The Birth of Venus

It was time for a banner update!

What you see now is a detail of Botticelli's "The Birth of Venus". A beautiful painting, one of my favorites!

According to Roman mythology, Venus was born as a full grown woman out of the sea. This was actually the result of - it may sound strange, I warn you - Uranus' genitals falling into the sea and fertilizing the water. In case you might ask why his genitals fell in the first place - and here I warn you again - well, his son Cronus chopped them off!

In reality, Venus arrived in Rome from the east. The Romans had borrowed her from the Greeks, who were calling her Aphrodite, but the goddess had her origins even further to the east. According to the Ionian historian Herodotus, the Greeks had borrowed her from the Phoenicians. In fact, she was known as Astarte in the Levant and as Ishtar in Mesopotamia. The Sumerians, creators of the first Mesopotamian civilization, called her Inanna. From Mesopotamia to Rome, quite a journey huh?!

I wonder why there is no sign of the goddess in her native lands nowadays. Might it be that she has fled the violence as well?

No Israelis and Palestinians in the pub

Have you ever seen an Israeli and a Palestinian official sitting around the same table in public? I mean in real, not on television or in newspapers! Well, did you? I myself did yesterday!

The deputy chief of the Israeli embassy in the Netherlands, Yair Even, and the Palestinian ambassador to the Netherlands, Sumaya Barghouti, met each other yesterday evening in a debate organized by a group of students of the University of Amsterdam (UvA). They were joined by Bert Bakker, former Dutch MP and Foreign Affairs spokesman for the small Dutch liberal party Democrats '66. The debate was presided by Paul Aarts, lecturer of International Relations at the UvA.

The event was titled "The good, the bad and the Dutch: The Netherlands' role in the Israel-Palestine conflict", but it was clearly not this Dutch thing that had attracted the 100-120 people present in the lecture room. It was rather the fact that two high ranked Israeli and Palestinian officials would talk to each other in public. The debate started with the aforementioned topic, but quickly shifted to the main issue of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I will only mention the main arguments though - this blog entry is not intended as a report or whatever.

"We want Israel to end the occupation, which is the root problem of the Palestinian question! If the occupation ends, there will be no Palestinian question!" shouted Barghouti. I never know what to think about female politicians and diplomats. There are so few of them, especially in the Middle East, that I can't afford myself to utter any critical word about them...

"If the Palestinians are really committed to peace, like Sadat (the former Egyptian president) was, then we will end the occupation and disband all settlements. Remember that we had cities in Sinai! We disbanded them all! Why? Because we saw that Sadat was committed to peace!" was Yair Even's reply. Though people had reminded him several times to speak up, the guy muttered throughout the debate, which really drove me crazy.

The Pub
The most interesting part of a debate in the Netherlands starts after the actual debate, as both the audience and the participants rush into a pub to continue talks in a more informal atmosphere. I was eagerly awaiting the moment that Even and Barghouti would have a beer together, but sadly enough, that did not happen.

The only debater that did come to the pub was Bert Bakker. Rushing into the pub, shouting "They sent me here!", he seemed as if he was totally unaware of the Dutch tradition of the Borrel (this is how the Dutch call such post-lecture pub sessions), but was eventually spotted drinking several pints of beer. At the end of the evening he greeted me twice; the first time on his way to the men's room and the second time on his way back - and this actually caused me some trouble in judging the guy: was he a real gentleman or simply a drunk man?

I myself was of course totally clearheaded, despite one Palm, two Maredsous and two La Chouffe...

Another world through exchange

For the ordinary man reading his daily newspaper, it may seem like squabbling is the only form of intercourse between the West and the Islamic Republic of Iran lately. I have to admit that this is indeed true for politicians and diplomats; they keep on arguing, bickering and maneuvering, yet not producing any tangible results. But hey, it's their job to act like that! We wouldn't have expected it otherwise, do we?

I'm happy to say that there is much more dialogue on much more levels between Western countries and Iran. In fact, at this particular moment, a group of Dutch students is visiting Iran, as part of an exchange project between the University of Amsterdam (UvA) and the Tehran based School of International Relations (SIR). A group of Iranian students had already visited the Netherlands in March 2007. The exchange project was started in 2002 and is repeated each year with new groups of students.

