Palestine – Joe Sacco
Ann’s choice after Paddy’s request to read a graphic novel, Palestine is Joe Sacco’s depiction of his experiences in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. For most of us, it was the first time that we had read a piece of journalism in this medium and it provoked a high level of debate. Ann hadn’t finished reading it at the time we all met and I think she’s revised her opinions since! Ann, feel free to leave some comments letting us know.
Sacco’s own appearance in Palestine was the subject of most of our discussion. I pointed out that in more conventional journalism, the writer does not present themselves as a character, and we debated the ethics of this. Paddy felt that he was very self deprecating in his portrayal of himself, even lampooning himself at times (for example being constantly after food). A few of us felt that this was a defence mechanism, maybe against criticism of his central role in the book, maybe against accusations of exploitation of the Palestinians. Martin mentioned that he usually dislikes the journalist making himself part of the story. We all thought that the journalist has to be very transparent about how his presence is affecting the events portrayed in order to be able to pull this style of journalism off.
Ann interpreted Sacco’s constant tucking in to his host’s food as symbolic of his journalism, in that he is feeding off the Palestinians. Ciara felt that he was offering very little in return for the information that he was gathering, this was reinforced by Palestinians repeatedly asking him, ‘what good will this do?’, to which Sacco has no answer. Martin pointed out that he was there to record the story, and couldn’t offer people hope. However, Ann felt that there were small things that he could do to make people’s everyday life better, but chose not to.
Ciara wondered how far he had engaged with the Palestinians as people, feeling that maybe his fear of the situation had created a barrier, affecting his relationships with the people he was closest to, like his social worker guide. Ann had the impression that he didn’t really connect with the people he was talking to, whereas Paddy and Martin disagreed.
We also looked at how well the book worked as a graphic novel, with everyone having noticed how abruptly the book ends: there is no conclusion, instead the narrative suddenly finishes. I felt that the structure of the book was a strange mixture of a narrative novel and journalism. Paddy and Pete disagreed over the quality of the drawings. Paddy didn’t particularly like the style of drawing, finding it a bit off putting, whereas Pete liked the simplicity of them. Ciara pointed out that Sacco uses exaggerated facial features when drawing people. Pete felt that the Sacco was using caricature well to highlight the emotion that people were feeling. Paddy highlighted that Sacco doesn’t draw eyes for himself, giving himself blank spectacle lenses instead. I noticed this as well and would have liked to discuss the significance of this but the lively discussion went elsewhere! Nicky enjoyed reading a graphic novel that was not based around the usual fantasy/science fiction themes.
Martin was particularly impressed by the prison camp section, finding it very powerful. It was made up of an extended flashback which stood out, as it depicted the events themselves rather than the person telling the story to Sacco, who is not depicted in this part of the book. Ann felt that this would have a strong impact as the target audience would probably be identifying with Sacco and his experiences. She also highlighted the olive tree story as a moving and powerful part of the book, which I felt symbolised the feelings of powerlessness of the Palestinians, and the abuses of power that occur in conflict.
Ann asked whether Sacco was satirising the Western position. Ciara and I thought so, but Pete questioned whether a journalist would go through what he did in order to write a satire. Paddy wondered if he had become detached because of the futility of the situation. I agreed, feeling that he satirises his own intentions and experiences because he sees the futility of trying to make an impact on the situation.
The book is definitely biased; as the title makes clear, it is out to show the Palestinians point of view. this means that when Israelis are depicted, we usually see brutal soldiers. There is a brief section at the end when Sacco talks to Israeli civilians but not enough to give a balanced view. Ciara thought that this was due to the fact that it was written in a very pro-Israeli time, so that Palestinians needed to be given a voice.
Overall, this book is a definite recommendation, especially for people who want an accessible way to gain understanding of the conflict. Nicky described it as memorable and engaging, and although not everyone in the group agreed, I think that we all found it thought provoking and original.
