reading response 3/18

            I thought that this reading assignment was very captivating and stood out from the material we have read throughout this semester.  After reading the brief section from Amiry’s book I immediately wanted to buy it and recommended it to a friend.  There were many parts of the reading that grabbed my attention.  In the chapter, “A Dog’s Life” I thought that the complexity of gaining a Jerusalem ID was discussed in a very clever way.  When the narrator was getting his dog, Nura, vaccinated he stated, “neither Nura nor Dr. Tamar realized how damn serious I was about replacing Nura’s photograph with mine.  I don’t think either of them know how difficult or impossible it is for Palestinians to acquire a Jerusalem ID, let alone a Jerusalem passport.”  I think this very intelligently touches upon one of the many difficulties Palestinians faced and how complicated this issue truly was.  When the narrator was driving through the Jerusalem checkpoint he decided to try and use the dogs document to get through.  He explained that he was unable to pass through the checkpoint because both his car and narrator himself need a permit to get through.  However the narrator told the Israeli guard “I don’t have one, but I am the driver of this Jerusalem dog….I am the dog’s driver. As you can see, she is from Jerusalem, and she cannot possibly drive the car or go to Jerusalem all by herself.” The narrator was in fact able to pass through and “thought to himself all it takes is a bit of humor.”  I think that this situation clearly depicts the absurdity of some of the laws that were established during this period of time.

            I also thought that Hasan-Rokem’s article depicted the situation of Jerusalem in a distinct and creative way.  Throughout the semester we have spent a lot of time exploring the strong connection many different groups of people feel to Jerusalem and the reasons why they feel this way.  However, this article’s portrayal of the connection through the feminist perspective is something that I never was exposed to previously.  I found the following quote very interesting “it is only natural that each one in his turn was filled with passion to fondle the roundness of the bulging hills and to adorn them with pearls of stone and brick, to seal his one and only covenant with the bride; or to enter the cleavage of winding wadis, to leave there the signs of their vitality and virility.” Here it is emphasized that people have a bond with Jerusalem that resembles a bond one has with a women.  The author brings it to attention that women deserve to be loved in a less possessive and more equal way, “however Jerusalem is not a women, it is a city with a long, long history, in which many peoples have lived and many cultures have teemed”.  After reading this article I agree with the authors perspective, that there should be “a higher order of open-mindedness, less blinded by ones frustrated emotional needs,” however I am interested to see how the author feels it is possible to implement this change. How does she expect peoples emotional “need” for Jerusalem to disappear?