It is worth noting that the participants have always described their experiences as very positive. The exchange is indeed a perfect tool for the development and facilitation of mutual understanding and dialogue. The participants not only get the opportunity of studying the country on location, but also of meeting fellow students and maintaining links with them. To give just one example: this blog itself is also read by Iranian students! (Hello my friends!)


Dutch and Iranian students in Tehran.
source: www.pidad.org

I myself participated in this exchange in 2005/2006 and I'm still involved in the project in some way. Together with fellow exchange students (both Dutch and Iranian) from my year, we have developed an online platform with the aim of making the dialogue stabler and permanent. Visit the platform for more information: PIDAD. Oh by the way, you can already read the report of the Dutch students' first day in Tehran!

Guys, I'm eagerly seeking new exchanges! Anyone organizing one?

Traditions of the French... and those of others

Today is a big day for the French. On this fine Sunday in May, they will decide who will occupy the most powerful office in the Fifth Republic. If we are to believe the two main candidates, Nicolas Sarkozy and Ségolène Royal, France is going to change a lot once he, or she, is elected.

The questions is whether this will happen indeed. According to this article by Craig Smith, entitled "Forget who'll win in France. Change is a loser.", France will move only a little, certainly not as much as the candidates claim.

"We have traditions, attitudes, an attachment to social welfare and, even if change is desirable, we won't accept change overnight.",¹ it is said by French historian Michel Winock.

I find this a quite interesting way of reasoning, especially if we would apply it to other countries in the world. Can you imagine the reaction of the Americans if the Iraqis suddenly say:

"We have traditions, attitudes, a habituation to authoritarian rule and, even if change is desirable, we won't accept change overnight".

1. Quoted in Smith, Craig, "Forget who'll win in France. Change is a loser", in International Herald Tribune, May 5, 2007. Accessed via http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/05/06/news/06smith-web.php?page=1 on May 6, 2007.

Remembering the Dead?

"True friends reveal themselves in times of misery"¹ is a saying existing in many languages and expressing the fact that many people are eager to share one's happiness, while remaining indifferent towards one's sorrow. The saying even proves to be true on the national level, which especially becomes clear in periods with a couple of national holidays.

On the 4th of May each year, the Dutch remember the victims of the Second World War and of all other military conflicts since then.² According to the annual research of the National Committee for 4 and 5 May, 82% of the Dutch find the Remembrance of the Dead important and also think that commemorating is more important than celebrating.³


The ceremony on Dam Square, Amsterdam (Het Nationaal Comité 4 en 5 mei)

For someone attending the main ceremony on the Dam Square in Amsterdam - admittingly, I myself had no intention of attending the ceremony at first, but as I was in the neighborhood around that time, I decided to do it anyway - the results of this research are not really convincing. There is obviously a huge difference between finding it important to commemorate and actually commemorating!

In contrast to the thousands of people on the streets in the entire city center and its surrounding neighborhoods five days ago on Queen's Day (see my post on May 1, 2007), only a couple of hundreds were present at the commemoration yesterday, not even filling Dam Square. The whole event did not take more than half an hour.

Did someone say commemorating is more important than celebrating? That really sounds great, but let us rather stick to "True friends reveal themselves in times of misery". It's just so much closer to the truth.

---

1. "Dost kara günde belli olur." is an example from Turkish.
2. Initially only Dutch victims were commemorated. From 1961 onwards the commemoration has included victims of other military conflicts as well.
3. "Draagvlak voor 4 en 5 mei blijft groot", on the website of Het Nationaal Comité 4 en 5 mei, 1 May 2007; available at http://www.4en5mei.nl/4en5mei/nieuws/nieuws/nieuwsdetail/_rp_kolom2_1_elementId/1_115593. (accessed on 05/05/07)

and... an 'Orange Monday' in Amsterdam

Yesterday, it was the most crowded day of the year in Amsterdam. Completely covered in orange, the city was home to a massive outdoor festivity. No, it was not a soft-drugs festival and neither had it to do with prostitutes, as some might have expected from Amsterdam, but it did involve drinking a lot of beer and partying on the streets! Yesterday, it was Queen's day (Koninginnedag in Dutch) in the Netherlands, a national holiday which is most extensively celebrated in the capital Amsterdam. ¹


ANP

At first it may seem like the Dutch are very attached to the monarchy and are eager to celebrate the birthday of their queen. However, a brief observation of what is actually happening during that day, will be enough to understand that the public enthousiasm is not really about the queen or the monarchy.

