17.04.2008

Statement by

Amin MAALOUF

writer

Debate “Promoting the teaching of European literature”

(Strasbourg, 14-18 April 2008)

(Extract of the verbatim records)

Mr MAALOUF (Writer) said he was touched by the confidence the Assembly had shown in him by inviting him to address it. He would speak of his concerns as a citizen. The world was undergoing an unprecedented crisis of civilisation. It felt almost as if mankind no longer knew which way to turn. Progress had been spectacular and following decades of scientific innovation, people now lived longer and in better health than ever before.

It was tragic, however, that a growing gap was opening between technical capabilities and the ability to manage such matters as the environment, climate change and humanity’s impact on the future. Responses to those issues, although better than 20 years ago, remained inadequate and anyone who now asked whether humanity was sufficiently aware to preserve the planet would receive the answer “no”.

More than ever, people were aware of the absurdity and destructiveness of financial mechanisms. It was ridiculous to operate what were effectively gigantic casinos when the fate of millions was at stake. The notion of an honest day’s or an honest life’s work was being undermined.

People needed to live in harmony within cities and districts, but whether society was able to meet that challenge was questionable. The current crisis, both global and cultural, differed from previous crises. Salvation would be found not in further technological advances but in adapting mindsets. In spite of their common humanity, people across Europe often behaved as if they were separate, warring factions. Such an idea might seem to be merely the naïvety of the novelist, but he believed that that was not so. The world had become a global village and progress in each area affected others. People rubbed shoulders daily but were still unable to live together as the affirmation of identity became ever more strident.

The Hemicycle was precisely the place where it was least necessary to make this point because of the work it had done on co-operation. As someone who was born outside Europe, he marvelled at the miracle that had occurred on that continent and at the way in which after centuries of conflict people had risen above ancient quarrels. In his own region the quarrels had continued: untreated wounds spread poison throughout humanity. Europe was the proudest of homelands – one built on ethics and a common identity that took account of its diversity and had stood against Stalinism, racism and other threats. To come from Europe should inspire a citizen with pride without arrogance.

Everyone had elements of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde and needed to fight for the one over the other. Everyone must learn to leave aside their prejudices and anathemas and to stop judging others superficially. All needed to listen in order to understand humanity. The deepest recesses of humanity could be discovered through its culture; and literature revealed the dreams, aspirations, vision and beliefs of a society. It was necessary to read the literature of others in order to understand their culture. There was a desire to know, but also a desire to live without outsiders, just neighbours.

Europe had to be vigorous, without being smug. What Europe had achieved was remarkable, but much remained to be done. Europe had developed its political and economic systems first, but now was the time for cultural advancement. More ambitious outreach was needed for the promotion of language and culture.

He wanted to conclude by making four points. First, culture was not a blank page and while it was being written all the time, much remained to be written. Culture provided a shared inheritance with few equivalents in the history of mankind, and that was worth preserving. Secondly, the heritage of culture was not closed and each generation had the right and the duty to add to the store. Thirdly, the teaching of literature was crucial in that respect, and the recommendations contained in the report were therefore urgent and necessary. Fourthly, there was a need to balance the inseparable values of universality and diversity. A multiplicity of languages was also required.