The Burdens of Interpretation and the Question of Palestine

Author(s): Edward Said

Source: Journal of Palestine Studies, Vol. 16, No. 1 (Autumn, 1986), pp. 29-37
Published by: University of California Press on behalf of the Institute for Palestine Studies
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2537020
Accessed: 23-02-2016 10:25 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Institute for Palestine Studies and University of California Press are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to Journal of Palestine Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 194.27.18.18 on Tue, 23 Feb 2016 10:25:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
The Burdensof Interpretation
and the Questionof Palestine

EdwardSaid*

Where do you stand on the questionof Palestine?A shamelessly

provocative question,butan interesting one againstthewiderbackground
of theoriesof interpretation.One of the effects of thatgreatexplosionof
knowledgeassociatedwithemergentmovementshas been the discovery
thatthereis no pointofview,no vantage,no perspective availablelikean
Archimedeanprincipleoutsidehistory.The resultof decolonizationand
thedevelopment ofnewlyindependent peoples,liketheriseofthewomen's
movementfromsubalternto coeval status,like the appearancefrom
obscurityofvariousand variously suppressed
minority voices,thesethings
have demonstrated thatall formsof knowledgeabouthumanhistoryare
formsofengagement in it. This is particularly
true,ofcourse,in thesocial
andhumanistic disciplines,wherewe havecometo realize-ifnotalwaysto
acknowledge-thatthemodernformation ofsuchsciencesas anthropology
and historyoccurredwithinthosesitesof intensity and contestwe have
tendedto associateonlywithpoliticalstruggle. Thus scientific
imagesof
blacks,ofwomen,ofprimitives thatoccurin thenineteenthcenturyare,
to use a notionelaboratedby Foucault,partof the productionof these

'EdwardSaid, ParrProfessor of Englishand ComparativeLiterature at ColumbiaUniversity, is a

memberof the PalestineNational Council and the authorof Orientalismn(1978); The Questionof
Palestine
(1979); andAfter
theLastSky:Palestinian
Lives(New York:PantheonBooks,1986). This paper
is derivedfroma talkgivenat the PresidentialSessionof the annual meetingof the International
SocietyofPoliticalPsychology,
held in Amsterdam, July1986.

This content downloaded from 194.27.18.18 on Tue, 23 Feb 2016 10:25:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
30 JOURNALOF PALESTINESTUDIES

beingsas inferior,andhenceas dominated bythewielders ofthescientific

discourseaboutblacks,women, primitives.I thinkit is correct tosaythat
Palestineis a topic,a subject,a "matter" aboutwhichinterests and
knowledges have evolved, but like all other such knowledges theyare
implicatedin thecontest overandaboutPalestine.
Perhaps thisis a roundabout wayofsaying thatthereis no neutrality,
therecanbe noneutrality orobjectivity aboutPalestine. Thisisnottosay,
on the other hand, thatall positions are equal,or that all perspectives are
as heavilyor as lightly invested.But it is to saythatso ideologically
saturatedis thequestionofPalestine, so manifestly present is it to most
peoplewho come to deal withit, thateven a superficial or cursory
apprehension ofitinvolves a position taken,an interest defended, a claim
ora rightasserted. Thereis no indifference, no objectivity, no neutrality
becausethereissimply no roomforthemina spacethatis as crowded and
overdetermined as thisone.
IfI'vebeenso insistent on thispointhereit isbecauseI havefeltthat
a numberof signsscattered here and therein the invitations, the
procedures, theinstructions forthisconference haveasserted otherwise.
Consider, first
ofall,theimagery bywhichthestruggle overPalestine has
beenrepresented. Palestinians and Israelisareseenas lockedintosome-
thingcalled "The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict";moreoverProfessor
Kelman's protocol forthisverysession hasitthatthisconflict "isperceived
bytheparties as a zero-sum conflict around national identity andexistence"
and that"negotiations are possibleonlyin the framework of mutual
recognition, which makes it clear that recognition of the other's rights
representsassertion, ratherthanabandonment, of one's own rights."t
Thereis an underlying assumption herethatoutsidethefateful circleof
Palestiniansand Israelisstandsa groupofpeoplelessinvolvedand less
affectedthanthemainparties bytheconflict's depredations anddiminish-

tProfessor
Kelman'sabstract reads,in part,as follows:"Herbert Kelman'spresidentialaddressstartswith
the propositionthatthe Israeli-Palestinianconflictis perceivedby the partiesas a zero-sumconflict
aroundnationalidentity andexistence.This viewhas ledto mutualefforts todelegitimizetheotherwith
dangerously
dehumanizing implications.The delegitimizing efforts
createan atmosphere antagonisticto
Theyundermine
negotiation. thestepstowardnegotiation thatleaderson bothsideshave in facttaken
becauseeach definesthe negotiating framework in waysthatare profoundly threatening to the other.
Negotiationsare possibleonly in a framework of mutualrecognition,which makes it clear that
of the other'srightsrepresents
recognition assertion,ratherthanabandonment, of one's own rights.
Suchnegotiations can be facilitated
through a prenegotiationprocessconduciveto differentiationofthe
enemyimage,including a breakdown ofthemonolithic viewoftheenemycamp,a distinction between
theenemy'sideologicaldreamsand operational programs, and a splitbetweenthenegativeand positive
components of theother'sideologyand symbolsof legitimacy."

This content downloaded from 194.27.18.18 on Tue, 23 Feb 2016 10:25:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 BURDENSOF INTERPRETATION 31

ments,able to legislate,inform, and perhapsevenachievea totallydistinct

I
and otherpointofview. wouldalso mentionthatthe rhetorical tone of
suchwriting, as muchas itsimpliedpointofview,seemsto transport the
readeroutsidethe conflict'szone of disagreeableengagementto a place
removed,where-it is further implied-thingscan be madeclear,setright,
properly understood.
Such interpretations (fortheyare, at bottom,interpretations) have
been a consistentaspect of the questionof Palestinesince its modem
inception.There has alwaysbeen an appeal made by one or both of the
partiesto a silentand impartial jurysomewhere outthere.The factthatno
suchjuryhas everreallyexistedcan immediately be verifiedbya quicklook
at thevacillating, notto saydramatically altered,perception oftheUnited
Nationsby partiesto the conflictsince the late 1940s. It is onlya slight
simplification to say that whereasthe Zionistsappealed to the United
Nations,moreor less consistently until1967, it has been Palestiniansfor
whomsince 1967 the UnitedNationshas been cast in the roleof arbiter
and adjudicator.Presentappeals by Israel and Israel'sfriendsto such
abstractions as "democracy"or the "Judeo-Christian heritage"have not
madeeitherofthesetwosolemnfictions anylessa weaponin therhetorical
battlebetweenpartisans.
Butthisis notall. One ofthemoststriking featuresoftheseattempts at
representing the conflictas iffromthe outsidehas been the notionthat
Palestiniansand Israelisare equal, symmetrically balanced,polarizedat
dead center.A workshopat thesemeetingswentso faras devisingthe
format ofan innercoreofsixPalestinians and sixIsraelis,aroundwhomsix
others-presumably lessinvolvedand morefreeto regardthe matterwith
impartiality-sat. It willhardlycomeas a revelation, however,whenI say
once againthatno suchsymmetry has everexisted,no matterhowtempted
we maybe bythenicelybalancedrhetorical formofthepolarity.Ifthereis
one thingthatdeconstructive philosophy has effectedit is to have shown
definitivelythatbipolaroppositions always,regularly, constitutivelymystify
thedominationofone ofthe termsbythe other.In thisinstanceI would
saythatto place thePalestinianand theIsraelisideswithintheopposition
on whatappearsto be an equal,opposite,and symmetrical footingis also to
reducethe claimsofthe one by elevatingthe claimsofthe other.
HowevermuchtheJewsmayviewZionismas a crucialand compelling
aspectofJewish history, as itstelos,as itsrestitutionand redemption, as its
culmination and vindication,thereis no gettingpastthe factthatforall
Palestinians theprocessesofZionismhave dispossessed them.And notjust
that,forherewe come to the veryessenceof the Palestiniancase against

This content downloaded from 194.27.18.18 on Tue, 23 Feb 2016 10:25:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
32 JOURNAL
OF PALESTINESTUDIES

Israel.The Zionistmovementis uniquein the history of suchpioneering

settlement movements fromEuropein thatit not onlytookoverterritory,
but it excluded-as opposed to simplyexploiting-thenatives. In the
process,and eversince,therehasbeena programmatic denialofthesefacts,
exceptby a fewcourageous(albeit belated) revisionist Israelihistorians,
and intellectuals.
politicalactivists, The firstdispossessionthereafterbreda
wholeseriesof sustainedexclusions,by whichnot onlywerePalestinians
deniedtheirprimordial rightsin fact:theywerealso deniedthoserightsin
history,in rhetoric,in information, and in institutions.
So we havethecase
today,uniquein history, bywhichthestateofIsraelmaintains a population
of over two millionPalestiniansin inferior status,and anothertwo-plus
millionas exiles,whileat thesametimeit saysthatit does not do so, and
warsagainstthe Palestinianson everyconceivablelevel. It brandsPales-
tinianorganizations as terrorist,it claimsthatitsown actionsare justand
democratic,it congratulates itselfconstantly on its soul and its anguish,
even afterit is manifestly responsible formassacres,wars,deportations,
torture,collectivepunishment, andexpropriations againstthePalestinians.
The irony ofthisextraordinary structure ofIsraeliself-congratulation
on the
one handand Israelisavagery on theotherhasfewparallels to myknowledge.
I was remindedof an earliercase in RudyardKipling'sposthumously
publishedautobiography, Something of Myself.Kiplingspeaksof visiting
TheodoreRooseveltat the SmithsonianInstitution earlyin thiscentury.

The Smithsonian, especiallyon theethnologicalside,was a pleasantplace to

browsein. Everynation,likeeveryindividual,walksin a vain show-else it
could not live withitself-butI nevergotoverthe wonderof a people who,
havingextirpated theaboriginals oftheircontinentmorecompletely thanany
modemracehad everdone,honestly believedthattheywerea godlylittleNew
Englandcommunity, settingexamplesto brutalmankind.This wonderI used
to explainto TheodoreRoosevelt,who made the glasscases of Indianrelics
shakewithhis rebuttals.(Something ofMyself, p. 133)

For indeedit is the coincidenceofshakingglasscases fullof Indianrelics

withRoosevelt'sloud rebuttalsthatrecallsIsraelipublicposturing today
alongsidethecontinuedoccupationoftheWestBankand Gaza, as wellas
the punishment and dailyhumiliationof the Palestinians.The frequent
IsraelicomplaintthatPalestinianswillnot recognizeIsrael(a falsehood),
thatIsraelis surrounded thattheworldis experiencing
byhostility, a new
waveofanti-Semitism-alltheseaggravate thealmostSwiftian ironyofthis
situation.To add also theviewofleadingAmericanZioniststhattelevision
representationsof the Israelidestruction
of Lebanonin 1982 weretanta-

This content downloaded from 194.27.18.18 on Tue, 23 Feb 2016 10:25:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 BURDENSOF INTERPRETATION 33

mountto anti-Semitism and a failureofnervein Westerncivilization, this

is to leave the worldof cruel realityfora paranoiduniverseof utter
derangement.
Butthesethingsoccur.TheydefinethecontextofPalestinianawareness
and, one shouldadd, ofJewishawarenesstoo. Yet one factcannotbe lost
sightof-the radical discrepancyin the Palestinianand Israeli/Zionist
situation.(I note parenthetically thatso totalizinghave each of the two
opposingviewsbecomethattragically theyarealmostclosedto theseparate
and different truthoftheother.This too shouldbe keptin mindas we try
to modulateaway fromthe rigidand, in my opinion,false symmetry
ascribedto thetwosides.)The difference betweenthePalestinianviewand
theIsraeliviewis therefore constitutiveto thenatureoftheconflict. To put
this in morepoliticallyemotiveterms,we mustbe able to see that the
justiceand truthof the oppressor-for thereis one here-and thatof the
oppressedare not interchangeable, morallyequal, epistemologically con-
gruent.
As to whythePalestinianand Israelipositionsareroutinely describedas
iftheywerecongruent and symmetrically opposite,theretoo we have an
instanceofinterpretation engaged,not to sayembroiled, in theconflictof
whichit is supposedly free.It mustbe one oftherarestinstancesever(the
Americancase is similar)in whichthe nationthathas dispossessed and
continuesto punishanotherwantsto enjoythe moralstatusand virtuous
suffering of the victim.More: Israelrequiresfromthe Palestinianssuch
unprecedented (and in thewholehistory ofdiplomacy, unknown)conces-
sionsfromthem-includingsuchthingsas acknowledgements ofthe right
to exist,legitimacy, etc.-with noneoffered in return.Who can forget the
extraordinary publicrelationsattemptby supporters of Israelto turnthe
massacresof Sabra and Shatila,forwhichIsraelwas directly responsible,
into an exampleof Israel'sgreatnessof soul, or, as it was put by the
egregious oftheNewRepublic,
editorialists an exampleofhowIsrael'sshame
honorsher?
These peculiaritiesof the politicalstrugglebetweenIsrael and the
Palestinians aredeeplytraumatic forthePalestinians.Not onlydoes every
Palestinianfeel exile as an unhealablewound,but thereis the added
torment of seeingPalestinianmiseriesequatedwithIsraelisoul-searching
(whosemostrepeatedformis thephrase,or itsvariations, "theoccupation
is bad forIsrael'ssoul"). When Israeldenies our historyand even our
reality,we arealso askedto listento paeansin praiseofIsrael'sdemocracy.
The attackon Palestiniannationallife,whichhas goneon sincethe very
beginning of Israel'sexistence-a factrecentlyacknowledged by the new

This content downloaded from 194.27.18.18 on Tue, 23 Feb 2016 10:25:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 OF PALESTINESTUDIES
34 JOURNAL

generation ofIsraelirevisionist historianstowhomI referred earlier-ispart

of a largerand moresustainedeffort to dehumanize the Palestinians
entirely. It is a veryshortroadfrom thedepictions ofthePalestinian Arab
asa nomadic, mindless, andessentially inconsequential nonpresence onthe
land of Israelto the bombingof terrorist concentrations, nests,and
infrastructures during theso-calledPeaceforGalileecampaign. I can say
flatlyandwithout fearofrefutation thatnosuchsystematic dehumanization
oftheJewshaseveroccurred in Palestinianlife,rhetoric, orculture. My
pointinreciting all ofthisisnotjusttoreassert that,forexample, theLaw
ofReturn is radically unjustto,andfundamentally discriminatory against,
thePalestinians, northatIsrael'srecordis incomparably worsethanthe
Palestinians'. I amperfectly preparednow,as I havebeenfrequently inthe
past,to be as unsparing in self-criticism
as I am in criticism of Israeli
practices. The pointI wantto make,however, is thatmostPalestinians,
myself included,feelthe need forpeace and restitution witha great
urgency, andyetwe alsofeelthattheofficial IsraeliandgeneralZionist
attitude tothePalestinians isoneofuncompromising After
hostility. all,it
is a factalsothatthePalestine NationalCouncil-andnotjusta handful
ofdoves-hasbeenonrecord since1974expressing willingnesstopartition
thelandofhistorical Palestineintotwostates;andit isno lessa factthat
thePNC officially represents thewillofthemajority ofPalestinians inexile,
in the occupiedterritories, and withinpre-1967Israel.We have also
publicly andconcretely expressed ourwillingness as a political
andnational
community to negotiate directly withIsraelat a Geneva-type conference.
AndyetIsrael-I speakhereofthestate,notofsomeindividuals init-will
notevenbegintorecognize thePLO as thelegitimate representativeofthe
Palestinian people,muchlessnegotiate a settlement withit. Giventhat
everyone, including everyIsraeli,knowsthatthereis notnow,andnever
has been,anycredible(or evenincredible) alternative to thePLO, this
Israelirefusal is tantamount to a rejectionofanymeaningful movement
towardpeace and reconciliation. As portrayed by soldiersin the Israeli
hasbara(information) effort abroad-e.g. Conor CruiseO'Brien-the
actualIsraelipositionis equivalent to a perpetual siege,whichnaturally
enoughwillhaveto be subsidized bytheU.S. It is important to note,
incidentally, thatTom Segev'srecently published portraitof Israelin
1948-49reveals thatverysamedesire, at thattime,toremain in a stateof
siege,andtherefore torejectArabpeaceinitiatives madebyJordan, Syria,
and Egyptin 1948 and 1949; it was a stableelementin Israeliofficial
thinking as earlyas thefounding ofthestate.The continuity endures.

This content downloaded from 194.27.18.18 on Tue, 23 Feb 2016 10:25:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 BURDENSOF INTERPRETATION 35

Verywell then:how do we changethissituation,ifwe have properly

understoodit and properly interpretedits discrepanciesas seen fromthe
perspective of its greatestloser,the PalestinianArab?How do we really
beginto movetowardpeace?What are the real,as opposedto fraudulent,
steps to be taken? The psychologyof conflictdemands,I think, a
recognition on thepartoftheIsraelisthattheyhave done a greatinjustice
to thePalestinianpeople.Foran exampleofthethinking and thepolitical
gestureI have in is
mind there a quite remarkable book by Edward
Thompsonpublishedin 1926 by the HogarthPress;it is called The Other
Side of the Medal. In this tract,Thompson addressesEngland'slong
colonizationofIndia,acknowledging the immensepsychological as wellas
moraldamagedonebothsidesin theprotracted colonialencounter between
them.But one of the characteristics of thisadmirablelittlebook is that
whereasThompsonshowshowbothsideshave misrepresented each other's
history-the1857 Mutiny,forexample,is shownbythe Indiansto be yet
anotherepisodein India'sdegradation byEngland,butforthe Britishthe
Mutinyis a signofhow savagea nation,and therefore how muchin need
of imperialsubjugation, India is-he also has the courageand the moral
severityto see thatthereis a differenceand an asymmetry betweenthetwo
sides.England has exploited and colonized India, he says,and no matter
howsavagethereprisals byIndiannationalism, theycannotmeasureup to
the imperialoffense itself.
Therefore ThompsonproposesthatEnglandshouldexpressatonement
foritsactionsin India, and it is in formulating thisnovel solutionto the
psychological dimensionof the Anglo-Indianrelationship thatThompson
risesabove mostothercommentators of the time.It is mybeliefthatthe
presentimpassebetweenthe Palestiniansand Israelcan profitfromthe
thought underlying Thompson'sideaofatonement. As Thompsonsays,the
differencebetweenthe Indianand the Britishversionsof theirhistoryis
thatin additionto theirmilitary and economicpowers,the latterhave an
enormous arsenalofinterpretive weaponswithwhichto maketheirpoints;
thisincludes,forexample,theOxfordHistory ofIndia,theBritishpress,the
greatuniversities. In otherwords,he recognizes the considerable political
forceof publications,of the diffusion of opinion, of moral hegemony
operating on the Britishside. The sameis no lesstruetoday,wherepartly
becauseofthe powerof the UnitedStates,whichsupportsIsraelmoreor
lessunconditionally, and partlybecauseof the moralauthority ofJewish
Israel'sviewshave a dominating
suffering, poweroverthePalestinians that
amplifies,intensifies,and aggravatesthedisproportionate character oftheir
relationship.Thuswhileitishorrible fora Palestinianto be deported,orfor

This content downloaded from 194.27.18.18 on Tue, 23 Feb 2016 10:25:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 OF PALESTINESTUDIES
36 JOURNAL

a Palestinianfamilyto be massacred,or forPalestiniansto be arrested

withoutcharge, it is a good deal worse for them to endure these
punishments and to be forced,at the same time,to be askedto admire
Israel'sdemocracy, itsscientificperformances, itsmilitary prowess.
One shouldindicateherethattheconflictoverPalestineis unusualin
thatsincethe earlytwentieth century, it has been conductedbothon the
groundin Palestineand,outsidePalestine,as an ideological,informational,
and interpretive conflictbyimportant expatriate or diasporacommunities.
Palestine,of course,is no ordinary place, and its extraordinary character
has inflatedtheseoutsideideologicalconteststo a degreequite without
precedentanywhere else in the modemworld.Irredentism toutcourthas
furnished the goal (anotheracre, anothergoat,said Weizmann),but the
energyhas come frompsychological, ideological,and moralpassionsthat
have led theirown lifeoutsidePalestine.
In such an inflatedideologicaland psychological climatethen, the
importance of conciliatory stepsthatpreservein thema real senseof the
actualdisparity betweenoppressor and oppressedis paramount.It needsto
be said againthatthedehumanizing portrayals ofthePalestinians byIsrael
and Israel'ssupporters have regularly been accompaniedbyweirdlyexces-
sive depictionsoftheJewsof Israelas victimswho have directly inherited
the sacrosanctstatusof Holocaust survivors in everything theyas
that
Israelisdo to thePalestinians. Therefore someconnections mustbe broken,
others must be affirmed.Here the tonic and therapeuticforce of
Thompson'snotionofatonementbecomesurgently relevant.Forwhatwe
the
needto begin process of reconciliation and peace is an Israeligestureof
atonement, a gesturewhichdoesnotexploitthetiebetweenthevictimsof
the Holocaustand Israel'sJewsbut notes insteadhow IsraeliJewshave
oppressed PalestinianArabs,and activatestheenergiesofsecularand social
actualitiesin a programof restitution by Israel and the U.S. for the
Palestinianpeople.
As to whatthatgestureof atonementmightbe, I shall not be more
specificthan to say that the Palestiniansituationrequiresa visible
abrogation ofthosedenials-by now institutionalized, programmed, total-
ized,and even theorized-bywhichIsraelhas protected itselffromitsown
pastrecordofpracticesagainstthePalestinianpeople.I wouldbe lessthan
honestwereI not also to add thatwe maybe verywell pastthe moment
whenreconciliation can be affected muchbysuchgestures, althoughthere
willalwaysbe roomforthem.Insteadthereis a muchmorelikelyprospect
ofgrowing polarization-after all, almostan entiregeneration ofpersecuted
Palestinianshas now grownup in Israel, the occupied territories, and

This content downloaded from 194.27.18.18 on Tue, 23 Feb 2016 10:25:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 BURDENSOF INTERPRETATION 37

Lebanon-especiallyas it is also clearto Israeland the Palestiniansthat

neitherhas anyrealmilitary optionagainstthe other.
I shouldnot end on so bleak and negativea note. If I wereto say to
myself and to a younger generationthanminewhatit is thatwe mustdo in
furthering the mutualrecognition and peace that the currentsituation
requires,I wouldspecifythreethings.One is to keep our thoughtsand
actionsresolutely in a seculardimension,freeof divinepromises,cove-
nants,anddestinies.Nothinghas aggravated thequestionofPalestinemore
thantheantinomian qualityofitsrichhistoricaldensity,on theone hand,
fusedwith its irrational,irreconcilable religiousdisputes,on the other.
Second,is a constant,perpetually renewedsearchformodesofcommunity,
notstructures ofexclusion.In this,thereis no doubtthatPalestinians have
led the way, but thereis a growingnumberof Jews-Israeliand non-
Israeli-forwhomthisimperative has becomecentral.Third,we need a
more consciouspoliticalengagementwith the questionsof justice and
injusticethathave animatedthe questionofPalestinethroughout modern
times.The lesswe disingenuously claimto be studying, or adjudicating,
or
manipulating, or pragmaticallyseekingimpartial solutionsforthe conflict
betweenIsraeland thePalestiniannation,thebetter.Everyonewho looks
intothe questionofPalestineis engagedin it, buthow muchbetterto be
engagedopenlyon the side of justiceand truththan to loiteron the
margins, vainlyseekingimpartial solutionsandsymmetrical frameworks.As
withmostthingsin humanhistory, thisis a matterofchoiceand will,and
so ratherthanconcludingwitha fewbitsof scientific and contemplative
wisdom,let me insteadenjoinyouto call justicejusticeand truthtruth.

This content downloaded from 194.27.18.18 on Tue, 23 Feb 2016 10:25:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions