Page all of 2 12>
Topic Options
#53236 - 09/17/01 11:13 PM Coverage of the attacks and the ensuing conflict
deborah Administrator
Chief Bibliofreak
Ching Shih


Registered: 05/27/00
Posts: 3901
Loc: Funkytown

Offline
You notice how I call it "conflict" instead of "war," a word I keep sidling up to and running away from. Intellectually, I know we're going to war; emotionally I can't handle the idea at all.

Anyway. I thought it might be useful to have a thread where we can share relevant links to worthwhile articles/sites online as well as mention well-written articles in periodicals, things that help us make sense of what's going on, provide good analysis or meaningful memorials or whatever.

And if there's something you want to complain about or warn us away from in terms of coverage, of course that can go here too.

My first contribution was brought to my attention by Regina Rouge: have the Kleenex handy .

Top
#53237 - 09/20/01 01:49 PM Re: Coverage of the attacks and the ensuing conflict
cat
Ching Shih


Registered: 06/02/00
Posts: 1754
Loc: Northern California

Offline
I linked to the New Yorker's site in the thread on the attacks in the Generalities section, but I thought it might be useful to do so again here. This week's issue is absolutely worth seeking out, if only to see the devastating cover, but there's really good, thoughtful coverage, especially considering that apparently the staffers pulled it all together within about 48 hours of the attacks. The website has most of the magazine content as well as some archive stories, including a profile of Osama bin Laden from last year and a 30-year-old piece that I haven't yet been able to bring myself to read on the building of the World Trade Center.

I never thought I'd see the day when the New Yorker had no cartoons.

(Edited to add: Not all of the archive content is available on the home page--you have to scroll down to the bottom to find the "From the Archives" link on the left.)

[This message has been edited by cat (edited September 20, 2001).]

Top
#53238 - 09/20/01 03:12 PM Re: Coverage of the attacks and the ensuing conflict
sparkies
Gráinne ni Mhaille


Registered: 05/11/01
Posts: 10
Loc: Toronto

Offline
One columnist who's really impressed me over the last week and a half is Leonard Pitts . zuclinator linked to his articles on MBTV and he seems to write almost exactly what I've been thinking.
Top
#53239 - 09/20/01 04:33 PM Re: Coverage of the attacks and the ensuing conflict
deborah Administrator
Chief Bibliofreak
Ching Shih


Registered: 05/27/00
Posts: 3901
Loc: Funkytown

Offline
cat, thanks for mentioning this week's New Yorker. As someone mentioned, I was also wondering how the magazine would cover the massacre. Unfortunately, there isn't any place out here in Mayberry that sells the magazine. (I can't even find frickin' Time magazine. Sigh.) I asked Frink to pick one up for me in the city, and he can't find any place that has a copy left; they were all sold out yesterday. One bookstore is compiling a waiting list and expects a shipment of more copies next week.

I'm hoping to get a copy of this because the cover art sounds beautiful and powerful, and it seems like the sort of thing that might be worth saving. (Actually, I don't usually buy the New Yorker but I don't think I've ever discarded any copy of it anyway.) But it's looking like I might not be able to find one.

Top
#53240 - 09/21/01 01:12 PM Re: Coverage of the attacks and the ensuing conflict
JohnConstantine
Ching Shih


Registered: 10/13/00
Posts: 520
Loc: Minneapolis, MN

Offline
Sports Illustrated is covering the attack as well, essentially from the perspective of the sporting world. Except for a few pages, the dumped all of their sports news and coverage (even though there was some to be covered) and wrote about the attack. I haven't read it all yet (I just got it yesterday, and to tell the truth, I'm a little burnt out on this), but SIhas some excellent writers on staff that y'all may be interested in checking out.
Top
#53241 - 09/21/01 05:02 PM Re: Coverage of the attacks and the ensuing conflict
Masha Moderator
Ching Shih


Registered: 05/23/01
Posts: 512
Loc: Chicago, IL, USA

Offline
This week's Entertainment Weekly just came. Thank god the cover image is an arty shot of the American flag, and not the towers (that was my fear). The coverage itself is interesting, as it echoes the conversations I've been having with the writers and academics who surround me. We, and EW, have been wondering how to justify what we do in the face of such tragedy. And the answer is, what we do is not of immediate importance, but it is absolutely necessary to normal life, which is what those of us not intimately affected need now, and what those still overwhelmed with grief will eventually need.