The holiday was initially meant as a tool to strengthen national unity back in the 1890's. However, especially in the last two decades or so, the link between this holiday and the monarchy has appeared only superficial. The truth is that the new generations Dutch don't bother much about the queen or the monarchy. Most of them being apolitical, the queen doesn't play any role in their life, her existence doesn't affect them in any way. So when the Dutch appear en masse on the streets on this particular day, it is not really because of their wish to celebrate the birthday of their queen, but simply because it is just another opportunity to party!

I mean, the holiday may be called Queen's day, but the youth still prefers to be at Museum Square, a large square where big concerts are organized, rather than in that small town somewhere visited by the queen.² The youth prefers dancing, while taking a pull of their Heineken, instead of waiting along the road for the queen and waving passionately when she passes.

This story may give the impression that the queen is very unpopular in the Netherlands, but that's certainly not the case. It's just that Museum Square is hotter!

So did the holiday actually achieve its aim of strengthening national unity? I'm not sure about that, but with those thousends of tourists attracted by the festivities, I guess its next aim is already quite obvious: international unity!

---

1. The 30^th of April is actually the birthday of the previous queen, Juliana. Her successor Beatrix wanted to continue celebrating Queen's Day on the 30^th of April as a mark of respect to her mother.
2. It has become some kind of a tradition that Queen Beatrix visits the festivities in one or two places.

The Ponentines

A Westerner permanently living in the Eastern Mediterranean is not a very common phenomenon nowadays, but in the past sizable communities of Westerners existed in cities like Istanbul (Constantinople), Izmir (Smyrna), Beirout, Cairo and Alexandria. These Levantines¹, as they were called, were usually descendants of traders from various backgrounds and in some cases even of the inhabitants of the Crusader states.

Pay attention to the fact that they weren't called Orientals², which was a term to denote the native population. However, they weren't considered Westerners either and were actually explicitly distinguished from Westerners temporarily residing in the Levant. While remaining attached to the culture they brought from their country of origin, many of the Levantines had also adapted to their societies, fluently speaking the language, being familiar with the local customs and values and even marrying locals, mostly Christians like Greeks, Armenians or Maronites. Due to their foreign background and often also because of their occupations, the Levantines had strong ties with the West (and in particular with their country of origin). Yes, the world of nations was not fully developed yet, but they were already fairly transnational.


A Levantine family in Istanbul
source: www.levantine.plus.com

A similar migration occurred in the second part of the 20^th century, yet in the opposite direction. Immigrants from the Levant initially arrived as 'guest-workers' in Western European countries, but they soon decided to settle here with their families. They too established sizable communities and have become an essential part of Western European societies. They are fluent in the languages, have adopted many of the customs and values of their host countries and have also married locals. They have maintained their ties with their country of origin and have travelled back and forth on a regular basis. In the course of time they have even adopted the nationality of their host countries, while still keeping their original one. In this respect, these immigrants have been, just like the Levantines, both bicultural and transnational. In fact, they could be considered the Levantines of today! ³

Even though the two immigrant communities differ from each other with regard to social class, they have very much in common as mentioned above. The Western immigrants were no 'Westerners' anymore, but neither were they 'Orientals'; they were Levantines. Similarly, the Eastern (and Southern) Mediterranean immigrants are no 'Orientals' anymore, but neither are they 'Westerners'; they must be Ponentines⁴ then!

---

1. From Italian 'Levante' and French 'Levant' meaning 'East', or more precisely: 'The lands where the sun rises'
2. From Italian 'Oriente' and French 'Orient' also meaning 'East' or 'The lands where the sun rises'.
3. This is obviously also true for Eastern Mediterranean immigrant communities in the Americas.
4. From Italian 'Ponente' and French 'Ponent' (archaic?) meaning 'West' or 'The lands where the sun sets', after the example of 'Levantine'.