Friday, May 20, 2011

Eyal Plotkin: "The Human Scale" - My 2 Cents

By Eyal Plotkin: "The 'Kameri' Theater has commissioned 'The Human Scale' to be performed in Tel-aviv – these are my 2 cents on it: (I direct my words to the creators of this endeavor; this is how this composition is written)

I have been talking to quite a few people about the notions raised in the presentation which includes coworkers, friends and even someone dear to me who had lost someone dear to them in an “abhorrent act”; that by itself already makes the purpose of 'The Human Scale' known and its affects evident.

When you hide behind the facade of the stage, you have the luxury of relinquishing any factual basis to your words so throwing numbers around is automatically believed without question (by some), which serves the angle in your case: I think you try to paint a picture of balance, of a common problem the Palestinians and Israelis share in this conflict of hatred but what comes across in the end, to me, is an imbalance of forces which puts Israel once more in the seat of 'the evil one'.

I thought the presentation about the conflict suffers from the same media oscillation on a world scale, it is a Macro Vs Micro really: the suffering on both sides is great – it just always looks like we are causing more damage intently.

We (Israelis) need to deal with an unknown enemy which uses its civilian buildings as military encampments while they (Palestinians) need to take back what was lost during a war which was started by their brethren who, now, want nothing to do with them.

In a densely populated area, which is so small; while keeping in mind the need to blend in, I don’t blame them (I would expect these are some of the cores to guerrilla tactics) – but it’s residue after effect reverberates in the world media and we become Goliath instead of David.

It is no news that their civilians, (I say civilians but really they are subjects) are being subjected to all sorts of brain washing with the sole purpose in mind to create new warriors in the name of Islam and word of Jihad – a proof of that you’ve shown when you presented children’s shows that perpetuate that same cause.

It is also not a big secret that we are stronger, we have a bigger army – better weapon technology, which (I’m assuming) its research is being fueled by Americans for reasons of your choosing, as better ways to kill a man are always a welcome commodity in warfare. Point being, we are using the smallest weapons you can use but when it comes to kill or be killed what would you tell a soldier who’s being shot at by a sniper from the third floor of a school when children are hiding on the second floor? What would you do?

The R&D capabilities of our country and its relations to the Americans would also explain the American aversion at stepping in, with the virtuous purpose and intent at changing the status quo.

What would you have us do, equip all our soldiers with Paintball guns? – We all know how that turned out on the 'Mavi Marmara' - Next water balloon grenades, and origami knifes.

On the other hand, I do believe that we need to be the better entity here; we need to do something extreme that would prove our intent at peace especially as the anvil of democracy hammers at the Muslim community – this is our time to shine but we are missing it and we are doing nothing about it.

As to the way you chose to receive feedback: the afterhours debate is scheduled at a very poor hour, when you actually want feedback, when you actually want to listen to people – you give them more than 30 minutes of time and you don’t bicker on how they should ask the questions, you give them space and you listen.

I thought the debate was the most important part of the presentation, but it felt it wasn’t your main agenda in how it was given attention.

The presentation was conducted in a Democratic society with people in a higher demographical and socioeconomically state, which albeit ensued response doesn’t really hit the ears of the people that are feeding the reciprocal rage that is going on – they are comfortable with their lives, wouldn’t count on them to do anything than speak about it over cocktails and shrimp.

Ask yourselves this:
  • How many people in the audience had lost someone dear to them in an “abhorrent act”, a terrorist bombing if you will?
  • How many of them were Palestinians?
  • How many of them were soldiers (Active or reserve)?
  • How would the Palestinians - a non-democratic society that brain washes their "subjects" receive you when you want to show them your piece?

Debating the purpose of this presentation as being good or bad is irrelevant – it is important at inciting talk and the exchange of ideas, which in itself is something that in my view would be almost illegal to contain and is obligatory to spread.

I would be really intrigued to see how the presentation pans out in a room parted by Palestinians and Israelis, the debate after the show on that would be fascinating.

When the ripples caused by the boulder of freedom that hit the Muslim world find their way to the shores of Gaza, I hope they will amount to no more than the foam of democracy rather than a tsunami of bigotry." (source) -Eyal Plotkin

- Please feel free to leave comments on his Facebook page:

Want alerts for new videos?
Like us on Facebook.