Friedman Takes on Apartheids and Boycotts
But his subject is 1980s South Africa and Paul Simon
Thomas Friedman’s column today doesn’t merit the Friedmometer, because it’s not explicitly about the peace process or Israel—which is exactly the point. He writes instead about Paul Simon (“a friend of mine”), who in 1985, inspired by a tape he heard of a group called the Boyoyo Boys, made an album massively influenced by South African music. That album, of course, was the classic Graceland.
But in making Graceland with South African musicians, Simon violated the cultural boycott that Artists Against Apartheid had then called for. In a new film, the co-founder of that group recalls, “I think he had a great creative idea to mix his music and his rhythms and his ingenuity with some that he had found in South Africa. But, at that moment in time, it was not helpful.” By contrast, though Simon was “appalled by apartheid,” according to Friedman, “he bristled at the notion that, in collaborating with black South African artists on a synthesis that elevated their music and talents onto a world stage, he was hurting their national cause.” Friedman’s verdict, now that apartheid is gone (and that Graceland is Graceland), is that Simon was right, and he quotes several South African musicians who agree. Message: even where regimes are unjust (and perhaps especially in those cases), cultural boycotts end up hurting the folks that outsiders would most wish to help.
The dog that doesn’t bark, in this column, are present-day instances in which there are calls for a cultural boycott due in part to allegations of apartheid. Friedman doesn’t go there, but given his feelings about South Africa, it’s pretty clear what he would think.
Paul Simon Takes Us Back [NYT]
Daily rate: $2
Monthly rate: $18
Yearly rate: $180
WAIT, WHY DO I HAVE TO PAY TO COMMENT?
Tablet is committed to bringing you the best, smartest, most enlightening and entertaining reporting and writing on Jewish life, all free of charge. We take pride in our community of readers, and are thrilled that you choose to engage with us in a way that is both thoughtful and thought-provoking. But the Internet, for all of its wonders, poses challenges to civilized and constructive discussion, allowing vocal—and, often, anonymous—minorities to drag it down with invective (and worse). Starting today, then, we are asking people who'd like to post comments on the site to pay a nominal fee—less a paywall than a gesture of your own commitment to the cause of great conversation. All proceeds go to helping us bring you the ambitious journalism that brought you here in the first place.
I NEED TO BE HEARD! BUT I DONT WANT TO PAY.
Readers can still interact with us free of charge via Facebook, Twitter, and our other social media channels, or write to us at email@example.com. Each week, we’ll select the best letters and publish them in a new letters to the editor feature on the Scroll.
We hope this new largely symbolic measure will help us create a more pleasant and cultivated environment for all of our readers, and, as always, we thank you deeply for your support.