To this end EW provides a list of things to watch, read, and listen to. I'm so pleased that their list of books includes Elizabeth Bishop's and Frank O'Hara's collected poems. I've been trying to formulate my argument for why poetry is important now, and while I don't quite have it properly sorted out in my head, my heart and soul know it is.

[This message has been edited by Masha (edited September 21, 2001).]

Top
#53242 - 09/26/01 11:09 PM Re: Coverage of the attacks and the ensuing conflict
deborah Administrator
Chief Bibliofreak
Ching Shih


Registered: 05/27/00
Posts: 3901
Loc: Funkytown

Offline
I just wanted to second cat's recommendation of the Sept. 24 New Yorker -- I have been looking for a copy since she posted that, and you can't find one for love nor money anywhere in Ontario it seems. But keckler was kind enough to send me a copy which I received today. The cover is stunning, and as I wrote to keckler, is probably the simplest, most tasteful and most powerful illustration of the event I've seen. (It was done by graphic genius Art Spiegelman.) I've only had a chance to read some of the shorter pieces at the front but what I've read so far has been great. I hope some of you can find it at your local library or borrow a copy from someone.

Oh, and there's a wonderful poem on the last page, which was not written about the attacks, but suits the event perfectly: "Try to Praise the Mutilated World," by Adam Zagajewski, translated from Polish by Clare Cavanagh. The poetry editor of the magazine was reading the poem while working at home during the time of the attacks. I tried to find it online but can't, and obviously can't post it here because of copyright, but it's really worth seeking out. I cried over it, and usually I do not cry easily over poetry. Although it's not like it takes much to make me cry these days.

Top
#53243 - 10/02/01 09:30 AM Re: Coverage of the attacks and the ensuing conflict
Joy
Ching Shih


Registered: 06/02/00
Posts: 322
Loc: London

Offline
Arundhati Roy had a really compelling and interesting piece in Saturday's Guardian.
Top
#53244 - 10/02/01 10:05 AM Re: Coverage of the attacks and the ensuing conflict
Bear
Ching Shih


Registered: 08/28/00
Posts: 1954
Loc: Dublin, Ireland

Offline
I was just going to mention that piece. I was especially struck by this part:
 Quote:
Because then it falls to the rest of us [non-Americans] to ask the hard questions and say the harsh things. And for our pains, for our bad timing, we will be disliked, ignored and perhaps eventually silenced.

Top
#53245 - 10/02/01 10:06 AM Re: Coverage of the attacks and the ensuing conflict
Bear
Ching Shih


Registered: 08/28/00
Posts: 1954
Loc: Dublin, Ireland

Offline
Oops, double post. For some reason Chiclit's forums are going crazy on me today.

[This message has been edited by Bear (edited October 02, 2001).]

Top
#53246 - 10/02/01 11:41 AM Re: Coverage of the attacks and the ensuing conflict
JohnConstantine
Ching Shih


Registered: 10/13/00
Posts: 520
Loc: Minneapolis, MN

Offline
Interesting article from Thomas Friedman in today's NYTimes. Submitted here for your reading interest.
Top
#53247 - 10/02/01 11:49 AM Re: Coverage of the attacks and the ensuing conflict
deborah Administrator
Chief Bibliofreak
Ching Shih


Registered: 05/27/00
Posts: 3901
Loc: Funkytown

Offline
Joy, thanks for the link to the Roy piece. I too found it compelling, and agree with much of what she said. (I just wish she hadn't fallen into the trap of completely misapprehending the word jihad and misusing it as so many irresponsible journalists have done for decades.)

