Actions Speak Louder Than Words
A few years ago, my mother was dying of brain cancer. She had beaten the odds for a long time, but, inevitably, the cancer reached a point beyond treatment. The doctors anticipated she would live one to three months more. That’s when my then-husband told me he wanted a divorce.
Now, I’m not saying I was in a good marriage. But I am saying that it was a shocker. The point, for our purposes here, is that it was a crappy thing to do to me, my young daughters, and my dad, whose wife of 55 years was dying and who was under the mistaken impression that his son-in-law would be there for his daughter and granddaughters during a difficult time.
My mom died within a few weeks. My then-husband of ten years did not come to the funeral and did not contact anyone in my family to express condolences. A few weeks later, though, he wrote my dad a flowery, deeply sympathetic email, disclaiming all responsibility for the timing of our break-up and swearing he had never intended to hurt any of us.
My dad took a few weeks to respond, so that, he said, he would not react emotionally. His response has stayed with me:
“I have always believed actions speak louder than words. This has proven true in both business and personal dealings throughout my life. Your email has many beautiful words which would be meaningful but for your actions in not waiting until [my wife’s] death to start the end of your marriage. Your leaving Susan and the girls as [their mother and grandmother] was nearing the very end of her life, a fact of which you were well aware, was a real kick in the gut to Susan, to me, and to my family. I will never understand why you had to act when you did.”
The words in his email to my dad reflected what my ex wanted to believe about himself. But his actions had already defined him.
Watching, over the past year, the sometimes misguided, sometimes hypocritical, and unfailingly inadequate responses to internal and external protests against the war in Gaza, I keep coming back to this simple premise, that actions speak louder than words. Organizations and schools and government officials keep focusing on how to control the protests by controlling words. Dissecting speech in a doomed attempt to police emotions as well as bodies.
But this narrow approach has done a disservice to everyone who cares about this war – pro-Israel, pro-Palestinian, or the agonizingly conflicted group of us who bristles at the use of abstract fundamentalism of any sort to justify human rights abuses on either side. Words matter, yes. But in many of these situations, the sole focus on words has not only inflamed and divided, it has obscured the fact that action (or inaction) tells a different story despite what organizations say in their carefully worded statements or security plans.
Case in point: the ongoing situation at PEN America, a free speech organization1 that has been hobbled by accusations of stifling speech that supports Palestinian free expression while refusing to criticize Israel for its actions toward Palestinian writers and journalists. Just when its mission was most vital – to protect expression – PEN America let its actions (and inaction) undermine its mission, and then failed to own up to its mistakes, using words to try and deflect from the truth of its actions.
As reported in The Intercept last spring, shortly after the October 7 attacks, current and former staff wrote a letter to PEN America’s board stating “that PEN America is failing to comply with its mission and values with regard to its work on Palestinian free expression.” Apparently, staff had spoken directly to PEN America’s leadership twice, and received no response to their concerns; thus the anonymous letter to the board.
Months later, PEN America did release a statement when the internal conflict turned public, and hundreds of prominent writers wrote an open letter criticizing PEN America because of its silence on Gaza and its silencing of Palestinian writers (in sharp contrast to PEN America’s loud and insistent stance against the war in Ukraine). The writers withdrew from appearing at the annual prestigious PEN World Voices Festival and wrote, in an open letter, “In the context of Israel’s ongoing war on Gaza, we believe that PEN America has betrayed the organization’s professed commitment to peace and equality for all, and to freedom and security for writers everywhere.”
In response to the crisis, a PEN America spokesperson told The Intercept:
Like many other organizations, PEN America is wrestling with the challenges of responding to a complex conflict that has divided our community. From the outset, we have had countless discussions with staff at all levels of the organization on how we can best contribute in this moment… These discussions have been fruitful and are ongoing — and, of course, will continue to shape our policies. This is consistent with our role as a big tent organization that defends free expression and writers. Our work in defense of speech, by or in defense of Palestinians, most of which is publicly available, has been robust and extensive. Airing varied voices and reflecting complexity in our work are essential in fulfillment of PEN America’s principles and mission.
The organization’s use of empty, flowery words to deflect from its actions only adds insult to injury, and is particularly ironic and painful because PEN is – literally – a free expression organization whose entire mission is to protect writers. Not only does this approach fail Palestinian writers, it undermines the varied and free perspectives of those with opposing views by forcing on everyone a monolithic viewpoint — the so-called big tent. That doesn’t help the cause, whatever the cause might be. Needless to say, that’s why protecting free expression is so important. We can absolutely disagree! We can disagree on some aspects and agree on others. More importantly, we see clearly when discourse is not open and free, even when being told otherwise, because it becomes warped and devolves into anger and division.
Why, regardless of my or your perspective on the war in Gaza, would an organization’s leadership so blatantly act against its own stated mission, refuse to engage with staff over its substantive, ongoing concerns, and most particularly, where the hell was the board during all of this? The ultimate responsibility, when the core values of the organization are at risk, lies with the board. The apparent failure of the board to act over the past year, while individual board members aired their differences publicly, speaks volumes, and has only solidified division — and prevented free discourse that could lead to better understanding on both sides — adding to the grievance and isolation of those whom PEN America alleges it serves.
After nearly a year, this existential crisis at PEN America has yet to be resolved, and this storied and vital organization’s future is unclear. I keep hoping to hear that the organization will align its actions with its words and own up to its mistakes. That the board will ensure the organization’s leadership is fulfilling its mission, and where it is not, hold leadership accountable. Organizations are under well-deserved scrutiny to ensure that their actions mirror their words. When actions belie their words, when an organization’s commitment to its own mission is repeatedly questioned, both internally and externally, it is up to the board to step in and say out loud what other stakeholders clearly see. That recognition, that response, is the only way to move forward.
PEN America, an organization whose mission I long admired, says that it “stands at the intersection of literature and human rights to protect free expression in the United States and worldwide,” and aims to “defend writers, artists, and journalists.” In the past, PEN America has done great work countering the rise of book banning in the US and bringing attention to the plight of Iranian journalist, Narges Mohammadi, who was honored by PEN America last year and subsequently received the Nobel Peace Prize.