Reading Response 9

I enjoyed both of the readings for today, Old and New Walls in Jerusalem by Menachem Klein and The Writing on the Walls: The Graffiti of the Intifada by Julie Peteet. While both of these article focus on the idea of the wall and its functions, Klein discusses the physical and imaginative walls that segregate the Israelis and the Palestinians, and Peteet is interested in the wall and the function of graffiti as a component of the Palestinian struggle. 

In Klein’s article Old and New Walls in Jerusalem, the author first explains the principal functions of walls. He says there are five different types, and the types of walls that are used for protection and shelter are not present in Jerusalem; rather, the walls found there are the excluding walls and walls of aggression (58). Klein also reinforces the idea that the walls serve as segregating agents. Hey  quotes Passi  saying, “Boundaries between ‘us’ and ‘others’ are critical elements in establishing ‘us’ and excluding ‘others’…boundaries become a part of everyday life and an identity narrative” (57). The difference between traditional walls and the walls that Klein refers to is that these walls further promote the differences between the two people and strengthen the idea of the ‘other’.  While reading Klein’s article, I am again surprised to discover all of the manipulative measures the Israeli government has succeeded in carrying out. Klein states, “The wall that Israel established, by virtue of its superior strength, was meant, by bureaucratic means, to contain and limit the weaker side’s demographic development and to perpetuate the stronger side’s domination” (63). Klein goes into more detail in regards to this statement and emphasizes the degrading procedures that the Palestinians are required to go through. For instance, to be able to cross between West and East Jerusalem Palestinians are required to go through several checkpoints that could take hours. The limited mobility only heightens anti-Israeli sentiment. 

I was fascinated by Peteet’s article on graffiti. I loved hearing the different examples and seeing some of the pictures she included. This article was especially interesting because in my bubble I had never thought about graffiti as more than an activity for kids who had nothing to do. When here we see graffiti we tend to automatically assume it is a gang symbol. In regards to the graffiti of the Palestinians, it became a powerful tool with many different purposes. Peteet says, “The Palestinian community thought “out loud” in graffiti” (141), and “Graffiti constituted a voice for those who felt voiceless in the international arena” (145). Some of the graffiti is resistance, as one would expect. However, I was surprised to find out that is it also a way of connecting the community, of communicating the news and other events, of informing, warning the population, resisting traditional cultural norms, and of commemorating martyrs. While the wall may segregate and dehumanize, as Klein mentioned, it also becomes an area for dialog and freedom. Furthermore, I was shocked to understand that because graffiti is illegal, many of the Palestinians who participate in the paintings will be beaten or even shot if they are caught, and many of the graffiti is painted over with black paint even minutes after it was just put up. For this reason, it becomes even more of a romanticized idea; these Palestinians will potentially risk their lives for a picture or painting that could last no more than a few hours. In the article, Peteet quotes a woman from Ramallah, “Of course, when I wake in the morning and see new graffiti I know that resistance continues. It tells me that people are risking their lives and that they live right here in this neighborhood” (151).  The community appreciates the graffiti and it becomes not only a way to connect the people and create solidarity, but it becomes entertainment. Some of the graffiti on the website was hilarious and laughable. I really enjoyed seeing pictures of it and seeing the diversity of themes that it dealt with. 

On the website, there was footage of part of a wall and the different graffiti there. One of the sayings caught my attention: “Give them justice and they will reward you with peace”. I thought this was a very curious statement and very distinct from other social and political movements throughout history. Most struggles are later commemorated for their non-violent nature. In contrast, the author of this graffiti believes that peace will only come once justice as served. He or she is clearly not afraid to use violence. 

Overall, the graffiti serves as not only beautiful artistic expression but it carries important and social and political meanings. In contrast to Klein’s analysis of the walls, these walls give the Palestinians a voice and help continue the social movement. The many different voices and opinions on these walls inspire dialog and stimulate political discussion while reflecting the variety of viewpoints among the Palestinians. I can’t help but wonder about graffiti and Israelis. They might not need graffiti as a way to speak their mind because they do not have the censorship that the Palestinians do. However, is graffiti still important on their side of the wall? Do they participate in this as a political act? What are their main themes? 

My friend AJ went to Israel/Palestine this summer and put a lot of cool pictures on facebook of some of the graffiti he saw. Here are a couple of the pictures. The last one makes me laugh a lot.