Escape from Saddam

                  Escape from Saddam was by far my favorite text that we have read so far!  Kudos to Katie for choosing it for us.  The story was so engaging that I could not put it down!

                  The most surprising part of the story for me was the first chapter, “The Interrogation.”  It was horrifying to see how the arifs were trying to turn their soldiers into brutal beasts.  It is terrifying to see soldiers being forced to interrogate/ torture their fellow soldiers.   It also seemed like these practices could be counter-productive.  Isn’t the fact that soldiers in a unit are united as comrades- or even as brothers- one thing that makes them more effective when fighting an enemy?  Forcing soldiers to fight against each other takes away their desire to fight to protect each other. 

                  Another thing that surprised me was the fact that the soldiers got to visit their homes once a month.  This seemed odd, compared to the awful brutality of the base where Sarmed was stationed.  Maybe these visits were necessary to keep the soldiers sane, but it did not seem as though the base cared much about the soldiers sanity.

                  The part of the book where Sarmed is imprisoned for no reason contrasted well with the chapters we read from the book about Guantanamo.  Some of the scenes could have even been interchangeable.  Is this what they mean when people say that you have to fight your enemy with their own weapons? 

Tuesday's Class

                  It was a pleasure to have Ms. Eraqi with us in class on Tuesday.  I loved hearing about all of her experiences, especially about her experiences in Cairo.  I also loved hearing her personal stories about her family life here in the West, and about how she is part of many different cultures at the same time.  Thank you, Sara for inviting her!

                  Let me try to better explain what I was trying to say the other day during our discussion about Does My Head Look Big in This? and about headscarves in general.  I remember a woman making the comment that she felt that it was relatively easy wearing the headscarf in America.  I was somewhat surprised to hear this comment.  I wondered if this is true because many Americans do not seem to care about what other people are wearing; they seem to not befriend people based on looks.  But then, I also see the reverse happening in America, especially among “higher” classes and certain groups of people, where one’s clothes and possessions are all that matter.  But I wonder on the whole how Americans do with accepting other cultures.  Traditionally, we are a “melting pot” (though that is debated by some), and I believe this makes it easier for people from all over the world to fit in.  Although people are going to be curious (as Dan mentioned in class, I think), most will also be accepting.

                  The other issue I was contemplating about the hijab being accepted is whether it is just a piece of material or whether it is a symbol of a whole realm of ideas- and even an entire religion.  First, I do not think anyone should be punished for wearing a hijab, because in reality it is only a piece of cloth, and is not intruding on anyone else’s rights.  But it cannot be denied that the hijab is also a symbol of Islam, even if it not worn by every Muslim woman.

Does My Head Look Big in This?

                  Does My Head Look Big in This? Was definitely a high school drama!  Even though it was set in Australia and centered around a Muslim girl, the story seemed as though it would fit right in with any American teenager, Muslim or not.  I enjoyed the story, though it seemed repetitive.

                  The story itself seemed very typical of any novel about high school life, with cliquey girls, short-term popularity, and high school crushes.  Amal seemed like a normal girl- although she was a pretty bratty to her parents (for me, at least!).  It is hard for me to do a post on this book, because I did not get a whole lot out of the story.  There were a few things that I learned from it, though.  I learned more about what struggles a Muslim girl might go through if she decides to wear the hijab, how the hijab may or may not affect the girl for the rest of her life, and how girls use the hijab in their everyday lives (like how they match it with their outfits, etc). 

                  Another interesting aspect of the novel was when her friend ran away on account the pressure for her to marry.  It was neat to see the mother and daughter relationship improve after she came back.

On the whole, this book was definitely an easy read, just not quite as informative as I would have liked it to be.

Arranged

                  Arranged was a nice little film.  It was a little politically charged and quite an Americanized fairy-tale, but a sweet movie nonetheless.  I loved the story, but it seemed to me that it was a little too good to be true- just like “world peace commercials,” etc.  It would be wonderful if everyone could live together peacefully and happily- it is somewhat of the American dream, I think-but it is not going to happen.  That may be a pretty Realist perspective, but it’s true.  And I think the same thing is true about the Arab-Israeli/ Muslim-Jewish conflict; the conflict is so long-standing and deep-rooted that the bitterness and animosity will never be fully washed away.  Maybe they can be friends on an individual basis like the two girls were in the film, but on the whole, I don’t think the conflict will ever fully be resolved.

                  I really enjoyed the aspect of the film that portrayed the arranged marriage processes for both the Muslims and the Orthodox Jews.  It was interesting to see how the whole process worked for both religions, and to see what parts of it the girls liked and what parts they did not agree with.  It was wonderful to see both of them so happily married in the end, with such bright futures ahead of them.

                  Watching the film, I could definitely tell that it was an American film, and that this situation would probably only (or at least mostly) happen in the US, particularly in a place like New York.  Plus, New York is far from the Middle East, and thus rather far from the conflict.  One has to wonder if these girls would have been able to be friends if they lived in the Middle East, right in the heart of the conflict.

                  One last thing… the one little kid in the movie asked a question that was not answered.  The question was along the lines that yes, some of the Muslims hate the Jews, but not all of them.  But the little kid asked, “How many?”  This is an important question.  How would one find the answer?  Was it significant that they did not answer it in the film?

