Global Trend

[eumelia]

Ever since (in)famous(?) Iraqi journalist Muntadar al-Zaidi threw his shoe at Former (hooray!) President Bush, there have been a number of copy cats.

A shoe was thrown at the Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao on Monday at his talk in Cambridge University. Unlike Mr. al-Zaidi, this protester did not manage to aim quite so squarely at Mr. Wen.

And just today a shoe and two books were thrown at Israel Ambassador Mr. Benny Dagan in Sweden.
The shoe and two books were thrown by two protesters at the University of Stockholm where Mr. Dagan was giving a talk about the upcoming elections.
I can only assume that the items were thrown in protest to the violence in Gaza.

Or Antisemitism.

Who can tell.

Although, it would appear that unlike the shoes thrown at Bush and Wen, these ones actually hit their target.

Here is a short video of the incident:

And on a more ludicrous note: books! They threw books?! Dude, shoes is one thing - it's dirty and out right disrespectful, but books! That's just disrespecting yourself.

Comments

[mao4269.livejournal.com]

I agree that they're disrespecting themselves regardless but am quite curious as to which books they threw. Mein Kampf? The Summa Theologica? Random materials for their coursework that happened to be in their bags? An IKEA catalog? :P

[eumelia.livejournal.com]

If someone threw Mein Kampf at me or anyone I know (Jew or non) I'd go Red Baron (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manfred_von_Richthofen) (no pun intended) on them.

And don't knock IKEA! Those benign blue blocks they call stores will wake up and eat us one day! I do not want to be on their bad side.

[mao4269.livejournal.com]

Hey, there's a use for your IAF training with which you can wholeheartedly agree!

If IKEA eats us does that mean we get to go while eating their cinnamon rolls? ;)

[cbr-paul.livejournal.com]

Maybe they were just really, really bad books...?

[hemlock-sholes.livejournal.com]

I actually thought it might be a reference to "The People of the Book"

[mao4269.livejournal.com]

Hmm...Interesting thought. Given that two books were thrown I'm assuming the intention wasn't to reference the Jewish notion of "THE People of the Book". If it was a reference to the Islamic concept of People of the Book, though, I could see the implication being that Israel has strayed so far from Jewish values as to jeopardize Judaism's inclusion in that category. With that intent, I'd be inclined to adapt eumelia's comment that throwing books is disrespecting themselves: throwing books that symbolize the xtian bible and Quran disrespects those religions.

[eumelia.livejournal.com]

You're both crazy!
The shoe is the referential!
The books are what they happened to have and I doubt they thought much about the books meant because it's the throwing of shoes that's trendy!

[mao4269.livejournal.com]

Why throw anything in addition to the shoes?

[eumelia.livejournal.com]

To make sure they hit something.
While an interesting discussion can be had speculating the meaning of books and shoes... I argue that shoes are what Mr. Al-Zaidi had on hand and all consequent shoe throwers are copy-cats... the Swedes wanted to one-up the phenomenon and use other objects and what they had on hand were books.

I'm waiting for someone to bring back pie-to-the-face and have the media call it innovative *snort*.

[mao4269.livejournal.com]

In Al-Zaidi's case the cultural significance of shoes as an insult may have factored in, but I'd certainly agree that the subsequent shoe throwers are copy cats and could see the addition of books being simply a matter of convenience. Occam's razor certainly favors that explanation.

Ooh, now part of me really wants to see someone throw a (dairy) pie at Marzel, preferably just after he's had a meat meal! The treif aspect is innovative (if obnoxiously antagonistic), so the media would even have a reason to call it innovative! Okay, maybe not so much. Is anyone actually calling the Stockholm incident innovative?

[eumelia.livejournal.com]

In Al-Zaidi's case the cultural significance of shoes as an insult may have factored in

Because in Western culture throwing shoes at someone is very friendly... /sarcasm/
I find that argument to be so simplistic and frankly racist (not you, the argument!!! I've just heard it time and time again and ARRRGH) because DUDE! If I, Western-White-Jewish-Girl, threw a shoe at anyone I doubt anyone would think I'm showing anything other than disrespect.
Seriously.

And *EVUL LAUGH* at the image of a treifed up Baruch Marzel! LOLZ

[mao4269.livejournal.com]

Obviously throwing a shoe is disrespectful regardless, but if it's true that in "Arab culture" even exposing the soles of one's shoes by sitting cross-legged is considered disrespectful the level of insult is going to higher. Having been exposed to that idea, however, I wasn't going to intentionally try to sit so as to test it so can't say from personal experience if it's true.

