Blog of Interest

I've linked to Muslimah Media Watch on my sidebar already, but I wanted to bring some attention to this particular blog. I'm not sure how they found my site, but I appreciated their comments on my last entry.

To recipicocate I searched them out and started reading. I think you might find this blog of interest, too, my fellow classmates as so much of what we've read has focused on the role of women in Muslim society.

A Matter of Gender

For this assignment we were asked to compare the men and women travel writers. The first thing that comes to mind for me is that the men tend to focus more on the religion than the women. Not to say the women don't explore the religion or attempt to learn more about it, but it seems to me that the focus is different. It could be my imagination but it seems the women are a bit more open to different ideologies and less critical of Islam and Muslims in general.

Even in those instances where the male author proclaims a desire to leave behind his prejudices and open himself up to the experiences and ideas he might find abroad, it generally didn't take very long for male writer to turn critical. The only exception to this that I can think of off the top of my head would be Dallam. He seemed to be the only one who simply related his experience and left out any judgements he may have made during his time in Constantinople.

Another difference, with perhaps the exception of Gertrude Bell and Geraldine Brooks, is that the men's writings tend to have a lot more history incorporated into them. I don't remember Duff-Gordon or Montagu providing any kind of history lesson. They tended to focus a bit more on the here and now.

Of course, the most obvious difference between the genders is in relation to gender, although again I must clarify that there are exceptions even here. While most of the women writers tend to reveal or de-mystify Muslim women and the men tend to make gross assumptions, not every woman writer focused on the issue of women. In fact, I'd say two of the four that we've studied have opted to focus more on either day-to-day living or remained firmly rooted in the world of men. Geraldine Bell was at home among the men, something rather unusual considering all the gender rules found in Muslim society. Lucy Duff-Gordon focused more on her male associates than the women, mentioning them only in passing.

However, when the women chose to focus on the women - something the men really could not ever hope to do in the same manner - they really did provide an alternative view of the harem and the women who lived there. They provide a window into a world were society would never allow the male traveller to enter.

In many ways, though, I think the writers shared a great deal in common regardless of their gender. Each reported their experiences, opinions, and observations. They gave us a chance to look into a time and place otherwise unavailable to us. They touch on common subjects like culture and religion. The differences come in the lens through which they view these things.

Nine Parts. Cont.

This book is a curious mixture of history, opinion, and experience. I think perhaps this is one of the most "Orientalist" accounts we've read, worse in some ways than our friend Biddulph. I say worse because this author has access to more information than Biddulph could have imagined in his day. Knowledge is limited only by imagination and motivation in today's information age.

Of course, you could argue her experiences have shaped her prejudices and she has ample reason to so pointedly discuss the more negative aspects of Middle Eastern existence. She has worked for several years between these countries and cultures and, in doing so, has encountered numerous instances where her Western values have been challenged. Interestingly enough, unlike Montagu, Bell, or Duff-Gordon, Brooks seems unable to focus much beyond the negative. I've yet to identify anything she truly admires.

I'm beginning to suspect her feminism is getting in the way of deeper introspection and acceptance. Not that I condone the hardships or horrors visited upon Muslim women, but I can't imagine it's as bleak a situation for all Muslim women.

Nine Parts of Desire

There are a few notable things about our first piece of truly modern literature on the Middle East. I don't think it's a small thing that the author is a woman or that the focus of the book seems to be on the women of Islam. I also think it is interesting that this is the first book we've been requested to read in its entirety. It's hard not to wonder why this book deserves a more thorough examination, although I have my suspicions.

We've only read four chapters so far. The author introduces the reader to the modern Middle East by relating a story about her own experience as a modern Western woman travelling alone through Saudi Arabia. The tale leaves a rather sour impression. In fact, I'd go so far as to say it reinforces the Western view of the supressed Muslim woman. The most interesting thing about this little story is how she ends it: "I couldn't check myself into a Saudi hotel room in the 1990s because thirteen hundred years earlier a Meccan named Muhammad had trouble with his wives." (p. 3)

What a nice way to introduce the Prophet to a Western audience! (Yes, that is sarcasm.)

I know we're supposed to be determining whether or not our current author-de-jour is working under an Orientalist influence, so it's hard not to view Geraldine Brooks' book with a critical eye. Perhaps this need to identify the Orientalist attitudes in the writing has made me blind to the non-Orientalist portions of the writing, but I can find little in this book that doesn't seem to carry a condescending tone. She's clearly puzzled and disturbed by the status of Muslim women.

However, I do think her history lesson in Chapter Four was actually very good. I think I really started to grasp where the division in Shiite and Sunni Islam originated. Of course, this doesn't mean I can competently relate the complicated history of the Prophet, his wives, and his political opponents.

I'm very interested to see what the rest of this book holds. I'm really not sure where she's going with this, what her ultimate goal is other than to offer a glimpse into modern Islam and Muslim culture.

Bell as the Orientalist?

I'm withholding my opinion until I finish reading all five chapters. However, I will comment on my observations so far.

Based on the writing in the first two chapters of the book, I'm not comfortable calling Bell an Orientalist, and yet I'm also not comfortable saying she wasn't. There are certainly elements of Orientalism in her writing. There may be a passing comment dropped in the most casual manner that makes me question her overall attitude toward the people she championed.