                  

Year of the Elephant

                  I confess that though I read and enjoyed the Year of the Elephant, I actually forgot most of what I read (probably from reading too many things at once!).  The story I most remember from the book is “A House in the Woods”; it is the first one I read and its symbolism intrigued me.  While reading it, I actually wondered if the girls were going to be kidnapped by the man in the woods, because it seemed as though the author was setting the story up to be a mystery.  When the ending was not what I expected, I was confused about the symbolism.

                  I wonder if the author was using the story as an analogy of international relations.  She describes the beautiful land in the beginning, and informs the readers that she sees three sisters who “appear” to be sisters.  The oldest takes control and tells the other two what to do, and they set off to build a house.  The two younger ones try hard to please their older sister with their work.  Then comes the old man who sees what’s going on and offers to help the two younger ones.  But then he falls asleep, and the girls start aggravating him.  He comes alive and again helps them.  There were also the hornet, the pebbles, and other things that the girls were collecting; maybe these symbolize things that the girls/states were chasing (such as peace, power, etc?).  Sometimes they were successful in grasping them, but other times, such as with the hornet, they were unsuccessful.  The funny thing is that if the youngest had caught the hornet, it probably would have stung her.

                  I do not know if my interpretations of the text are correct, but it seemed that the author may have been portraying different countries and how they relate to each other, specifically her own country (which is represented maybe by the youngest sibling?). 

Two Women

                  Two Women was an excellent film, and one of my favorite of the media that we have analyzed this semester.  Roya and Fereshtah were beautiful characters with whom I could easily sympathize.  The film also gave a peek into Iranian culture and the issues that have to be dealt with by women living there.

                  Fereshtah was a compelling character.  In the beginning of the film, she seemed almost too “perfect,” being beautiful, smart, and independent.  One could tell that although she studied diligently to get good grades, she also possessed an incredible intelligence.  Then, after being stalked by a male stranger, she was afraid to go to the police, because it would dishonor her family; and her life ended up being ruined.  Her father forbade her to go back to the university and pressured her to enter an arranged marriage.  Her being stalked caused terrible dishonor on her family, her father said; he blamed the actions of the stalker on Fereshtah, and even said at one time that he would kill her for the dishonor she had brought on him.  The man she married also deeply distrusted her, and practically kept her as a slave because of his jealousy for her and his fears that she would misuse her independence, though she never gave him any reason for him to distrust her.  She is only freed when both her husband and her stalker die.  Then she is free to live her own life and raise her two sons the way she feels is best.

                  I loved Roya’s character, though her story is not the main one.  Though she is much more timid in the beginning of the movie, and does not seem as intelligent as Fereshtah, she is the one who ends up with the “good” life.  She is free to finish her education, and she marries a more liberal-minded husband and becomes a career woman.  Her education and independence elevates her and gives her freedom.  But though she succeeds, she never forgets her beloved friend.

 

Women in the Middle East: First Day!

                  This past Tuesday was one of my favorite class periods so far.  Women in the Middle East and in women in Islam are two subjects that are of great interest to me.  It was wonderful to have two different women come to speak so that we could get different points of view.  I only wish Professor Hanan could have stayed longer.

                  Gulnar’s presentation “Women in Islam: Debunking the Myth” was well prepared and thought out.  I could tell that she has done a lot of studying about women in the Quran and knew many of the questions that people outside Islam would want to ask.  But I also had trouble believing that the Quran is this favorable towards women.  It is hard not to draw a relationship between Islam and the oppression of women.  Let me explain why I think this is true.  It is true that almost every society through all ages has oppressed women in some way or another, whether it has been by physically oppressing them or by not giving them equal human rights with men.  Even some so-called Christian societies have oppressed women.  But when I look at the world today, I cannot help but see that most countries that have a majority of citizens who believe in Islam also have a huge problem with oppression of women.  You may again argue that other religions- including Christianity- and other countries have this problem as well, and that it does not necessarily mean that Islam in its true form is oppressive towards women.  But it is just as logical to say that if Islam in its true form frees women, then the majority of people who believe in Islam and/or interpret the Quran interpret it wrong.  Is that likely?  Maybe it is possible, maybe not. 

                  I hope I have not offended anyone; these are just my own observations.  I will leave them up to you to decide whether they are drawing accurate conclusions.  And many thanks to Professor Hanan and Gulnar for coming and sharing their views on this subject.

The Turkey group...

                  We had some interesting discussions last Thursday about Memed, My Hawk and the Turkish short stories.  The Turkey group did a wonderful job this last couple of weeks, and having Dr. Mirzeler in class was wonderful. 

                  The thing that stood out to me the most from the Turkey group was the discussions about honor killings.  Watching the documentary, hearing Dr. Mirzeler’s story, and then discussing in class last week has left that topic on my mind.  The way that honor killings tie in with Arab family relationships especially boggles my mind. 