[eumelia.livejournal.com]

Which Arab culture are we talking about?
Let's not fall into the "monolith" trap.
And again, to the majority of viewers world wide, including myself, the for-knowledge of what shoes mean in a culture not my own had no factor in what happened when al-Zaidi threw the shoes.
It was a guy throwing shoes at another guy, quite obviously out of anger and disrespect. I feel that the whole "Arab Culture" thing reduces the impact of what happened... would there have been less impact if he'd thrown, a pie or rotten fruit and veg, probably not. It probably would have been portrayed as more amusing, because a shoe, everywhere, is an article of clothing and those are for wearing and not throwing - so juxtaposing those makes for bigger impact, not the fact that maybe the soles of shoes are culturally offensive, of which we have no hard evidence in any event.

[mao4269.livejournal.com]

I don't know which Arab culture(s) the mainstream Western media means in this case when they refer to "Arab culture" which is why I put put it in quotes. But so long as I'm erring on the side of not offending people, I'm going to avoid exposing the soles of my shoes to people whether in a Bedouin village in Israel or anywhere in Jordan. In terms of personal behavior I'd rather buy into the monolith than unintentionally offend someone when I could have easily avoided it. Unfortunately, that means I don't have evidence (beyond the fact that generally speaking the "Arab world" has a lot of heterogeneity) with which to challenge the idea that all people in all Arab cultures wound find throwing a shoe more offensive than all people in all non-Arab cultures.

Whether or not there was originally any special significance to it, though, IMHO the way the mainstream Western media have presented the incident has shaped how most global viewers understand it. It's seen as a case of using language culturally-specific to a formerly-colonized culture to supplement the anger and disrespect expressed towards (one of?) the world's biggest symbol(s) of militarism and capitalism. However baseless that dynamic might be, it's leading to shoe-throwing becoming emblematic of anti-imperialism and anti-capitalism. IMHO throwing a pie or rotten fruit, while conveying aggression, doesn't have connotations of that aggression being part of a larger issue/struggle.
While the juxtaposition of an article of clothing and a projectile may also have increased the impact, I don't think there would have been as many copycats if the original journalist had been a white United Statesian or if the media hadn't made such a big deal about the cultural significance of shoes.

[eumelia.livejournal.com]

Personally, the focus on the culture aspect of the shoe, I felt was just another way to "Other"-ise al-Zaidi.
"Look at the crazy Arab and his Arab culture throwing shoes at the Prez".

Focusing on the Way, detracts for the Why. Obviously there's a whole lot of hate going around for Bush, but the media focusing on the way al-Zaidi made his statement, detracts from the legitimacy of the statement.
Now all them shoe throwers around the world are the focus of a "mini-terrorist" trend and no one is asking Why they are throwing the shoes "Oh, they're copying the crazy Arab and his crazy culture".

Everyone "knows" that the US, China, Israel does bad things... but hey! Shoe throwing, that's just nuts!

[mao4269.livejournal.com]

Hmm, that makes a lot of sense, though I think that the effect was to polarize how shoe throwers around the world are perceived. It's either, as you said, "Shoe throwing, that's just nuts! (so we can ignore the complaints that might have motivated it)" or "Yay for shoe throwing at imperialists and those who cooperate with them (and who needs concrete criticism of their behavior)!"...

[hemlock-sholes.livejournal.com]

Perhaps a shoe is just a shoe?

What else was the guy going to throw? A hat? His shirt? his shoe was probably the only thing he had which was small and heavy (necessary to throw properly). Perhaps his cellphone, but that was probably too small.

The "copy cats" are throwing shoes because that's what gets them into the news. "They're throwing the same thing that was thrown at ex-President Bush". Do you think a rabid-republican will not throw his/her shoe at Obama the very first chance they get?

I don't remember hearing the Arab culture getting more than a line of two in reference to the shoe, in any case.

Also, I would avoid sitting so that the soles of my feet point at someone in ANY culture, and merely because of the fact that many scuff marks are caused by brushing my shoes against his/her trouser pants/dress/skirt.

[eumelia.livejournal.com]

What I've been saying :)

[mao4269.livejournal.com]

I really don't think that a rabid-Republican will thow hir shoe at Obama at this point - now anyone who does so is associated with al-Zaidi and that's presumably not an association ze would want, even if it does get the incident in the news. I guess only time will tell.

As for the last bit, good point :). In addition to the scuff mark issue, I would add that any position in which the soles of the feet are pointing at someone is likely to be considered immodest for women anyway. While I may choose to ignore that consideration at home, if traveling it seems prudent not to.

[hemlock-sholes.livejournal.com]

Unless of course, the said woman is wearing pants...

In which case, you might be opening a whole new kettle of fish!

[eumelia.livejournal.com]

See my comment to Mao, below.