Being a fan of spy thrillers, I've enjoyed the episodes. Not being a fan of how the conflict is packaged in the West, I found the subject's presentation disconcerting. The series often utilizes the usual boilerplate that can be found in the New York Times on any given morning. I somewhat expected this and therefore wasn't, in a way, disappointed.
Of course, one could easily make the counterargument that The Honourable Woman is simply television, that it's entertainment, that it tells a story, that it's predominantly about spies and wealth and power and scheming, and not so much about Israel and Palestine. And I would basically agree. However, it's worth considering the broader picture in which the conflict appears.
If seeking to learn about the Palestine-Israel question, we would likely not choose a dramatic miniseries to begin our studies. Yet, where does most of our exposure to the conflict (and greater Middle East) occur? Obviously, the window is provided by news, film, and television. All are, by their own reckoning, guiltless.
Due to political concerns, the major American news outlets are very careful about how they report on the conflict: Israel is a US client, it has strong and organized domestic backing, advertisers of luxury products (see pages 2 and 3 in any NYT) prefer an even keel, and the news media generally try to avoid jeopardizing their access in Washington. So the bigger news organizations keep their reportage within constrained parameters, regardless of location on the political spectrum. This sanitization has been labeled "objectivity." Deemphasizing Israeli violence and emphasizing Palestinian violence is therefore construed as responsible, balanced journalism. The world of entertainment, on the other hand, is just producing entertainment.
These industries are protecting their own interests and will only change course when the culture encourages it. This is continuously happening; as people become better educated and society's moral principles improve, the news and entertainment industries follow suit. It's also taking place regarding the Middle East, however slowly. A series like The Honourable Woman indicates the crawling pace.
One of the mentions in print that steered me toward the show was a brief interview with actress Maggie Gyllenhaal, who plays the program's lead character. In the back of a recent Time magazine, Gyllenhaal answered questions about the series and some of the issues it addresses. The first question was, unsurprisingly, about whether she takes "a side" in the conflict. (This question is a journalistic way of really asking, "Do you sympathize with the Palestinians?"). Gyllenhaal answered thus:
I feel like the show I made, the piece of art I made, does articulate really beautifully so many things I feel about the conflict better than I could say in three sentences to you now. And I'm trying to keep my personal politics out of the press about it, at least until people have seen the show. I also feel like this particular conflict, in my opinion, it's very difficult for me to have a hard and fast, immovable position on it. How I feel and how I think shifts all the time - by small degrees. I do believe in compassion, I believe in the possibility of reconciliation, I am hopeful, even in times when it seems impossible, I don't know what else we have. And I think the show takes a similar position.
I don't quote Gyllenhaal to unfairly single her out, but her answer is a non-answer and points to the reflexive thinking on the subject: if you can't say nothing, repeat what the news says. She opted for the former, the series the latter.
In The Honourable Woman, the Middle East is a dark, sinister, scary place. The conflict is presented as symmetrical, hopelessly complicated, and more or less impossible to solve. The word "Hamas" is routinely invoked as if it's supposed to send shivers down one's spine. There are bad Israeli individuals, but Palestinian culture as a whole is cast in a negative light.
Five points of clarification regarding the previous paragraph:
1. The Middle East can be scary in places. Most of it is not.
2. There is nothing symmetrical whatsoever about the Palestine-Israel conflict.
3. Nor is the conflict hopelessly complicated. Moreover, the solutions are simple; they're just prevented.
4. Hamas is a resistance movement that is focused on Israel's occupation of Palestine (within the 1967 boundaries). While militant and responsible for terrorist acts, Hamas is largely a political organization. Were it not for the occupation, there would likely never have been a Hamas.
5. Despite what they have been put through, Palestinian culture is one of the friendliest I have ever encountered.
The Honourable Woman makes for good entertainment, in my view, but features portrayals that reinforce the common misconceptions. And those misconceptions are common for a reason.
UK: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01z78nq
US: http://www.sundance.tv/series/the-honorable-woman