                  If you ask almost any Middle Eastern person, I think they would say that one thing their many different cultures agree on and take pride in is strong family relationships.  Family members are expected to sacrifice themselves for the good of the whole family and the family “honor.”  The belief is that these selfless actions bring good to the whole family and build strong family ties between the members.  They do.  But these principles of “group-ism” can be taken too far.  If the good of the entire family becomes the primary and un-trespassable goal, then if one member messes up, his good (even his own life) may be sacrificed for the good of the rest of the members.  In other words, when a member is in the good graces of the rest of his family, everything goes well; but if he sins against the family honor, his “good” is no longer a consideration.  Even more, it is not usually a he, but only a she who can dishonor the family enough to deserve the death penalty.  These concepts are contradictory and do not leave room for unconditional love and forgiveness between family members.

                  These concepts make me consider the American family as well, and see many of the opposite problems with it, such as the selfishness of the members, the disrespect for other members (especially parents), and often the desires expressed to be away from one’s family. 

                  Not every family from either culture is going to display these flaws, but it is interesting to note how one culture can take a seemingly “good” thing- such as strong Arab families and American individualism- and take them too far until they become a flaw.  

Memed, My Hawk, and related topics...

                  Memed, My Hawk was a very different sort of book for me. I still cannot decide whether I liked or disliked it, but “like” is a vague term.  I enjoyed part of it, while I did not always enjoy the long descriptions.  But it did introduce some new concepts about Turkey that I had not known before.  Some of these new concepts were the notion of the Aghas, the peasants that were (basically) his slaves, the brigands, and the disconnected Turkish countryside.

                  In the beginning of the story, I could not tell if Memed was going to turn out to be a “good” character, or sort of a “bad hero,” if there is such a thing.  The translation was a little rough for me, and many of the sentences seemed disconnected, which also disconnected the relationships and conversations of the characters.  The characters’ words seemed harsher to each other than they were meant to be, even the words of characters with close relationships.  The ending of the story was somewhat happy, which took me by surprise.

                  What redeemed the book for me was to hear Dr. Mirzeler speak about the countryside and different villages that were the setting of the novel.  It was so neat to hear his own stories from childhood, and how they compared with the stories of Memed’s childhood.  It was also sad to hear that he did not want to go back because many of the beautiful places that he remembers are gone, or at least are not public property anymore.

                  It was amazing to hear Dr Mirzeler’s story that he shared near the end of class yesterday.  Did anyone else think, “Wow, I don’t know how I could ever get through something as terrible as that”?  I was amazed to hear his courage, and am so glad that it all worked out well for his family.

Turkey Group

                  Out of the three things that we have read/watched from the Turkey group (“Women on the Frontline: Turkey,” the headscarf clip, and the three short stories), “Women on the Frontline: Turkey” was definitely the one that impacted me the most.  It is unbelievable that the statistics said that 16-17 girls and women were killed in the name of honor per day in Turkey over the two-year span of the survey.  The film also stated that honor killings affect more women than cancer affects them, and that it affects one in three women around the world (I presume that this “affect” means they are killed?).  The film was maddening to me.  Even though the men that did these killings talked about their honor, their family’s place in society, and deep traditions as being excuses for murder, there are really no reasons good enough to excuse the murder of a family member. 

                  The headscarf film was tricky for me.  I believe that these women should be able to wear a headscarf if that is what they truly desire- it should be a basic freedom of choice.  But I wonder how much traditions are not only affecting their choices, but mandating them.  That is to say, I wonder how many girls fighting for the choice to wear a headscarf are not being pressured to do so by a traditional community where they live, a community who would ostracize them if they did not wear it.  I just wonder how many of their “choices” are really choices.  Even if the government bans certain things, I wonder how many traditional communities follow these bans- communities like the ones where honor killings are happening the most- and how many force “choices” upon their members.  Not to say that a girl would never have the desire to wear a headscarf… but how many actually would, I wonder?  Even more, how many would actually choose to wear them almost ALL of the time? 

                  Finally, the short stories were very different for me.  I did not care for them.  To me, it is as if the authors were drunk while writing!  I did not understand much of anything, especially from the last two!  But maybe they will make more sense after class tomorrow…

Paradise Now III

                  Being not quite sure what to blog about today, I finally decided to do yet another blog about Paradise Now, and the lively discussion we had about suicide bombers in class on Tuesday.  There were many different opinions expressed on the subject.  Some people sympathized with the suicide bombers because of their bad living conditions, while some said they could never sympathize with someone that would kill themselves and others.  Some also said they learned new things about Palestine and could perhaps see a reason for these suicide bombers’ decisions, while others said that the film itself did not provide much about the actual situation in Palestine, but rather was just aiming to give suicide bombers a face, and show us what is going on in their minds.  Another disagreement was over how much of a role that religion plays to Palestinian suicide bombers, and how much of a role personal circumstances play.

                  My personal opinion is that the movie itself was fairly moderate, and not aiming to advocate anything in particular.  I think it was slightly Pro-Palestinian, and though it was somewhat biased toward their plight versus Israel’s, the only Israeli people shown in the film were innocent ones and friendly-looking soldiers.  And the fact that it was fought over as to whether it was Palestinian or Israeli film means that it could not have been too biased.  I do think it was trying to humanize people that we truly cannot understand and who are terrible enemies (meaning suicide bombers in general).  In this I think the film was successful.  Though we cannot imagine committing a crime such as this, we can at least somewhat understand what goes on inside a suicide bomber’s head, and maybe even find ways to stop these people in their decision to commit this awful crime.

