectual, and an older one at that, we can’t excuse Sontag’s comments as deriving from ignorance or inexperience.
SNAFU:
Are you trying to say that in order to criticize someone, we must read (one of? all of?) their books? Would you apply that standard to yourself? And why should I have to wade through Sontag’s views on camp or photography in order to comment on her statements about Israel? Try using real arguments next time.
SNAFU: I’ve read Illness as Metaphor, AIDS & It’s Metaphors and a number of her essays (generally as they came out in the various publications)…
J: To start I want to say I have no desire to deny you the right to denounce sontag. Perhaps it would be apropos to quote the anti-Semitic Voltaire “I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it.”
That aside… I think you and I are reading this article differently. I see a woman who has a deep sense of yiddishkayt w/o perhaps a deep knowledge of those histories and traditions, but a deep meaningful understanding of her Jewishness based on that fact.
So what you read of anti-Israel/anti-Jewish rhetoric (again, I’m still perplexed how even if all those comments are anti-Israel, how they’re anti-Jewish) I read as one Jewish woman’s attempt to balance her own internal contradictions (which i think most of us have w/ our own Jewish Identity)… Heck, it’s the product of “a highly effective democratic style of child rearing sprinkled with a healthy dose of liberalism” (The Hebrew Hammer)
One example. When accepting the Jerusalem Prize, (yes she was awarded Israel’s top literary honor,) many on the far-left chastised her for accepting the award for giving legitimacy to the Israeli government. Many others were offended that she used the opportuinity to condemn Israel’s “collective punishment” (her words)… but then again… others applauded.
Lerxst:
“Perhaps it would be apropos to quote the anti-Semitic Voltaire “I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it.”
That’s the money quote (though I still don’t think the old bastard wouldv’e had the guts to actually follow through).
“I see a woman who has a deep sense of yiddishkayt w/o perhaps a deep knowledge of those histories and traditions, but a deep meaningful understanding of her Jewishness based on that fact.”
I agree, but that’s only Part One. Grafted onto this (otherwise unobjectionable) moralism, I think, is a great deal of exhibitionism and self-righteousness, with a lack of restraint and discipline. People like Sontag tend to be in love with “speaking truth to power”, and they’ll do this regardless of whether the circumstances justify it. They’re more interested in a “moral stance” than in actual morality. And of course, for a self-proclaimed “public intellectual”, what excuse is there for claiming that one’s positions stem from their Jewishness while remaining willfully ignorant of what Jewishness actually entails?
“So what you read of anti-Israel/anti-Jewish rhetoric (again, I’m still perplexed how even if all those comments are anti-Israel, how they’re anti-Jewish) …”
I find the comments to be anti-Jewish because the thinking behind those comments imposes standards on Jews that it wouldn’t even consider imposing on most others, and the imposition endangers Israel as a whole and contributes to the killing of individual Jews. (You can argue that the Sontags of the world are also hyper-critical about the US and the West in general. True, but that still doesn’t mean these people are not anti-Jewish. And their bashing of the US is just one more reason I say “good riddance” when they finally kick the bucket.)
“I read as one Jewish woman’s attempt to balance her own internal contradictions (which i think most of us have w/ our own Jewish Identity)… Heck, it’s the product of “a highly effective democratic style of child rearing sprinkled with a healthy dose of liberalism” (The Hebrew Hammer)”
Very possibly. It may then be time to reconsider how non-Orthodox Jews are being raised. But in any case, most liberal Jews manage not to spew the vile accusations I quoted above, internal contradictions notwithstanding.
“When accepting the Jerusalem Prize, (yes she was awarded Israel’s top literary honor,) ”
In another thread, we were discussing Yoram Hazony’s book, “The Jewish State”. If you read it, you’ll see that Israel-bashing is no obstruction (to say the least) to winning awards in Israel.
Yes, there are people out there who are worse than Sontag (Hello, Noam!), but I don’t see how Sontag’s accusations of murder and oppression can be excused.
J: points taken again… (especially on our buddy voltaire). Just two quick points:
1. re: I find the comments to be anti-Jewish because the thinking behind those comments imposes standards on Jews that it wouldn’t even consider imposing on most others, and the imposition endangers Israel as a whole and contributes to the killing of individual Jews…
Fair enough, but Sontag certainly didn’t limit her criticism to Israel or the U.S.A. it’s somewhat unfortunate that many will only know her/remember her for such rhetoric, but juxtaposing it against the entirety of the work, you’re right there are far larger fish to fry. which brings me to…
2. Yes, there are people out there who are worse than Sontag (Hello, Noam!), but I don’t see how Sontag’s accusations of murder and oppression can be excused.
Not excused but Again I think Avi’s reaction when her body was still probably warm was a bit over the top… She’s no Arafat.
I don’t think anyone sees Sontag as being in the same league as Arafat. As for reaction to her death, it’s a judgment call. When Arafat went, me and my friends polished off a great deal of Scotland’s and Kentucky’s finest (my toast: “may Arafat be rewarded with 72 virgins…who look just like him”), but I wouldn’t consider doing that on the occasion of Sontag’s death. Sontag’s passing is more of an opportunity to reflect on the terrible waste of talent and influence among far too many prominent Jews.