[This message has been edited by deborah (edited October 02, 2001).]

Top
#53248 - 10/02/01 01:02 PM Re: Coverage of the attacks and the ensuing conflict
WriterGirl
Ching Shih


Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 231
Loc: once Atlanta, GA; now Brooklyn...

Offline
I think the Roy piece, though it brings up some interesting points, falls into the same trap as much as what I've read -- assuming that the attackers were motivated by the same kind of anti-American feeling as the Palestinians, Saudis, Egyptians, Arab-Americans, and countless others who really don't like America. I don't think that's necessarily true, given the evidence so far; we don't have a proven link between, say, Palestinian suicide bombers and the hijackers. And I can't believe that the hijackers, even if they were acting out of some pan-Arab, anti-American sympathies, thought for even a second that their actions would make the US more sympathetic to the anti-American cause. If they wanted to commit suicide and draw attention to their cause, they have a very powerful precedent: the self-immolating Buddhist monks of the early 1960s.

I'm trying not to be an ugly American, and in the aftermath of the attack I was falling into the we-deserved-it logic, but I'm starting to get impatient with the idea that the attack was a manifestation of global anti-American hatred. To use a metaphor: millions of people think child sexual abuse is wrong and horrible. Yet we don't encourage people to shoot the pedophiles and their families, and we're even less sympathetic to the shooters if they themselves are not victims of child sexual abuse.

There is a valid argument that American policies have resulted in anti-American feeling, and there is a valid practical argument that changing those policies would help us in the long run by creating fewer potential terrorists, as well as the moral argument that Roy and others are presenting. But to say "what goes around comes around" in relation to this attack is insulting to both sides: there are people dead in the WTC who never even got a chance to vote in the US, and there are millions of people suffering because of American decisions who have nonetheless not felt the need to resort to murder -- and millions of dead in Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, etc. etc., who might not be happy to hear that they had signed a "calling card" that killed 6,000.

And it seems to me she's unaware that in the US, there has been a lot of talk about what to do about the fact that Afghanistan is at civil war, in horrible shape, and producing millions of refugees -- yes, there are people here saying, "Bomb 'em back to the Stone Age," but there are also many who know better. The US is not a monolith, even now.

And I think her position is short-sighted. If the attackers are motivated by pan-Arab sentiment, then India, with its (from a Pakistani point of view) illegal occupation of Kashmir, is a prime target. (And it should be noted that it would be diabolically perfect for Pakistan to cooperate fully with the US, then see India bombed by supposedly independent sources. I hope that doesn't happen, but I could see it.) If they're not, then how do we know they won't try hitting America's allies as well? At one point there was a report floating around that linked this attack to a 1992 bombing in Argentina. Great Britain could be a target, with Tony Blair taking such an active role. Canada, certainly. Japan, possibly. Bush might not be anyone's first choice to lead the fight against terrorism, but that doesn't mean the fight shouldn't be fought.

I guess the more I read her piece, the more I disagree with it.

Top
#53249 - 10/02/01 02:43 PM Re: Coverage of the attacks and the ensuing conflict
Angiv
Ching Shih


Registered: 06/01/00
Posts: 1291
Loc: Scotland

Offline
deborah - I've taken to writing to people to thank them if they use jihad and fatwa correctly.

Writergirl - while some of the points you make are valid, you should be careful about using phrases like pan-Arab to describe the terrorists and their supporters. Not all Arabs are Muslims and not all Muslims are Arabs.

Pan-Arabism is a secular movement separate from and contrary to Islam and pan-Islamism. Pan-Arabism calls for unity between Arab states; pan-Islamism calls for unity under Islam. Islam (in its purest form) makes no distinctions based on race or colour, neither does it promote secular government. Pan-Arabism and pan-Islamism are often used interrchangeably in the press, but are in fact mutually exclusive.

