💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › marie-mason-review-battle-of-seattle.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 12:46:12. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
➡️ Next capture (2024-06-20)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Title: Review: Battle of Seattle Author: Marie Mason Date: 2010 Language: en Topics: Fifth Estate, Fifth Estate #383, review, Seattle Notes: From Fifth Estate #383, Summer 2010
The Battle of the Story of the Battle of Seattle,
David Solnit and Rebecca Solnit,
AK Press, 2009, $12,
www.akpress.org
Having been in Seattle for the “insurrection” against the World Trade
Organization (WTO) in 1999, I looked forward to reading David Solnit’s
account of the days leading up to November 26 and his interpretation of
the aftermath of those events. I took part enthusiastically in many of
the demonstrations and blockades of which he writes, and ran in the
Black Bloc.
I remember feeling personally wounded by how not only the mainstream
press summarized our efforts, but also by the unexpected sting of
sharply divided alternative press attacks that smacked so many radicals
square across the jaw.
The second “Battle” in the title refers to Solnit’s attempts to
intervene in the filming of director Stuart Townsend’s 2007 film, Battle
in Seattle, to make it conform more closely to his version of events. I
was curious to read Solnit’s account of his meetings with the director
where he describes his negotiations with Townsend over content and
dialogue.
I appreciated the film and wrote a mostly positive review in these pages
(see FE Fall 2008). It features actors Charlize Theron and Woody
Harrelson portraying the anti-WTO demonstrations through a mostly
sympathetic fictionalized account of events and what was at stake. This
is done through the eyes of characters portraying some of the types of
people present during the tumultuous demonstrations and blockades.
Although Solnit is a skilled organizer and a person of integrity and
vision, I disagree with what amounts to an attempt to disenfranchise
many who were there, but whose views and purpose differed from his own.
Many individuals, unions, international and U.S. based non-profits, and
grass-roots groups came to participate with varying visions of what they
wanted and the tactics they hoped would achieve the change they desired.
Many groups were never in contact with one another, and certainly not
with the Direct Action Network (DAN), the coalition Solnit worked with,
so they never signed onto their action agreement. While DAN did do a
great deal of work to create the framework of a plan to blockade the
streets which ultimately led to the shut down of Seattle’s crosstown
traffic, it was, in fact, a glorious and unpredictable mess which
ultimately won the day and forced the collapse of the ministerial talks.
Solnit makes the same critical mistake he accuses Townsend of in making
his film. Like the director, he didn’t reach outside of his own
experiences to interview anyone who participated in events beyond his
paradigm/approval.
It is a fatal flaw in the book as a definitive historical document, but
does not damage its ability to enlighten a whole new generation of
radicals who want to know how some segment of the movement perceived
their role in the first major successful opposition to the juggernaut of
global capital.
Its detailing of organizing tactics make it a fascinating book that
serves as an insight into the perspective of someone so highly committed
and engaged. It helps to keep the historic memory alive and expands the
foundation for dialogue that should continue about the changing face of
capitalism and how it is best confronted.