Four textual comparisons
The introduction to Zion’s Fiction and Timothy Quevillon’s 2021 article, “Herzl, Nakba, and Nationalist Escapism in Israeli and Palestinian Science Fiction.”
1. Cultural gatekeepers
Zion’s Fiction, introduction, p. 5: “a cohort of ‘gatekeepers’ that effectively controlled the Yishuv’s cultural output: publishers, literary magazines’ and journals’ editors, literary critics, professors of literature”
Quevillon, p. 21: “a generation of gatekeepers controlled the Yishuv’s cultural output. Publishers, the editors of literary magazines and journals, literary critics, and professors of literature”
2. Utopia and attribution
Zion’s Fiction: Kimmerling’s statement that Israel was “considered the only successful materialization of utopia in the world” is separated from Elana Gomel’s description of “a horizon of expectations, a vision of perfection.”
Quevillon, p. 24: The two are combined into a single sentence credited only to Kimmerling, also incorporating the introduction’s editorial insertion, “however briefly.”
Neither passage credits the introduction where the material is used.
3. “A nuts-and-bolts nation”
Zion’s Fiction, introduction, p. 4: “Creating a nuts-and-bolts nation, whether or not inspired by a literary fantasy, called on sources of faith of a much more practical nature. This task proved totally consuming, utterly grueling, costly in blood and fraught with calamity.”
Quevillon, p. 21: “Creating a nuts-and-bolts nation called on resources and faith of a much more practical nature. This proved consuming, grueling, and costly in blood and resources, all of which discouraged the fanciful and imaginative nature of speculative fiction.”
The article retains the opening image, the sequence of the argument and much of the phrasing without crediting the introduction at this point. This is close paraphrase.
4. “The end of all things Israeli”
Zion’s Fiction, introduction, p. 18: “What, then, do Israeli writers write about when they write speculative fiction? With notable exceptions, many of them write about the end of all things. Or, to be more exact, all things Israeli.”
Quevillon, p. 25: “modern Israeli science fiction writers often focus on the dystopian end of all things Israeli.”
The distinctive formulation reappears in Quevillon’s summary without attribution to Teitelbaum and Lottem.