On the other hand, its hard to reconcile someone who so adored the desert and its tribal flavor with the sour impression I have of Orientalism. Bell's knowledge of the area and its citizens could arguably negate her sometimes condescening observations. After all, most people do have something negative to say about somebody. Perhaps her momentary lapses are prompted by an individual reaction and not meant as comprehensive statements encompassing all "Orientals". After all, in the next breath she can gush over how much she's genuinely enjoying herself.

Although, I have to admit I wonder if her love of the desert and the sense of adventure/discovery outweighs her love of the people. The bulk of her writing does seem to focus on the visual or textile images. She describes the landscape, the appearance of people, and, of course, the ruins she finds along her travels. While I love her descriptive talent - for it is a talent as impressive as her political intuition (in my opinion, of course) - her writing lacks the personable touch of writers like Montague or even Duff-Gordon. The only person she seems to give a personality to is her travelling companion, Namrud, and that's only expressed through the stories he tells her. She never offers much in terms of what she thinks of him personally.

Her writing gives insights to her passion for the desert and her knowledge of the tribes. Although I may change my mind, I don't think her passion extends quite as much to the people as it does to the land on which they live. But I reserve the right to change my mind on this.

A List of Tribes

We were asked to keep a list of the different tribes Gertrude Bell mentions in her writings.

Here goes:

'Adwan
Abadeh
*Anazeh
Belka
Beni Sakhr
Da'ja
Druzes
*Ghassanid
*Ghawarny
Hassaniyyeh
Shammar
Sherarat
Sukkur

*These may or may not be tribes. Given the way in which Bell discusses them, I'm assuming they were (are), but only further reading or some proactive research will provide a clearer answer.

More on Said's Orientalism

The preface of the 25th anniversary edition made for some interesting reading. I got the distinct impression Said is more than a little disgusted with our current involvement in Iraq. He certainly doesn't try to soften his opinion about American foreign policies as they apply to the Middle East (aka "The Orient").

I am actually looking forward to discussion on the topic of Orientalism tonight. Although I've read both the preface and the first chapter, I must admit I'm still trying to sort through everything Said had to say on the matter. I almost need to re-read the first chapter just in order to clarify.

I'll probably update this post later tonight. We'll see.

Updated (8:48 PM)

I think I've got a better grasp on Orientalism. I also think the old definition, the one Said created in the 1970s, is no longer 100% applicable. That or I'm still confused. Here are some of my observations/impressions:

• I don't see the men depicted as effeminate. This is a stereotype I can not easily identify in the travel writings we have read so far this semester. Although, while I don't see it, I suppose the few sentences here and there about homosexual practices could arguably emasculate the Oriental man.
• The image of Oriental women as exotic nymphs has been mostly replaced with the image of a suppressed gender-group who are at the mercy of their tyrannical menfolk.
• The emerging stereotype of Muslim men over the last few years has shifted to that of a religous zealot, a terrorist bent on destroying "The West".

I think perhaps the real definition of Orientalism can be found in the Us vs. Them argument. This psychological conditioning can be perpetrated by the media, the government, and our schools.

I think I'll leave it at that for now. Night!

Letter XXXIX to Anne Thistlethwayte

Lady Montagu had many interesting letters to choose from for this particular assignment, which made my selection feel rather arbitrary. As I flipped through the correspondence I noticed one with a lot of highlighting and notes in the margin. Apparently I found a lot of things very interesting in this particular letter, so it seems logical to discuss it.

One of the first things I noticed about this particular letter was the grateful tone of Lady Montagu's opening. It definitely leaves the reader with the impression that she was perhaps a bit desperate for news of home. Considering the length of time she has been away from England, this makes perfect sense, as does her consternation with her other correspondents for not thinking she would appreciate a little dated gossip.

If these letters were constructed after the fact, this is one of the elements that makes them so engaging. Her tone conveys a frustration I find very real and very believable.

As the letter progresses she indulges in a bit of cultural gossip herself. Considering she admits she's pregnant, the content of her letter flows naturally. It is in this passage where she discusses marriage and children that she perhaps shows her first true distaste for something within the Turkish culture. This sentence may explain her viewpoint on the matter: "You won't know what to make of this speech, but in this country it is more despicable to be married and not fruitful than it is with us to be fruitful before marriage." (p. 107).

Then you read this line: "..they do not content themselves with using the natural means, but fly to all sort of quackeries to avoid the scandal of being past child bearing and often kill themselves by them." (p. 107) Is that actually censure I hear? It certainly sounds like it. If remember correctly she bring up this bizarre gender-based cultural expectation more than once and more than in one letter.

What makes this letter interesting to me isn't just the fact that she finally shows the less than ideal state of Turkish women, but that she realizes it and tries to redeem the culture and perhaps the perception of her reader by adding a last paragraph about things she does like, like the punishment of convicted liars whom she refers to as "triumphant criminals in our country, God knows." (p. 108)

I think this goes back to Ryan's earlier statement about her desire to create an idealized society for herself where she can pick and choose different laws and customs from her experiences. I also believe the later letters in this series supports that argument even further.