TURNBULL, THUCYDIDES AND ORIENTALISM
“The strong do what
they have to do and the weak accept what they have to accept.” Thucydides
Our august Prime Minister,
while on a visit to the planetarch, snuck in a reference to classical Greek
historian Thucydides. It is not the
first time our classically minded leader has done so. A month or so before, he
quoted Thucydides to the Prime Minster of Malaysia and the Prime Minister of
China. As way back as 2012 in fact, our prime minister tweeted excitedly that
he was about to “discuss Thucydides at the Classical Association of NSW annual
dinner.” Prime Minister Turnbull’s recourse to our classical past for
inspiration has sent shivers of delight down the spines of sections of the
Greek community. According to them, these remarks are indicative of the fact
that the Prime Minister is paying the requisite homage to the Greek people as
the personification of civilization itself. Malcolm Turnbull thus is a Philhellene
and surely only good things would flow on to the Greek community as a result,
in contrast with his other parliamentary colleagues, who are not sufficiently
enlightened to realise that good governance depends upon a deep knowledge of
and the capacity to learn from the ample examples provided by Greek history and
apply them to daily challenges.
Yet as delighted as
they may be at the sound of Greek names upon Anglo-Saxonic lips, those Greeks that are titivated by this form
of exposure are deluding themselves. Had Malcolm Turnbull quoted revolutionary
general Makrigiannis to Obama, then we would all have ample justification for
amazement and delight, for he belongs to us and we, the modern Greeks can
relate to him directly. Thucydides on the other hand, no longer belongs to us
in the way that Makrigiannis does. For he has long been appropriated by the
West and subsumed into the manner in which the West perceives its culture.
An interesting parallel
to this phenomenon is the manner in which the West views the Parthenon. In
1988, the editor of the Daily Telegraph, Boris Johnson, now mayor of
London, published an interview with a
senior curator at the British Museum. The curator was quoted as stating: “the
Elgin Marbles are “a pictorial representation of England as a free society and
the liberator of other peoples..” Notably, anything to do with the building’s
religious function or its builder’s ethnic origins are irrelevant for the purpose of this form of cultural
appropriation.
This is evidenced by
the fact that members of the West views such elements from the ancient Greek
world in ways that reinforce or justify their own particular sense of
themselves. Thus, Cecil Rhodes viewed the Parthenon as a manifestation not of
democracy, but of empire, stating: “Through art, Pericles taught the lazy
Athenians to believe in Empire.” In 1832 French poet Alphonse de Lamartine last
of the romatics declared the Parthenon to be “the most perfect poem ever
written in stone on the surface of the earth,” while architect Le Corbusier, he
of the drab and arid edifice, upon first seeing the Parthenon proclaimed it to
be the “repository of the sacred standard, the basis for all measurement in
art.
Thus the Parthenon
acts, to the western world, as a magnet and a mirror. The west sees itself in
it and appropriates it for its own devices. As a result, its original meaning
has been obscured. The West sees only what flatters its own self image or
explains it through the connection to the birthplace of democracy.
Attacks on the integrity
of the elements that have been appropriated are thus considered to be attacks
on Western civilization itself, and possibly should not be seen as defences of
Hellenism. Thus, when British naturalist, mineralogist and historian Edward
Daniel Clarke gave the following eyewitness account of the lowering of a metope
in 1801: “Removed from their original setting the Parthenon marbles have lost
all their excellence,” he was merely lamenting the destruction of a cultural
icon, something that as even felt by the Ottomans. Clarke states that as the
metope was hoisted down, the rigging dislodged an adjoining block that fell to
the ground with a thunderous noise. The local Ottoman military governor took no
longer restrain himself. He took his pipe out of his mouth, let a tear fall and
uttered, with an emphatic tone: “Te-los.” It would be fascinating to see within
which perspective, this decidedly non-western individual appreciated the
destruction of this wondrous building.
Rather than identify us
with our ancient forebears, western appropriators generally seek to separate us
from them, indulging in a form of orientalism, whereby, by divorcing us from
those ancestors, we are included within the paradigm of a patronizing Western
attitude towards Middle Eastern, Asian and North African societies. In Edward
Said’s analysis of Orientalism, the West essentialises these societies as
static and undeveloped. Implicit in this, is the idea that Western society is
developed, rational, flexible, and superior. Of course when examining Western
society, Said points to the appropriation of the ancient Greek tradition by it.
So complete is that appropriation that certain nineteenth century thinkers have
even sought to deny our heritage to us, Fallmerayer and others arguing that we
are so unlike our ancient ancestors (ie we are too middle eastern), to be
descendent from them, a process that has its origins in the political rivalry
between Greek and Latin cultures during the Byzantine Empire.
The aforementioned
orientalist tendencies are now well entrenched within western societies and
their attitudes towards modern Greece and are no more so evident that in the
justification provided over decades by the British museum us to why the
Parthenon Marbles should be retained in London – simply that the primitive
oriental Greeks, cannot look after them in the manner that their superior
western counterparts can. Thus Urging his fellow peers to block any return of
the marbles to Greece, Lord Wyatt of Weeford in 1997 stated in the House of
Lords: “My Lords, it would be dangerous to return the marbles to Athens because
they were under attack by Turkish and Greek fire in the Parthenon when they
were rescued and the volatile Greeks might easily start hurling bombs again.”
As modern Greece is as western
a creation as the west’s reconstruction and interpretation of ancient Greek
culture, that skewed view of our heritage has been foisted upon us, along with
a misplaced sense of inadequacy and low self-esteem. It is this insecurity,
that we are somehow not good enough, far fallen from the imagined glories of
our ancestors that causes us to snap to attention and bask in what we believe
to be praise vicariously lavished upon us by the dominant ruling group, through
our ancestors. While an increasing number of scholars are now reinterpreting
ancient Greek culture and tearing down the Olympian superhuman stereotype in
favour of a nuanced view that sees the ancients in all their frustrating and
all too human complexity, rational and yet superstitious, moral yet capable of
the worst brutality, measured and yet irrational, the old view has become so
internalised that it will take a considerable amount of time before it is
dissipated. In the meantime, we will continue to smile, every time a politician
makes a classical reference, consider them our admirers, laud ourselves about
the “strength” of our “lobby,” and become bewildered when it becomes apparent
that as an ethnic community we are to enjoy no more grace or favour than anyone
else.
Granted, I have no
problem with our Prime Minister discussing ancient Greek historians with world
leaders, for there is much to be learned from Thucydides and I harbour a
sneaking suspicion that the majority of world leaders, in their synaxis,
generally prefer to discuss the multifarious undertakings of Kim Kardashian
instead. What I do have a problem with however, is the said Prime Minister’s
government considering penalising Greek-Australian pensioners, who have endured
great privations in order to make a lasting contribution to this country, for
choosing to spend protracted periods of time in their homeland.
We leave you this week
with the musings of Lord Byron on Lord Elgin. In the poem: The curse of Minerva
he seeks to distance his country from the appropriations of Elgin thus:
“England own him not: Athena no! thy plunderer was a Scot.” In Childe Harold’s
Pilgimage, however, he comes clean in the second canto, which is devoted to the
atrocities of the pillage that was supposedly necessary in order to make the
world safe for democracy: “Dull is the eye that will not weep to see/ Thy walls
defac’d, thy mouldering shrines remov’d/ By British hands.”
And we all wait desperately for the day when an
Australian Prime Minister can suggest interpretations of world politics to his
American counterpart, gleaned from the wisdom of Karagiozis.
DEAN KALIMNIOU
First published in NKEE on Saturday 13 February 2016
<< Home