Reading Response # 9

I enjoyed reading Nassar's article. It was interesting to read an article being told from a different perspective than what we are accustomed to. On the very first page off the article I was able to make direct connections to this course. Near the bottom of page one, it reads "Nineteenth-century European photography had a similar attitude towards Jerusalem, representing the city as an ancient place that belonged more to the world of the Bible than to this world. In doing so, it failed to document Jerusalem as a living and socially inhabited place." Had that short paragraph not been included in the reading, I would have most likely failed to recognize that pattern. At the very least, this article was extremely thought-provoking. I think as humans we sometimes forget that images don't tell the whole story. For example, we often see images (on television, in magazines, newspapers, books, etc.) of violence, misuses of power, and others that lend us to negative perceptions of society. However, this is likely not the case in all regions. Likewise, Jerusalem was depicted as being a mundane, "people-less" place.

When I took a look at the various photos presented throughout the article, it indeed made me feel that at one point, Jerusalem must have been empty. However, this was far from the truth. Since Jerusalem's existence they have been populated with a variety of different people groups.

I found it interesting that Palestine was presented as a "biblical site most relevant to Europe." The images focused on the minority groups of the Christians and the Jews who had potentially close relationships with the Europeans. It was for these reasons that many Europeans perceived Palestine as somewhat of a Holy Land. I think this article does a wonderful job of reminding us to take everything we see with a grain of salt. Before automatically perceiving images, people, etc. in a certain way, we should take a look at them from multiple angles, consult a variety of sources, and ask questions.