                  I still believe that religion plays a big role in a suicide bomber’s decision, at least for most suicide bombers.  There are of course some that probably do not care two bits about religion, but for the Palestinians, their religion at least helps them in their decision, by promising something after death.  Think about it: though the situation for Khaled and Said was not great by any means, it also was not totally hopeless.  They still had their families to love, and at least somewhat of a normal life with a job, though “normal” was very different for them and their jobs were not well-paying.  Do you think that they would have been so willing, at least at first, to make this decision without having heard about the reward for suicide bombers in the after-life?  Do you think they would be so-willing to destroy their own lives without any hope for life after death?  Plus, they did tape their speeches in front of a portion of the Koran, didn’t they?

                  But though religion did help their decision, I do no think it was the only cause.  I think that the people who recruited them picked Khaled and Said for specific personal reasons, such as passion and past circumstances (such as Said’s father).  I also think that the people like this, who prey on young men like Khaled and Said, have their own propaganda system to keep their own “resistance” going, and to help keep the conflict alive, rather than helping it to die down so that peace could possibly be reached.  Maybe if these men instead used their cunningness to organize themselves on a diplomatic mission to Israel instead of a killing mission, they would help resolve the conflict.  Not that this by itself would bring peace, but it certainly would help.  This is the essence of what Suha was saying, I think, and I totally agree with her.

Paradise Now II

                  I thought it would be hard to do another blog post on the film Paradise Now, since I had to do one for another class not too long ago; but considering what a wonderful and jam-packed film it is, I think I will manage to find enough to write about!!!

                  As I had said in my other post, I have a high regard for this film.  Normally, I am a pretty critical viewer, and do not like to be pulled into a film, especially films that have to do with anything political, by emotions rather than by solid facts.  This film was different.  I did not agree with the film Real Bad Arabs, but I do agree with their positive review of Paradise Now as a moderate, compelling film.  I also mentioned before that I thought I would probably be bored and fall asleep during the film, because I started it very late one night; but I instead could not keep my eyes from being glued to the television.  I also cried… wow, very rare for me!!!

                  My favorite part of the film is when Suha is in the car with Khaled, and they are trying to find Said.  Suha is the real hero of the film, especially as she is able to calm Khaled down and show him that is throwing his life away by killing himself (and others along with him).  The film really caused me to sympathize with these two would-be suicide bombers, not that I thought they were right to do this in any way, but that I felt a terrible pity for them as I saw them being talked into ruining their own lives and blowing other people up.  Needless to say, the ending was heartbreaking, as Said’s young life and love story ends in his suicide (or at least we are led to believe that he made that decision).

                  A really interesting thing that I read was that the Israelis and Palestinians fought over whether the film was Israeli or Palestinian.  I think this obviously points to the film’s success: if the film were openly biased, there would have been no fight over it, except to disprove it by the side offended.  Instead, the film is moderate, focusing more on the characters and what goes on in their heads, rather than on the politics of the situation.

The Two Short Stories

            Both of the short stories, The Lawsuit and A Long-Term Plan, were well-picked stories for us to read as a class.  I thought both stories were interesting enough to want to read, and both kept you reading.  Personally, I liked The Lawsuit better, though I thought A Long-Term Plan was more ironic and had a clearer moral and storyline than the Lawsuit.

                  What I enjoyed about The Lawsuit was that it was a very human story.  It also showed what strife can come about when a man marries more than one woman, and how that strife affects all members of the family.  But maybe what I enjoyed the most was that the story had a HAPPY ending!  Most of the stories we have been reading do not have any sort of happy ending, but this one was different.  Even though so much has happened to the main character in the story, he moves on with his life, and even forgives the woman that caused so much strife in his family.  The story was very realistic in that nothing was perfect (in fact, everything was very imperfect), but it also underlined the timeless message of forgiveness.

                  I found the second story’s title, A Long-Term Plan, to be particularly amusing.  The fact that the main character was basically a lazy, selfish man with absolutely no plan for his future totally contradicted the title.  The character mistreated others, especially his mother, and abused the generosity of all his friends, living parasitically off everyone around him.  Then when his mother died and all of what little money he had disappears, he “wins the lottery,” so to speak, and becomes a millionaire.  But a little while later he dies, spending his last moments in loneliness.  The moral of this story seemed to be that one will never have a happy ending- even if he wins a million bucks- if he spends his life devoted to self.

Gold Dust

                  Gold Dust.  Wow, quite an original little book!  When I first started reading, I thought to myself, “This might be a nice story about a little boy and his beloved camel.  Cool, this resembles our stories of kids with their horses!”  But as I got farther into the story, my feelings changed toward the book.  My feelings toward Ukhayyad especially changed.  In the beginning, I thought he was a little cocky, but I really started to like him when he showed his love for his camel, especially during the gruesome scene where he is dragged through the fields, hanging onto the camel’s tail.  But when he was expressing that everything would be lost and that saving the piebald was worth nothing if his color did not come back as beautiful as before, I thought, “Wow, this kid has got a major pride issue.”  Ukhayyad just seemed to want to be better than others by having this gorgeous Mahri camel, and though he really seemed to love him as his dearest and only friend, his perspective changed when the Mahri lost his beauty.  It seemed that he would not have loved the piebald/Mahri if he had not been just that- a purebred.  I maintained some respect for Ukhayyad, until the part where he devorced his wife and son in order to keep his camel.  The way he referred to women in the novel, especially his own wife, as “deceivers” and “traps” caused me to lose all respect for him.  Even more, he referred to his own little boy as a terrible burden, and not as a privilege. 

                  I think it is wonderful that Ukhayyad loved his animal devotedly, but this devotion meant nothing if he could not devote himself to his own family, nor see the love and friendship they could offer him.  Granted, he seemed to find this out after he had already divorced his wife, but the fact that he even came to that decision amazed me.  Oh, well, I guess I will have to see how the book ends!

The Children's Books

We had some great discussions about the two children’s books in class today, Sami and the Time of Troubles and The Day of Ahmed’s Secret. I never realized how much discussion could be generated from two kids’ books!
The first book, The Day of Ahmed’s Secret, portrayed Cairo beautifully, I felt. I thought the mix of the “old” look and the “new” look was cool (It seemed accurate from pictures I have seen as well, but I hope to go there to see for myself!). The old architecture in the pictures is beautiful, and something to be preserved as history. Egypt has such a rich history, and I think these pictures may help kids to have a better appreciation of it.

The second book, Sami and the Time of Troubles, had quite a theme for a children’s book. The story definitely makes children and adults alike ponder conflict situations in the Middle East and their effects on children there. The point that Molly made about children being used for a political agenda was very important, though. Children can be used to push someone’s own political agenda, because children are helpless and need someone to defend them; therefore, we empathize with them much easier than we do with an adult. The point also was made that we should take time to look at political situations through innocent children’s eyes; this, too, is important. A third point was made that the kids were playing with guns, and then they were talking about growing up to have real guns. Some thought that this may point fingers at these people as being the main perpetrators; but I do not think this is the case here. The implication of the boys growing up to play with real guns just shows the reality of the situation; it does not point fingers. For all we as readers know, the boys could merely be defending themselves. Plus, let’s face it: little boys love toy guns, and grown boys love real ones!
All in all, these books were great choices for books to read!

Discussion on War in the Land of Egypt

I really enjoyed our class today and the book War in the Land of Egypt. I hope everyone else enjoyed it as well, and not just me! I am so glad that Dr. Mughazy was able to come today and be of so much help in our discussion.
Some of the things that Dr. Mughazy brought up in class struck me as being extremely important. The first thing is that he said there are only three options for those affected by a corrupt system, but who are not strong enough to overthrow it: 1) that they die for it in attempt to change it, 2) that they simply run from it and their fellow citizens, or 3) that they join it. This is a powerful statement, especially when we are analyzing a different culture and are often prone to judging it for the choices its people make. How do people like the ones in Egypt fight the corruption in their government? Yes, it is up to individuals to take a stand against corruption, but what about when their family suffers from their choice to stand up? And what if their choice to stand up simply does not make any difference in the grand scheme of things? We may judge Masri’s choices, but I wonder if any one of us would have chosen differently if we were put in his situation.
We also discussed the fact that the war in the book really refers to the war between “the have’s and the have-not’s.” It is a war where people are squeezing money out of others “below” them just so that they can give someone “above” them money- someone who is requiring more from them than what they are able to give them. This is sad! So corruption is a self-continued and self-contained system, starting from the top-down. And the “fixer” like the one in the book is needed not to get what you want, but what is yours that someone has taken from you.
All of these thoughts were sobering to me, and made me consider how I might react in a situation like Masri’s.

The Trip to the Mosque

The trip to the mosque on Thursday was very interesting (there I go using that word again!).  Figuring that I would not have gone there on my own, it was probably a good field trip for our class to take.  It was nice of the Imam to let us come and to give us such a long tour.

                  I thought the building itself was very interesting.  From the outside, I never would have guessed that the building was a mosque!  And it looks so small from the outside, but is rather large inside!  I thought that the architecture, especially on the new front, was very pretty.  I had forgotten that the pointed arches are supposed to be shaped to point toward heaven- that is a rather neat way to design architecture.   And did anyone else notice the lines on the carpet?  I think they were orientated in a way so that everyone knows which way to kneel.   Also, the fact that were no chairs, or very few, even present in the building very different from what I am used to seeing in any “social” building.

                  I thought it was very different how they separate the men and the women in the mosque, but I did think I understood better after the Imam explained why the women would not want to be praying in front of the men, and I agreed.  Still, it was very different to see a women’s “wing” on the one side of the building, separate from the men’s or main “wing” on the other side.

                  I was disappointed and wished that the Imam had allowed for us to ask more questions at the end.  I also wondered what everyone else thought about the verses from the Koran that we read.  It was probably the first time (or one of the first times) that most of us had read anything from it.  So what did everyone think?

Thoughts from the movie and class...

                  First off, I really struggled with this post, because I do not agree with homosexuality.  I think that it goes against God’s original intentions for His creation.  That being said, it is impossible to argue my own beliefs, because they are what I consider to be truth, but others may not.  I cannot force my own beliefs on anyone else, and I hope that no one takes this as just a harsh judgment of mine on people with different beliefs, namely homosexuals.                   

Now as for my thoughts on the film and the topic of homosexuality as it relates to the Middle East.  First, although the fact that homosexuality is not altogether rejected in many parts of the Middle East seems to go against our original stereotypes of the Middle East, it is not wholly surprising if one looks deeper.  First, much segregation still exists between males and females in many parts of the Middle East.  When men and boys are deprived of interacting with women outside their own family, or at least only allowed to have very limited interactions, it is not surprising that they find other avenues for their passions.  Someone in the movie mentioned this segregation (or limited exposure) as leading to “a lot of frustrated people.”  Can you blame them? 

The part where they portrayed certain Koranic schools (I’m not sure when and where these school were located- that would be VERY important) as promoting- or even forcing- homosexual relations as a part of learning and developing as an adolescent was disturbing.  If you cannot force someone not to be homosexual, you certainly should not force them to be homosexual!  Now they did not talk very long on this subject, so I would be interested to find out the validity of the information that was given. 

                  And as for homosexual marriages existing before heterosexual marriages, that is a bit of a contradiction.  There had to be heterosexual marriages (or at least intimate relationships) in order to populate the earth enough to be able to have homosexual relations.  We all know that the basic family structure is man, woman, and children, whether we accept it or not.  Why then would we call it the “traditional” family?

                  As to gay churches, and how Islam views homosexuality versus how Christianity views it, I can at least address what Christianity says about it.  Even though there are popular movements to accept gays and lesbians, if you go back to the original text that founded Christianity, the Bible, it clearly condemns it.

                  With all of this being said, I just want to say that I have nothing against homosexuals themselves- they are humans just as anyone else, and deserve to be treated as such, with love and care.  I only have problems with the practice- and my opinions are not exactly the issue here.  The issue is that I am not wholly surprised about how the Middle East relates to homosexuals.  

The Escape

                  The second film that I watched for my group (Arabic Literature) is titled The Escape, and it features Ahmed Zaki as its main actor.  This film was interesting, but I did not enjoy it quite as much as I enjoyed A Man in Our House.  But the basic storyline of this film was one of a murderer on the run, similar to A Man in Our House.

                  The main character, Montasser, gets put in prison on charges of murder (of a very evil woman, if I may say so, who is enticing his wife), but he is escapes.  He then accidentally kills another man, and is chased even more.  But every time he is caught, he escapes, until the very end of the movie.  The reason he is so determined to escape is to find his cousin, to whom he is engaged and who has left him for an adulterous lifestyle. 

                  The majority of the film is spent tracking Montasser and his continual escapes.  The journalists follow his story, and people in Egypt cannot decide whether he is a persecuted hero or what the officials’ say, a murderer.   Throughout his escapes, his family helps him, and even an official from his home town, who is supposed to catch him. 

The movie ends tragically, as with pretty much all of the Arabic films I have watched and books I have read!  An interesting topic to research/contemplate would be the fact that most American movies end with “happily ever after,” while most Arabic films end with “happily never after.”  Why is this so?   We as Americans love to see our dreams come true, while Arabs seem to have a much more sobering way to view life.  Americans seem to be idealists, while Arabs seem to be realists.  Now I realize that I am simplifying this idea, but it is worth contemplating!

Thoughts form Class Today

Ok, so I am not a history buff.  I have taken a few classes that have involved the history of the Middle East, so much of this is not new to me.  Even this specific view of the history of the area.  I admit that I usually forget much of what I have learned, if I do not use it every day!  But, what I do know, is that it is very difficult to find a comprehensive history of anything that takes in all points of view, and treats them fairly.  All historical authors and professors have their own points of view and their own agendas.  I realize that in this class we are aiming to dispel some false and “narrow” views of America’s history in the Middle East; but I do wish we could hear a little bit more from America’s point of view to compare with the Middle Eastern point of view.  It is thought that kids in schools always learn the “American” way of looking at history; but, though in some cases this is true, much of the time the history is taught through the professors point of view, many of whom are liberal.  Plus, history does not seem to be a major focus anymore in high school.  Many American kids enter college with knowing hardly anything about their own country, let alone anything of the histories of the countries around them.  This means that if students in college do not get to hear all sides of history, their views may be shaped by one or two professors’ opinions.  Let’s face it, American kids are not known for doing much research outside of what they learn in school!

                  I think it is a common misconception to think that most Americans hear the American viewpoint consistently praised here in the US, so that they are “brainwashed” with these ideas.  For me, it is just the opposite.  In fact, if I did not work hard to filter everything that I hear, I could be hating my own country right now.  I am constantly bombarded with anti-American sentiment coming from her own people.  Now I know that our country has made many mistakes and done many things wrong, but she still is nevertheless our country.  And we need to work hard to keep her our country.  This means looking into history with all points of view, including her point of view.  It is then up to the individual to decide which viewpoint, or combinations of viewpoints, he/she will accept.

A Man in Our House

   Last week I watched an excellent Egyptian film called A man in Our House.  It is over two hours long, but is well worth watching!  It is a fascinating film, and I wish we had time to watch it in class!

                  A Man in Our House is about a young man who assassinates the Egyptian Prime Minister.  The part is played by actor Omar Sharif.  Ibrahim Hamdy is a politically active student whose brother dies when the Egyptian government sends people to stop a student protest against it.  After Ibrahim kills the Prime Minister, he is arrested; but when he becomes ill and is sent to the hospital, he is able to escape.  After escaping, he stays with a fellow student’s family in their apartment.  He feels safe there, because the family has never been politically active and the government will not think to search for him there. 

                  While he is staying with this family the youngest daughter, Nawal, falls in love with Ibrahim, and he with her.  The family risks their lives to keep Ibrahim safe, knowing that the government will punish anyone who helps him with at least 3 years in prison.  Meanwhile, Ibrahim learns what it means to be loved by a family, and he says that he has “liven an entire lifetime while staying with them” (or something to that effect).   But Ibrahim is worried about the family’s safety, so he escapes as quickly as possible.  Meanwhile, Nawal and Ibrahim promise each other to stay in contact.  I will not tell you the ending, because it is a movie that everyone should watch if possible!

                  I found this film quite eye-opening.  It is a black-and-white film, and if it had not been for the English subtitle, one would have assumed that this was a classic Hollywood film.  The dress, acting, and even much of the décor in the movie all resembled Hollywood.  The film was touching, and I would recommend it to grades 10 through the first two years of college (and anyone after that, too!).

Here is a clip from the movie!  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-10uV1jXkg

Egypt

            In my group, Arabic literature, I have been learning more about Egypt.  I have read the short novel War in the Land of Egypt and watched an Egyptian movie titled A Man in Our House.  Egypt has always fascinated me, but more so in the last year as I have learned more about its corrupt government and ongoing political unrest.  In the past, I have also read a book called the Yacoubian Building, a book by Alaa Al-Aswany that exposes the corruption of Egypt’s government and society. 

                  The novel War in the Land of Egypt is about a poor man’s son that is sent into the military in the stead of a rich man’s son, all because of a bribe to get the poor man’s land back.  (I will not tell you the ending because it is one we may all read as a class!)  A Man in Our House is an excellent movie that tells the journey of a young man who assassinates the Prime Minister of Egypt.  The Yacoubian Building is a novel with several different characters living in a single building, all experiencing different struggles with the government or societal systems.

                  As I was looking for more information pertaining to continuing unrest in Egypt, I learned that its leader, Mubarak, is very aged and will probably die in the near future.  He has no successor right now, and the politically unstable situation that exists now could explode after he dies, with different factions/leaders fighting for control of the government.  This is especially true since there have been many movements against his government, and against the rising prices of food and low wages.  I also discovered that there was a recent shortage of bread, and how some people waited in line for hours just to buy bread for their families at a price they could afford.

                  I included three links below, two YouTube newscasts and one newspaper article on Mubarak.  They are very interesting, so I hope that you get to watch them!  My group goes first, so I am sure we will be discussing many of these issues in the next couple of weeks!

http://www.mg.co.za/article/2008-05-04-as-mubarak-turns-80-egypt-faces-inflation-unrest  -- Mubarak article

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhI-FSKgTfs  --Al-Jazeera newscast

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Lavfa2VXq0  --other newscast on bread shortage

 

Aunt Safiyya, the Second Two Chapters

                  We had some very interesting discussion about the last two chapters of Aunt Safiyya and the Monastery in class the other day!  I thought that our discussion on gender roles in the village, especially the roles of the mother and father, were particularly interesting  (I know, I have to come up with another word other than “interesting”!!!  Someone help me, please!!!)  Both characters intrigued me, and I never knew quite what to expect out of them, or even how to analyze them after the end of the story.

                  The mother’s relationship with her son, her daughters, Safiyya, and her husband was quite shocking.  The fact that she openly favored her son over her daughters, and was even slightly abusive to her daughters when they did anything wrong, took me by surprise!  I expected that the mother would have had sympathy toward her daughters, I guess like my own mother has toward me.  Also, she favored Safiyya over her own daughters, because of her beauty and prospect of advancing the family’s honor by a prosperous marriage.  The whole character of the mother was harsh, though maybe some of her harshness was due to the roughness of life in the village.

                  The father was an even more complex character, and I am still not sure whether to think of him as harsh, or as tender and understanding.  I think he was a little bit of both.  The author seemed to have a fear of him throughout the whole book, as though not sure of what to expect from him.  But there were also tender moments in the book where you saw his wisdom, strength, and understanding.  He never seemed to overpower his wife, for example.  He also insisted that his daughters be educated.  And even when there was so much conflict over Harbi, he risked his life to make sure he was safe, and then did his best to keep family relations as peaceful as possible (though he never was successful).  All in all, I think his character was a noble one.

                  I really enjoyed this book, and there is much more that could be said about it, especially with all of the interesting topics we found for discussion.  I think the whole class will really enjoy writing a paper on this book and some of its topics!

Short Arabic Plays

                  The first book that I have chosen for my group, Arabic Literature II, is the book Short Arabic Plays.  It has been immensely interesting so far, and I cannot wait to finish it!  So far, I have read three plays: “Where the Power Lies,” “The Traveler,” and “The Alley.”

                  “Where the Power Lies” is a play that exposes the corruption and laziness of government officials in the Middle East.  Its main characters are civil servants that “work” in little offices that are supposed to handle applications (though it is not clear what exactly the applications are for).  “Work” is in parenthesis because all they really do is chat with each other and make plans on how to get out of doing their work.  Their corruption is shown in that they treat every applicant that comes into their office differently, based on the applicant’s wealth, power, and even appearance.  There is specifically a poor applicant whom they continually refuse to help, until he pretends to have “connections.”

                  “The Traveler” is the most interesting play to me so far.  There is only one actor in the play, who is acting on a stage full of scattered luggage.  The play is performed with a thorough soundtrack, including an announcer who keeps telling passengers to board different flights.  The actor cannot decide which flight to board.  There is one leading home, one leading to the future, and others.   The announcer also keeps telling any of the passengers who want to find “love” to find the nearest person and investigate for “potential.”  It is a rather amusing play, though sad in the end, because the actor is left confused and unable to decide where he wants to go with his life.

                  Finally, “The Alley” is another play with only one main actress.  It is a play in which the actress reveals her childhood memories about life in Palestine before and after Israel was created.  The name comes from an alley that she frequently visited near her house.

                  I will keep everyone posted on the rest of the plays!

 

                 

 

Reel Bad Arabs film

                  Reel Bad Arabs was not a new film for me.    Though I think that is a very solemn film, and deserves careful consideration, I also have a few issues with the film.  There is no doubt that the producer has a way of grabbing our attention, and even making viewers feel guilty (not that he was totally wrong in doing so), though I do not think he was totally fair in all of his accusations.

                  First, there is no doubt that Hollywood has its prejudices and stereotypes, many of which are negative.  There is also no doubt that Hollywood desires to influence its viewers with these stereotypes and prejudices.  But just because it is attempting to influence its audience does not mean that it is actually representing them, or even that it is successful in its pursuit to influence.  For one thing, in order to be successful, people must watch the movies.  This may sound obvious, but many (in fact almost all) of the movies shown in this film I have never seen.  Hollywood represents a small part of the American population who attempt to provide entertainment and/or push certain points of view.  But there are many people in America who do not agree with Hollywood’s points of view.

                  Also, though this was not the object of the film, I think something deserves to be said of how the Arabs view Americans on television, especially the “typical” American woman.  Many of what people in the Middle East see of Americans on television are soap-opera like shows, with images of lusty blonde woman with too much eye makeup and bright-red lipstick.  Thus they tend to think of all American woman as filling this stereotype.  This is definitely a topic I am interested in researching more thoroughly.

                  This being said, I do think that the producer hit home with Aladdin.  I do think that it was extremely inappropriate for Disney to open a children’s cartoon with a song that had such violent words (“where they cut off your ear...”).  But because he did not mention the fact that Disney reworded the song and apologized later on, I did not feel that I could trust the rest of his accusations without more research. 

                  Finally, this film did cause me to think about my own stereotypes, both positive and negative, and whether any of them are based on fact.  It also made me realize that Hollywood is a form of entertainment, and should be viewed through critical eyes.                    

The First Two Chapters of "Aunt Safiyya and the Monastery"

Ahhlan wa sahhlan!  That means "Welcome" in Arabic.  I have never blogged before this class, so bear with me!  But I have really enjoyed this class so far.  And I have really enjoyed reading Aunt Safiyya well as!

  The first two chapters of Aunt Safiyya were intriguing, enlightening, and saddening.  The story is intriguing because of both its structure and its content.  I thought it was very interesting how Bahaa' Taher opens the book by introducing the monastery, of which we do not yet see the full importance, instead of developing Aunt Safiyya's character first.  Most American authors start by introducing the main (s) and/or circumstances first, whereas in much of the Arabic literature that I have studied so far, the main character is not confirmed until the middle or end of the story.  The content is also intriguing in that the author intertwines different religions (Coptic Christianity and Islam), different social classes, and different beliefs towards women in the Middle East, all into his own life in a small village.

The first two chapters were also enlightening, in that I realized even more the importance of words and language to the Arabic people.  There are many different phrases that have been used so far, such as "may God have mercy on us all," "son of my father," and "there is no strength or power except in God."  The middle phrase was a term of address to someone, and the other two were used as replies.  I found the dramatic use of language to be quite fascinating.

  Finally, I found the first two chapters to be saddening, as did everyone else, I am sure.  It was very sad to watch Aunt Safiyya grow into a beautiful, sweet, and innocent young woman, and then see her disintegrate into a wrinkly, stern, and even "scary" old woman.  The fact that both of these processes happened within a single chapter amazed me.

I cannot wait to see how Bahaa' Taher brings the monastery and Aunt Safiyya together, and how Aunt Safiyya's character is developed even more fully...