‘Pound of flesh’

This week, the literary and entertainment industries have become battlegrounds for a profound ethical debate, with thousands from these sectors signing two opposing letters. We witness what might be described as the latest in a series of never-ending “pound of flesh” demands.

One group, including notable authors like Percival Everett, Sally Rooney, Annie Ernaux, and Ocean Vuong, along with over 2,700 signatories, has pledged to boycott Israeli cultural institutions. Their open letter, published on Literary Hub on October 28, criticizes these institutions for either complicity or silence in the face of Palestinian oppression. They refuse to engage with publishers, literary agents, and festivals believed to support this stance.

On the other hand, another faction, represented by Creative Community for Peace, has condemned this boycott. Their rebuttal, signed by luminaries such as Bernard-Henri Lévy, Herta Müller, and Howard Jacobson, views the boycott as an attempt to “persecute, exclude, boycott and intimidate.” This counter-letter gathered over 1,000 signatures, underscoring a significant schism within the community on how cultural institutions should respond to geopolitical issues.

The discourse evokes Shakespeare’s metaphor of “a pound of flesh”, drawn from The Merchant of Venice—a play often critiqued for its anti-Semitic undertones. Here, the boycott is likened to Shylock’s demand, symbolizing what some see as an unreasonable and punitive demand on cultural heritage and identity. The call to sever ties not just with Israeli policies but with Jewish cultural expressions is seen as akin to Shylock’s tragic fate: forced to convert, stripped of his possessions, and left with nothing but his grief.

We have seen this before. Over the years, The Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement has emerged as a prominent example of these “pound of flesh” bullying tactics. BDS started to pressuring Jewish young individuals, particularly in academic settings, inviting to participate in the cause of “social justice” and criticize Israeli government actions, their own cultural and national identity, often escalating to demands for cultural disconnection and the mutilation of their Jewish identity in the university campus. 

Now, this narrative has permeated the literary world, where Jewish authors and Israeli literature are increasingly ostracized; book events are canceled, and publications are rejected due to their association with Israel. Recent actions, like the rejection of an advertisement for Bernard-Henri Lévy’s book “Israel Alone” because of its title, illustrate this cultural silencing. This actions are not just about political stance but are attempts at cultural erasure, where Jewish voices are censored under the guise of political critique. Essentially, the ancient goal of making it harder and harder for Jews to express their identity fully, pushing towards cultural obliteration.

Shylock in the famous play, after he is being humiliated and losing everything that he loved, his daughter and part of his possessions, is punished by the court, forced to convert to Christianity and all of his wealth is seized. Now, the letter, when call to boycott Israeli cultural entities and the Jewish authors, pretend to be a court that declares that everything should vanish, specifically the Zionist voice, echoing Shylock’s plight.

When Shylock learns from a friend that his daughter stole and sold his ring in a exchange for a monkey, he laments, “It was my turquoise. I had it of Leah when I was a bachelor. I would not have given it for a wilderness of monkeys.” Here, Shylock, often portrayed as the villain, in the end is the only one that underscores a value beyond price, cherishing the ring not for its worth but for its sentimental connection to his late wife.

These two letters highlight a broader cultural battle where freedom of expression, identity, and the role of art in political discourse are at stake. The literary community, traditionally a bastion for diversity and dialogue, now finds itself torn between advocating for social justice and preserving the integrity of cultural exchange and freedom. As this debate unfolds and in response to this boycott, Bernard-Henri Lévy took a decision and has decided to embark on a U.S. campus tour, choosing not to be Shylock in this narrative.