This year's Nobel Prize winner in literature, Doris Lessing recently expressed her views on the political events of the past few years. According to her the 9/11 attacks were "not that terrible." She also confessed that she "always hated Tony Blair from the beginning" and that George W. Bush is "a world calamity." Lessing is 88. She has the Nobel. What does she care? She feels she can speak her mind.
Nobel Prize-winning author Doris Lessing has said that the 11 September attacks were "not that terrible" compared to the IRA's terror campaign.
"Some Americans will think I'm crazy... but it was neither as terrible or as extraordinary as they think," the writer told Spanish newspaper El Pais.
The 88-year-old added that "people forget" the IRA bomb attack on Margaret Thatcher's government in 1984. Five people died and 34 were injured when an IRA bomb exploded in a Brighton hotel where leading members of the Conservative party - including Mrs Thatcher - were staying for its annual conference.
'World calamity'
The author conceded that "many people died and two prominent buildings fell" in the attacks on New York's World Trade Center in 2001. "They're a very naive people, or they pretend to be," she added of Americans.
Lessing, whose novels include The Golden Notebook and Memoirs of a Survivor, also branded President George W Bush "a world calamity".
"Everyone is tired of this man. Either he is stupid or he is very clever, although you have to remember he is a member of a social class which has profited from wars."
The writer also said that she "always hated Tony Blair from the beginning".
Just confirms the notion, that any tragedy that strikes home (in Doris's case it is the IRA attacks in England) will always have greater emotional impact than tragedies elsewhere. We do not lose too much sleep over Darfur, Rwanda etc. where the scale of loss is in the millions. The only reason we are second guessing President Bush's decision to go to Iraq is because of the loss of American life. If the mission was truly accomplished in 2003, would we be questioning that decision in the same way? If not, why not? The issue is still the same- whether it was okay to invade and occupy a sovereign nation that did not have the connection to 9-11 in the same way that say Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia or Pakistan did.
Posted by: AKB | October 28, 2007 at 03:58 PM
The issue is still the same- whether it was okay to invade and occupy a sovereign nation that did not have the connection to 9-11 in the same way that say Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia or Pakistan did.
AKB: You have come to a place where most of the authors recognized from day one, the moral vacuum in which the Iraq war was launched. For us, there was no "mission to be accomplished" in Iraq. So, no. No matter what the outcome of the Iraq war would have been, we still would have condemned the aggression and occupation.
Speaking only for myself, I have little problem with going after Al Qaida in Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan or wherever it has a viable operation going.
Posted by: Ruchira | October 28, 2007 at 11:44 PM
Hi Ruchira: Yes, but in the days leading up to the war, you would have been in a very tiny minority. In fact, any public figure who took a remotely skeptical view of that decision to go to war was soundly ridiculed. There weren't many politicians who even wanted to debate it. (In fact the Congress didn't debate it, and no one pressured their Congressmen to debate it). On the other hand, today, the pendulum has swung to the other end- where it is now fashionable to criticize the President's decision to go to war and his management of the war. What was the difference maker? It was the continued cost in American lives, that caused one to question whether the cause was worth it. The way we evaluate things is different when our own have to pay the price, doesn't it? If looked that way, Doris' comments make sense. She would assign a greater value to IRA actions than the occurrences of 9-11.
Anyway, now the drum beat is Iran. But at least that issue is being debated and questioned. Fareed Zakaria did a very nice job on the Lehrer news hour today. http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/july-dec07/iran_10-29.html
Finally, please accept my apologies. It probably appeared rude when I commented out of the blue. I really like the way you've done your blog. I was told to visit here,and maybe I would learn something. And- that advice was exactly right. I hope you keep this going for a long long time. Thanks a bunch.
Posted by: AKB | October 30, 2007 at 02:14 AM
AKB:
No, you were not rude at all and thanks for your kind words. We like it very much when our silent readers jump in out of the blue with their opinions. I am somewhat surprised that you "learnt" something here. Wow! We don't flatter ourselves as disseminators of new information or insights. We are just happy to have a forum where like minded people see their point of view reflected. But thanks anyway for the compliment.
Yes, we the opponents of the Iraq war were in the minority in the early days when opposition to this horrendous undertaking was interpreted as unpatriotic and sympathetic to terrorists. But not surprisingly, among my own friends, a majority was critical of the misadventure of Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld.
You are absolutely right that the pendulum has swung to the other side because things didn't quite go the way the public believed they would. The early days of "Shock & Awe" have turned into a "quagmire" and the price of the war in terms of American lives is no longer acceptable. Unfortunately, the opposition to the Iraq war is not based on the right moral reasons but because the outcome has hurt American pride. (I speculated on this nearly a year ago here.) You are also correct in assessing Lessing's reaction to 9/11. Tragedy is always more real when it hits near home and not in faraway Rwanda, Darfur or Burma.
But what I fear most is the inertia of the human mindset. The last six and a half years the Bush White House has set a public policy agenda of fear, suspicion, jingoism and aggression which will take a while to shake off. Even after the conspicuous failures of this administration, many among the politicians, law enforcement personnel and even the public are reluctant to remedy the lingering paranoia and curtailment of civil liberties. (See another post here.) With the right leadership it is possible to overcome that attitude. But I am afraid that the current crop of Democratic presidential candidates may not have the spine to undo the harm that Bush-Cheney have wreaked upon us.
I did happen to catch the Iran debate between Fareed Zakaria and Norman Podhoretz on Jim Lehrer's show. Zakaria made the same points in his article in last week's Newsweek. I am glad that he is showing more caution and restraint on Iran than he did for Iraq. The sweet Mr. Zakaria was right up there with other cheerleaders when Bush-Cheney were beating the war drums against the latter.
Posted by: Ruchira | October 30, 2007 at 10:44 AM