Arts & International Affairs: Vol. 3, No. 2, Summer/Autumn 2018 | Page 52

THE BARENBOIM CASE: HOW TO LINK MUSIC AND DIPLOMACY STUDIES
the orchestra “has become a potent symbol of dialogue and peace” (Mahiet, Ferrugato,
and Ahrendt 2014:3).
By supporting each other in a common musical performance, the members of the Divan
learn to look differently at the de-humanized “enemy” who, until then, had no individual
texture and was limited to weapons or soldiers: “Before going to the Divan, Sharon
[Cohen] had really no thought of Syrians as human beings. She had only ever heard
them spoken of as killers. The only thing she knew about Syrians was that they were
sitting on the Golan Heights and shooting Israelis [ ... ] Sharon’s mother’s family had
nothing against her playing in the Divan, but many of them couldn’t resist saying, ‘So,
you’re playing with Syrians, huh?’ whenever the opportunity arose” (Cheah 2009:76).
Hence, the orchestra projects a different image of what might happen in the social or
political reality because “the fundamental principle of the orchestra was quite simple:
once the young musicians agreed on how to play even just one note together they would
not be able to look at each other in the same way again” (Barenboim 2008a:54). This is
also relating to the observations the American cellist Elena Cheah made as a temporary
professional stand-in within the ensemble. Cheah recognizes the idea that “this particular
orchestra is a microcosm of a society that has never existed an may well never exist”
(Cheah 2009:1). Several interviews with Divan instrumentalists corroborate evidence
for this idea. Indeed, musicians share this design by highlighting the fact that the WEDO
“does not forget the existence of the other” (Tribot Laspière 2013b). Rachel Abitan, an
Israeli violinist, also points out that the common goal is not to resolve the conflict but to
establish good conditions for real discussions that are often impossible otherwise. She
added that this perspective makes all the political sense of the orchestra, since it “is a
good model, even though many times they say what we do here is not politics, but I think
there’s a political aspect to it. And I think that if people do see how Israelis and Arabs
from different countries are getting along here and have a joint interest [ ... ], we wanna
spread this message often, show that this is possible” (Tribot Laspière 2013a).
These reactions and comments reinforce Barenboim’s aspiration. If Palestinians and Israelis
live in political and economic asymmetry, symmetry appears when it comes to
perceptions: both groups are linked through “mutual ignorance” (Barenboim 2013a).
Fighting this ignorance is the basic aim of the Divan at the symbolic level. Even though
it is unable to “bring about peace,” the orchestra “can create the conditions for understanding
without which it is impossible even to speak of peace” (Barenboim 2010:73).
That is why the fruitful intellectual relationship between Barenboim and Said may be
qualified as a middle-range couple, capable to break the double-bind (Norbert Elias), i.e.
the insoluble nexus of opponents in the Israel–Palestine conflict, and thus cultivating a
change of mutual representations (Ramel 2014).
The Divan and Music Diplomacy�Considerations from a Best-Practice Viewpoint
While considering the WEDO as a substantial example for informal music diplomacy,
a variety of more general methodological and epistemological challenges has to be ad-
49