I found Friedman's article a little unsettling. It hinted of the kind of jingoism that we've seen too much of lately. I admire Friedman, and usually find him to be a voice of reason, but this article worried me.

America is a great country with great people, but its people are neither better nor worse than any other country's. The lives of its citizens are worth neither more nor less than any other country's.

I agree that there is no justification for rejoicing at the deaths of so many people, or indeed for killing so many people. It is, however, worth remembering that the US and the UK have been bombing Iraqi civilians since the end of the Gulf War without UN agreement, in what many in the Middle East see as state-level terrorism. I repeat this is not a justification of anything, merely a statement of fact.

Top
#53250 - 10/03/01 05:13 AM Re: Coverage of the attacks and the ensuing conflict
WriterGirl
Ching Shih


Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 231
Loc: once Atlanta, GA; now Brooklyn...

Offline
Angiv: thanks for the clarification. But my point still stands: we don't know if these attackers were working out of any sort of pan-Arab or pan-Islamic sentiment, much less representing anti-American feelings as a whole, and to declare them somehow representative of anti-American sentiment an insult to those with anti-American sentiments who do not condone the attacks.

As for the UN and the no-fly zones in Iraq: I poked around a bit, including here , and found that the Security Council hasn't approved US-UK bombing (not surprising, given the usual positions of France, Russia, and China on Iraq); I don't know about the General Assembly. Nor, of course, has the UN specifically condemned bombing in the no-fly zone. There's a great deal of information that says the sanctions/oil-for-food programme/no-fly zone bombings are misguided, ineffective, and harmful, and I would love to see someone come up with an alternative. (Nor do I think the backup US plan -- hold some money in case some other Iraqi leader comes to power -- will work worth a damn.) But I don't think anyone would argue that the UK and US are primarily responsible for the sufferings of Iraqi civilians, and that the cessation of bombings in the no-fly zones and/or the lifting of sanctions would lead automatically to higher quality of life for Iraqis there.

 Quote:
America is a great country with great people, but its people are neither better nor worse than any other country's. The lives of its citizens are worth neither more nor less than any other country's.


That statement works on a moral level but not on a geopolitical one. If I live in America, pay taxes to the American government, and live subject to its laws, then I expect it to defend my life prior to defending the life of a non-American citizen. In the case of the Iraqi sanctions, I'd want my government to make a damn good case to me that it's protecting my life by killing Iraqi civilians, which it hasn't yet; but if it could, I'd listen.

Top
#53251 - 10/03/01 01:33 PM Re: Coverage of the attacks and the ensuing conflict
JohnConstantine
Ching Shih


Registered: 10/13/00
Posts: 520
Loc: Minneapolis, MN

Offline
I'd like to note for the record that Anne Coulter's recent rantings on the attacks and what we should be doing because of them has managed to get her removed as a columnist for The National Review.

Personally, I was amazed. Both at the depths even the pathetic Ms. Coulter could sink to, and that it was possible she could write things even that nasty rag didn't want to be associated with.

Top
#53252 - 10/05/01 12:46 PM Re: Coverage of the attacks and the ensuing conflict
Angiv
Ching Shih


Registered: 06/01/00
Posts: 1291
Loc: Scotland

Offline
In the Scotsman today is a pretty scathing response from Gavin Esler to Arundhati Roy's article.
 Quote:
You can forgive the young students in Manaus for kneejerk anti-Americanism, but not Arundhati Roy. As George Orwell pointed out, she must be an intellectual. No ordinary person could be quite so stupid.

Top
#53253 - 10/10/01 03:03 PM Re: Coverage of the attacks and the ensuing conflict
ee-fah
Ching Shih


Registered: 09/19/00
Posts: 119

Offline
The Guardian has been my paper of choice for some years (out of the UK, I don't assume too many of you are interested in Swedish journalism) but I have become absolutely addicted during the last month. The link I posted on HF might as well go up here too.
Top
Page all of 2 12>


Moderator:  Masha 
Hop to: