September 22 1999
To
Miri Nishri
62 Bograshov St.
Tel Aviv
Hello Miri,
I received the “baby”. I apologize for my delayed response. Re-acclimation in the country is not simple, and the holiday season that is upon us does not help.
My initial impression, as I glanced at the attached written materials, before opening the box, was that, for some reason, this material is addressed to men, and it was unclear why it was directed to me. I recalled you saying that you have found a way to alter the text so that it would be suitable for women as well, however, I did not see it.
I understood your intention when I opened the box. The image was effective: it was something very appealing and eye catching. This baby-embryo had to it, something primeval, elementary, universal.
But this was a short impression. My habit of critically reading the text was the downfall of my ability to connect to the project. Here, you did manage to overcome the masculine phrasing. It would have been more appropriate to talk of “parenthood” and not “fatherhood”, but other than that, the text is indeed strong, and applies for women and men alike. However, the biological difference is more meaningful here: a man can “fantasize” that his fertile materials are wandering around the world, but the mother’s parental mechanism is more complex, longer, and therefore less susceptible to this kind of petition.
But here I came across what I felt was the deepest difficulty: I see a great difference between the responsibility towards any human being and the acceptance of parenthood over a certain child. The analogy between the two, seems to me to be misleading instead of acting as a bridge. I am responsible for the embryo even if it is not, and cannot be, my child, simply because it is a human being. But for my own children I bear an additional and different responsibility – and I am not sure I would like to blur the difference between the two.
Later, I recalled the very powerful play “All my Sons”, and thought that perhaps there is more to this project, that my initial response may be missing.
At this point I appear to be coming from that initial response. I apologize if this reply is too rationalistic.
Happy new year and good luck,
Ruth Gavison
