The New York Times architecture critic Michael Kimmelman accuses Israel of carrying out the “Disneyfication” of Jerusalem in reference to a planned cable car network connecting the Old City. The article, however, is less “Disneyfication” and more politicization on the part of the writer.
The scene is set in the opening paragraph:
The skyline is still dominated by the city’s great Muslim and Christian shrines: the gold, glistening Dome of the Rock and the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, where Jesus was said to have been buried.
For it is these sites that Kimmelman evidently sees as the legitimate religious identity of Jerusalem at the expense of its Jewish sites. Kimmelman is clearly an architect rather than an historian for in his second paragraph, he inaccurately describes the Western Wall as “the holiest site in the Jewish world.”
In fact, while the Western Wall is the holiest site that Jews are allowed to pray, the Temple Mount, the site of two ancient Jewish temples is, in fact, Judaism’s holiest site. The New York Times itself has previously corrected this error, prompted by HonestReporting.
UPDATE
In response to HonestReporting’s request, the New York Times issued the following correction:
Correction:
An earlier version of this article erroneously attributed a distinction to the Western Wall in Jerusalem. It is one of the holiest sites in Judaism, not the holiest.
Related reading: Jewish Ties to the Temple Mount – What’s the Story?
Kimmelman is perfectly entitled to critique the Israeli cable car plan on the grounds of architecture and design. Indeed, one of the critics he interviews is Moshe Safdie, the architect responsible for many Israeli building projects including within Jerusalem. But Kimmelman goes further:
The cable-car project is an example, illustrating how Israel wields architecture and urban planning to extend its authority in the occupied territories. Whatever its transit merits, which critics say are negligible, the cable car curates a specifically Jewish narrative of Jerusalem, furthering Israeli claims over Arab parts of the city.
What is this architecture and urban planning that Israel wields? An illustrative photo below the paragraph shows a walled section of Israel’s security barrier as an example. The barrier is not about extending Israeli authority but preventing acts of Palestinian terrorism against Israeli civilians.
And what exactly is a “specifically Jewish narrative of Jerusalem,” a city that has been central to Judaism and the Jewish people for thousands of years?
Later, Kimmelman also states:
Cable car passengers will be funneled through a Jewish version of the city’s history.
As if Israel is somehow imposing on or ‘Judaizing’ the city.
Indeed, according to Kimmelman:
the cable cars will swoop down from a Jewish neighborhood in the western part of Jerusalem to Mount Zion.
This is an interesting use of language given that cable cars usually descend fairly slowly. Instead, we have them “swooping down” almost like a predatory bird, which might well be a subliminal image for Kimmelman who sees Israel preying on the holy city.
Related reading: Deal With It: Jerusalem is Israel’s Capital
It’s also worth pointing out that while Kimmelman sees Israel promoting a “Jewish version of the city’s history,” Israel is the one authority that has consistently and effectively protected all holy sites in Jerusalem for all religions. Indeed there is nothing preventing tourists from visiting the many Christian or Muslim historical sites. The only party that denies a Jewish historical connection to the city is the Palestinians.
Referring to the Arab neighborhood of Silwan, Kimmelman writes:
Tourists will fly over and tunnel under Silwan’s Palestinian residents without actually having to encounter them.
The plan can bring to mind Israel’s so-called bypass roads, built to safely speed Jewish settlers in the occupied West Bank to Jerusalem without passing through Palestinian towns.
There’s a good reason for roads for Israelis to bypass Palestinian towns. Jews entering those towns run the risk of being murdered by Palestinian terrorists. Hardly comparable with methods of preventing tourists disrupting the residents of Silwan.
The city of Jerusalem is far more than only the Old City and the holy basin. Jerusalem is a city of some 900,000 people who live and work there. It is a living, breathing entity that while preserving its incredibly rich history, also needs to develop. So why does Kimmelman need to add:
In a city long defined by low-rise, stone-clad buildings, Israeli authorities are now approving 40-story glass towers and cut-and-paste office park development more in keeping with Singapore or Jakarta than Jerusalem.
Indeed, this major development is taking place at the main north western entrance to the city, which has no bearing whatsoever on the Old City.
But if Kimmelman is so concerned with the preservation of Jerusalem’s historical landscape, how is it that he appears not to acknowledge that the eastern part of the city that he labels as Arab or Palestinian was only ever that for a mere 19 years of its history when the city was divided. Because, for Kimmelman:
Even the cladding of East Jerusalem’s settlements in Jerusalem stone, the architectural uniform traditionally worn by buildings in Jewish West Jerusalem, helps spread the image of a single Jewish city.
The cable car, critics say, is part of this same effort to inculcate a Jewish narrative of occupied Jerusalem.
What exactly is “occupied Jerusalem?” Is Kimmelman referring to the entire city or only the parts that he considers to be Palestinian and thus where a Jewish presence is illegitimate?
If this is an editorial error then it’s a telling one.
Ultimately, this story is typical of the New York Times: what is at its core a scheme to improve access to historical tourism sites in a city with significant transport challenges is instead critiqued not on grounds of architecture, design or effectiveness but on political grounds. The cable car may not be to everyone’s taste and is certainly contentious but the New York Times and Michael Kimmelman have created a framework where Israel’s plans are sinister and malevolent; designed specifically to maintain an “occupation” of its own capital city and to promote the Judaization of Jerusalem.
Please send your considered comments for publication on the New York Times letters page to [email protected]
