across its concrete sensibility there is a path toward the possibility to
construct a new place. The movie is saying to us that when the situation is horrible, full of death and violence, when it has become impossible for it to become something good for all people, there is always the possibility of seizing the situation in another manner, from the point of view of humanity itself and not from some particular part of humanity. From this point of view it can be seen that all people who live here are all the same, and that a new place can be constructed. As I understand it, Local Angel is the angel for a new place. In the film there is a very important subjective declaration about the reconciliation between the weak god, who is not the god of glory and potency but a weak and suffering god, and the figure of the mother who protests and does not accept. The question for me is the gap between these two determinations. Is it possible to have simultaneously a strong protest and revolt and, on the other hand, a god of weakness, pity, and compassion, something like a Christian god? Udis vision is precisely on this gap between the two. On one side, the question of the construction of a new place is always a question of weakness, because a new Palestine is something that is the result neither of victory nor defeat. If you want to have a new place, you have to renounce the logic of power. So, on one side, you have a god who is not the god of one people but the god of everybody; on the other side you have to do and to say something, because a searching for a new way in a situation cant be purely passive and compassionate. In the movie we can see Udi facing Arafat. In politics speaking to somebody is an act, it is not pure passivity. The question is, what is the action adequate to my vision of the construction of a new place? It is not the classical form of action, which in this situation would be fighting and aggression. While Udi is not a pure pacifist, he knows as well as I do that a new political conception about this sort of situation is not on the side of the old conception of fighting, fighting, fighting, and then finally victory or death. Another way must be found. In the movie we can see that the art, the singers and love, are determinations immanent to a real conception of a political transformation of place. The gap between protestation, revolt, and the weak god is also a place for a new means for a new place. This gap is certainly a problem: Udi has no mechanical solutiononly the gap itself. So my question, which is not an objection, is about the means of Udis vision. Udis means lies in the gap between four figures of messianism: Walter Benjamin, Gershom Scholem, Shabtai Tzvi, and Saint Paul. I think he