Blog

 

Game Clock

On the altar of the skies
A star ignites
And with our yearning flares.

And time–like a game keeper at his meadow–
Is counting in the sky,
A heart beats up,
The star drips down.

Fate is just an echo.
While others shout
I–silent like foam.

Life is just an hour.
But no one knows
Where it ends
And when it begins.

(for Paví Očko)

translated from the Czech by Motýlí Voko

Časomíra

Na nebes oltáři
hvězda zazáří
a touhou naší plane.

A čas, jak hajný na čekané,
na nebi počítá,
srdce dotluče,
hvězda skane.

Osud je jen ozvěna,
jiný křičí,
já jak pěna.

Život je jen hodina,
nikdo ale neví,
kdy končí
a kdy začíná.

~listopad 2004~

About the poem: Although Admiral Babočka would have never authorized these lyrics for publication, the weight of the occasion, I trust, justifies my snatching them from the academician’s scratch book.

Jan Vihan is a contributing writer for In The Fray.

 

Springtime for Hitler

If there’s one place in the world that has full license to make fun of Hitler, it’s here … We don’t shy away from the images. If you look at Israeli television every night, there are swastikas and Nazi footage on one programme or another. It’s not as if seeing a swastika is a shock for Israelis. The main objective is to make people laugh.”

Micah Levensohn, Israeli director ofThe Producers, a musical based on Mel Brooks’ original 1968 film about two Broadway producers who stage an accidentally successful musical about Hitler. Although the producers’ intent was to create an offensive flop — and subsequently flee with the excess money they had raised for the musical — they discover that they have unwittingly made a hit musical about Hitler and are consequently incarcerated.

The show, translated into Hebrew and playing to packed houses at the 920-seater Cameri Theater in Tel Aviv, is currently sold out through May 2006.

Mimi Hanaoka

 

It’s the hate, stupid

I wasn’t entirely clear on last week’s post about Proposition 187.  Worrying about the Hispanic vote is a secondary issue.  Even in California, as nasty Mickey Kaus points out (scroll down to March 30th), the Hispanic vote is not large enough to account for the swing towards Democrats.  It seems doubtful in any case that second- and third-generation immigrants are single-issue voters on immigration policy.

The dynamic is much more like the one facing Republicans over racial issues.  The real constituency of concern is not African Americans, who at this point are unattainable.  However, when the Republicans pander to the bigots in their base, they scare off centrist voters of all races and ethnicities.  The majority of American voters are simply not racist xenophobes, and they are going to find these sentiments distasteful.  Being worried about immigration does not mean that one hates immigrants.  

If a politician seems to be attacking your neighbor, your co-worker, or your friend, you are going to react against them.  In a state like California, a construction worker with right-wing views might vote Democratic because he is going to feel uncomfortable supporting bigotry against people he knows.  If he has never met a Mexican immigrant, the whole thing becomes abstract and impersonal.  It’s much easier to hate people you never meet in person.

An anti-immigrant policy may have short-term support. In the long run, as more Americans come into contact with immigrants, they will be more likely to support politicians who aren’t making their living by stoking up ethnic and racial animosity.

Pete DeWan

 

The Asians are back

It’s very sad and disturbing that in this day and age, this stereotype is coming from a large and global company like Adidas.


Vincent Pan, executive director of Chinese for Affirmative Action in San Francisco, referring to Adidas’ new $250 “Yellow Series Y1 Huf” sneakers, emblazoned with a yellow drawing of a young Asian boy who sports bowl-cut hair, a pig nose, and bares his buck teeth.

Adidas, for its part, denies the accusations of racism and cites the fact that the image was drawn by U.S. graffiti artist Barry McGee, who has used the drawing in anti-racist commentary. Unlike the previous Abercrombie and Fitch t-shirts, also emblazoned with images of Asians — although this time with caricatured faces, garb, commentary (such as “Wong Brothers Laundry Service — Two Wongs Can Make It White,”) and no irony — which caused a furor and sparked accusations of racism, Adidas’ ploy might be better-intentioned. However, Barry McGee’s drawing, stripped of its context, loses its edginess and instead becomes mired in sloppy commentary on race relations that encourages misinterpretation.

Mimi Hanaoka

 

Immigration nation

We’re going to have an endless parade of illegal immigrants here in our country.
— House Majority Leader John Boehner

As Mexican immigrants continue to be criminalized for making their way into the U.S., I think about my parents’ journeys to this country and how little they fit into the spin of what Mexican immigrants represent. Thieves, rapists, murderers. Lazy, slothful, deceitful.

My mother’s family came from Mexico via Texas. The oldest daughter, she made her way to California through the fields. Literally. My mother picked cotton, fruit, and vegetables and met my father, who found his way from the Philippines, in that same soil.

Starting a family, my parents put the oldest of their brood to work right alongside them, hours of walking, bending, picking in the sun and the dust. Lazy? Slothful? Not quite. And, as far as I know, they never stole, raped, or killed anyone.

Just as my parents don’t fit the stereotype, the overwhelming majority of Mexican immigrants don’t either. They don’t risk their lives to cross into a country that devalues their skills, asks them to do jobs that “we” wouldn’t do, and gives them no credit for their contributions.

We ask them to be invisible, until it’s time to get them the hell out.  

The cycle of criminalizing immigrants continues. Instead of buying the tired old stereotype trotted out every time the status quo feels threatened by the different-colored faces in their midst, “we” the people need to do a little thinking.

One of the easiest ways might be to look to our own family’s history. Why did our immigrant families choose to come to the United States? Do they fit into the stereotypes of immigrant criminals? We know the answers. Now, all we have to do is keep asking those questions before we close the doors on everyone else.

Desiree Aquino

 

When in the course of human events does it become necessary?

Seymour Hersh’s frightening article in The New Yorker tells us not only that Bush is planning to attack Iran but that he is considering using nuclear weapons to do so.  Given all the anonymous sources, it’s hard to be sure how seriously to take it.  Perhaps it is all part of some behind-the-scenes negotiating strategy, but it also doesn’t seem wise to believe that these people recognize just how crazy their ideas are.  The kicker line from some defense official is that they believe “a sustained bombing campaign in Iran will humiliate the religious leadership and lead the public to rise up and overthrow the government.”  Doesn’t that sound like exactly the kind of thing that they might believe?

When the administration geared up to attack Iraq, I thought about what my response should be.  On moral grounds, I felt that removing Saddam was the right thing to do.  In the real world, though, the chances of the cure being worse than the disease looked awfully high.

I went to some futile protests, where I got to walk with some supporters of the North Korean regime.  Later I watched on television as “Shock and Awe” began the inevitable disaster that Iraq has been.  I felt hopeless and turned away to disengagement.  To pacify my conflicted feelings, I told myself I wouldn’t stand by if it came to attacking Iran.  There is no moral or pragmatic confusion — bombing Iran would be both evil and idiotic.

Now it seems that the day may be arriving soon, perhaps in time for midterm elections.  If Bush decides to attack Iran with nukes, what responsibility do we have as Americans?  When do we say enough is enough, risk our comfortable lives, and take action by any means necessary?

Pete DeWan

 

Why your tuna has a layover in Tokyo

I’ve been in Tokyo for a day now, and today I visited the Tsukiji fish market, the world’s largest, which handles more than 400 types of seafood…

I’ve been in Tokyo for a day now, and today I visited the Tsukiji fish market, the world’s largest, which handles more than 400 types of seafood every day. This includes fresh tuna weighing more than 600 pounds each, which are auctioned off in frenzied early-morning bidding and then quickly find their way into sushi bars across the country and around the world.

The irony is that many of these tuna are caught in waters off the coast of New England, then are shipped overnight to Tsukiji in Tokyo — and then, if deemed premium grade, may actually make their way back to America for sale in top-end sushi bars.

This article in Foreign Policy provides a fascinating look at the global network of fishermen, fishmongers, and businesspeople who bring that fresh pink tuna onto your dinner plate. Here’s one paragraph worth pondering:

Not to impugn the quality of the fish sold in the United States, but on the New England docks, the first determination of tuna buyers is whether they are looking at a “domestic” fish or an “export” fish. On that judgment hangs several dollars a pound for the fisher, and the supply of sashimi-grade tuna for fishmongers, sushi bars, and seafood restaurants up and down the Eastern seaboard. Some of the best tuna from New England may make it to New York or Los Angeles, but by way of Tokyo — validated as top quality (and top price) by the decision to ship it to Japan by air for sale at Tsukiji, where it may be purchased by one of the handful of Tsukiji sushi exporters who supply premier expatriate sushi chefs in the world’s leading cities.

So what value does that around-the-world jaunt from New England to Tokyo and back actually impart to your wasabi-laden sushi roll? Nothing more than the stamp of approval of a certified Japanese tuna buyer — one worth a substantial amount of money in this global fish market.

Of course, this may not be so strange a concept if you remember all the “American” brand-name products that are manufactured in far-off lands, with no real U.S. connection except for, at best, a corporate headquarters still rooted (thanks to generous tax breaks) in some random city. Even the label “Made in America” can sometimes mean parts produced in Mexico and China were merely clamped and welded together in a domestic factory.

In the interconnected world of today, rich countries like America and Japan may not build or produce anything in their own factories anymore, but they sure know good value — enough to charge a hefty premium for it.

Victor Tan Chen

Victor Tan Chen is In The Fray's editor in chief and the author of Cut Loose: Jobless and Hopeless in an Unfair Economy. Site: victortanchen.com | Facebook | Twitter: @victortanchen

 

TV vs. the Web — friends or foes?

On Wednesday the big headline all over the media landscape was that Katie Couric finally decided to move her perky but serious persona to CBS News to host their evening national newscast.  Is this big news?  Will this change the way we all govern our lives? Ten or twenty years ago it would have been the story of the year, but today, I’m not so sure.  The proliferation of cable, satellite, and the Internet has either leveled the playing field or decimated traditional information outlets, depending on if you’re old or new media.

If you break the current media landscape down to two main sources, you have television on one side and the Web on the other, with each having good and bad qualities.  Overall, you have to say that the Web is probably the best tool ever invented to efficiently and conveniently spread information out to the most people, but it has no human personality — just plain old information.  Oh, yes, certain websites have a certain look to them and you can play videos and have conference calls, but it’s more like the telephone — a means to an end.

Television, on the other hand, is an end to a means.  It has lots of personality — actually, it is mostly all personality, especially now that there are a gazillion channels from which to choose.  By this definition, television is more human, but it lacks the ability to communicate information effectively and conveniently for the best interests of the viewer.  Getting back to Katie Couric, she works on television because she is all personality — you watch because you like her, not because you’re trying to get information from her.  You sit at your computer and click to CNN.com or a number of other news websites to strictly get news and information.  Even the so-called cable news channels have switched to the all-personality method.  CNN did start 25 years ago almost like a website, delivering the headlines over and over, to which you simply tuned in for a few minutes until they would begin repeating themselves.  Then the first Gulf War showed them that people would stay and watch longer when certain interesting news personalities were on the air, such as Bernard Shaw, Peter Arnett, Wolf Blitzer, and the Scud Stud, Arthur Kent, the dashing correspondent that wooed a lot of women to watch the first TV war.  

Now all news on TV is entertainment to some degree, whether it’s Bill O’Reilly or Billy Bush.  The Web is still strictly a no-nonsense, fact-finding, information-tool kind of media where each website pretty much is interchangeable and the difference is more of how it is delivered than how it emotionally connects to people.  What is the future?  Television cannot continue strictly as entertainment and be as powerful as it has since the 1950s.  The Web won’t just stay the way it is because people will begin to demand more personality.  The result will be the merging of the two media, which is slowly beginning to happen as we speak.  I think in the not-so-distant future, all homes will have one information portal, whether through one or a combination of technologies, i.e., cable, wireless, telephony.  You may certainly have multiple screens in various rooms, but through these screens you will communicate with others (picture and voice), watch entertainment, obtain news and information, and monitor your home’s systems.  It will be a combination television, computer, telephone, stereo, and appliance.  And you’ll be able to take it all with you on a handheld duplicate version, all geared to your personal specifications.  Your spouse, kids, roommates, and in-laws would all have their own versions programmed to their own tastes and needs.  

So when Katie Couric announces that she’s leaving the Today show and switching to the CBS Evening News, don’t believe it’s going to change America.  That’s more a job for Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and the clever person who came up with podcasting (Adam Curry).

Rich Burlingham

null

 

Letting the girls live

The medical profession is doing all it can though we have to address this as a social evil. People should be proud to have a girl child.

Dr. Vinay Agarwal, president of the Indian Medical Association, speaking about the first conviction leading to a jail sentence in India for a doctor and his X-ray technician for determining the sex of a female fetus, which they then agreed to abort based on its gender.  Dr. Anil Sabhani and his assistant Kartar Singh were sentenced to two years in jail and a fine for agreeing to abort a female fetus in 2001.

India banned gender testing for fetuses and abortions based on the results in 1994. Traditional biases and crippling dowry prices have made female lives significantly more expendable than those of their male counterparts; medical journal The Lancet estimates that ten million female fetuses were aborted during the past two decades as a result of gender determination, a practice which has ratcheted up the gender imbalance as high as 793 girls to every 1,000 boys in the state of Punjab.

Mimi Hanaoka

 

War powers remain in legal limbo

The U.S. Supreme Court refused today to hear a legal challenge to the president’s war powers brought by Jose Padilla, a U.S. citizen who was he…

The U.S. Supreme Court refused today to hear a legal challenge to the president’s war powers brought by Jose Padilla, a U.S. citizen who was held until recently as an “enemy combatant” without basic legal rights. The court’s majority pointed out that since the Bush administration moved Padilla after 3 1/2 years from military to civilian custody, the appeal was now “hypothetical.” (Forget that the administration transferred Padilla precisely to avoid any such legal questioning of its wartime policies.) But by not taking up the case, the court has left unanswered key questions about the president’s wartime authority to circumvent or defy the Constitution. The administration will continue with dubious measures it insists are legal, and critics will continue to be able to do nothing about it. What, you may ask, is the purpose of a Supreme Court, if it cannot resolve these divisive wartime issues?

It’s important to remember this kind of legal uncertainty encourages abuse. We can see this at U.S.-run prison camps in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere, where the administration’s failure to dictate clear policies encouraged soldiers to make their own conclusions about what treatment was “humane” and what was not — with tragic results.

Victor Tan Chen

Victor Tan Chen is In The Fray's editor in chief and the author of Cut Loose: Jobless and Hopeless in an Unfair Economy. Site: victortanchen.com | Facebook | Twitter: @victortanchen

 

The dreams that got away

issue banner

Spring is the season for daydreaming. But just as quickly as the season fades into summer, so too do our dreams vanish right before our eyes.

In this issue of InTheFray, we highlight stories concerning the fleeting nature of our dreams and expectations. We begin on the streets of Manhattan, where ITF Contributing Writer Erin Marie Daly offers us a poignant glimpse of the taxing, scarcely acknowledged existence of homeless transgender teens in How many strikes. We then board Brooklyn’s Q train with Iraq war veteran Boris Pukhovitskiy, whose Homecoming from a 16-month tour of duty in Iraq forces him to bridge the world he left behind with a changing New York landscape.

Meanwhile, in Kenya, Marian Smith’s conscience gets the best of her when she sees the Maasai’s dung houses standing alongside her own luxurious accommodations during A summer of gracious living. But as she discovers, she’s the only one troubled by this disparity.

Back in the United States, Ellen Wernecke exposes just how illusive such gracious living is for Americans on welfare in her insightful review of Jason DeParle’s American Dreams. Rounding out this month’s stories is Kimberlee Soo’s Covergirl, an all-too-familiar tale of a little sister who aspires to her older sister’s beauty, only to discover her sister also longs for something more.

Thanks for reading!

Laura Nathan
Editor
Buffalo, New York

Coming soon: A whole new look and feel to our website!

 

If we leave our gods (part two)

Those were the good days when a man had friends in distant clans. Your generations does not know that. You stay at home, afraid of your next-door neighbor. Even a man’s motherland is strange to him nowada…

Those were the good days when a man had friends in distant clans. Your generations does not know that. You stay at home, afraid of your next-door neighbor. Even a man’s motherland is strange to him nowadays.

—Chinua Achebe, Things Fall Apart

On Wednesday I wrote about Chinua Achebe’s book Things Fall Apart, and its relevance to modern-day struggles between old and new — specifically, the recently renewed debate over evolution, which pits religious doctrine against scientific knowledge.

I should be clear about one thing: By humanizing deeply flawed men like Okonkwo, Achebe is not telling us that we should wax nostalgic about the old ways. It would be foolish to forget the cruelties of that past society. But it would be foolish, too, to forget why Okonkwo clings so desperately to his culture’s disappearing traditions — or, for that matter, why men and women of a similar mindset today persist in certain beliefs about the origins and history of life in spite of scientific evidence to the contrary.

When I used to cover religious issues as a reporter, I saw these reasons firsthand. The church is, above all, a community, and tradition is the bedrock of that community, the shared language, imagery, and philosophy that make communication, and communion, possible. It is not surprising that today’s most fervent defenders of the old doctrines — evangelical Christians in this country — have some of the most tightly knit communities of faith and the fastest-growing congregations. Especially in regions of the country (or world) that have yet to hear the good news of this new era of global markets, the good news of scripture adds real, undeniable value to people’s lives.

Perhaps the clash of cultures in Things Fall Apart could have turned out less tragically, and we may hope the same for the current battle over evolution. (There have been some recent attempts to reconcile faith with science — take, for example, the Dalai Lama’s recent book, The Universe in a Single Atom, which attempts a dialogue between Buddhism and modern science, especially physics and genetics.) That said, the lack of understanding on either side does not bode well. We see the terrible consequences of such ignorance in Achebe’s novel. The British overlords do not understand why the Igbo persist in their “primitive” customs, and their intransigence forces a confrontation that ends in death.

Particularly illuminating is the description of one zealous missionary, the Rev. James Smith, who insists there is no reason to compromise with or accommodate the heathens. “He saw the world as a battlefield in which the children of light were locked in mortal conflict with the sons of darkness,” Achebe writes. It is not hard to see a similar kind of combativeness on both sides in the recent debate over teaching evolution. On one side are those who disdain science; on the other are those who see the religiously devout as “primitives” of another sort. What lies between them is shared misunderstanding. When Okonkwo and his fellow villagers confront the missionary, one of the men offers an apt description of their predicament: “We say he is foolish because he does not know our ways, and perhaps he says we are foolish because we do not know his.”

Near the end of Things Fall Apart, Achebe gives us more clues of what the old ways mean to men like Okonkwo. Giving thanks before a feast at Okonkwo’s home, his uncle Uchendu prays to the ancestors for health and children. “We do not ask for wealth because he that has health and children will also have wealth. We do not pray to have more money but to have more kinsmen. We are better than animals because we have kinsmen. An animal rubs its itching flank against a tree, a man asks his kinsman to scratch him.”

With all our modern technology and sophistication, humanity still hungers for connection and kinship. The old ways die, the new ways take root, but what happens to the community? That is the tragedy of Achebe’s book, and the challenge we face now, on the precipice of another transformation.

Victor Tan Chen

Victor Tan Chen is In The Fray's editor in chief and the author of Cut Loose: Jobless and Hopeless in an Unfair Economy. Site: victortanchen.com | Facebook | Twitter: @victortanchen