Waltz with Bashir!

I agree with many other people in class in saying that is was probably the best movie we have seen so far, and an awesome one to end on! I feel like even if the movie was terrible I would have still been amazed, because it is not only a true story about Ari Folman's experience during the 1982 Lebanon War, but he is also directed, produced, and starred in it! Most of the people in the movie were playing themselves as well.

After doing some research on the movie, I learned that it took four years to make, which shows how much dedication the film took to make. Also, I thought that the movie was made by drawing over the animation, such as in the movies Waking Life and A Scanner Darkly, but actually it was made on a sound stage, then a storyboard was laid out and the animation was done using several different techniques.

I also learned that the perceptions of the film varied greatly person to person and country to country. What I found particularly interesting was that it was so well received in the US, but banned in Europe and at times not well received in Israel. One Israeli newspaper said that it was "stylish, sophisticated, gifted, and tasteful - but propaganda" because it didn't come right out and say that the Israeli Defense Forces were wrong in their actions. Conversely, others complained that it was anti-semitic because at one point a character compares the SS to the IDF's actions during the massacre.

Although I may not know as much about Israel and it's many issues as some of the people who have reviewed the movie, I thought that Folman's portrayal was very good. For one, it is through the eyes of a soldier. Soldiers are not supposed to form judgements about what they are doing, they are supposed to obey orders and do their job. Obviously what happened was very traumatic for him, or else he wouldn't have lost his memories of it. Also, I am sure the soldiers fighting beside him were his friends, why would they be betrayed as terrible people? Like him they were there because it was a requirement of them. I thought it took courage to make a movie about his own life, and to not portray anyone as perfect.

Iraq/n?

I noticed while reading everyone's blogs that a few people called it an Iraqi movie. I don't know if this is just a spelling mistake, or just a miscommunication, or if they confused the two, but I thought it was important to clear up the differences. Although Iraq and Iran are both located in the Middle East, share a border that is 900 miles long, and are often on the nightly news here in the US, they couldn't be more different. Some examples:

Iran is about four times as big as Iraq, about 636,372 square miles (18th in the world) vs 169,234 square miles (58th). Iran has about 74 million people, vs Iraq with 31 million. The GDP for Iran is also much higher, about $11,000 vs $2000 per capita.

Iran's population is very diverse, with Persians making up about half the population, Azeris about a quarter, and dozens of others comprising the rest. Only 3% of the population is Arabic. Iraq's population is over 75% Arabic, 20% Kurdish, and a small amount of other groups comprising the rest of the population.

Iran is officially a Muslim country, and Twelver Shi'a is the state religion, with 89% of the population. However, 9% are Sunni, and the rest of the minority population are Hindus, Jews, Christians, and other religions. However, the largest minority, Bahais, face persecution since the 1979 revolution, and have been denied access to jobs, education, and even executed. Iraq is about 60-65% Shi'a, 35% Sunni, and 3% Christian and other religions., which has dropped since the mid-20th century.

Perhaps the most important difference is in government. Iran is led by the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who is in charge of the military, police, state-run television, and judiciary system. Below him is the President, who is elected by the people, and is in charge of executive decisions not given to the Supreme Leader. The Iraqi government is supposed to be an "Islamic, democratic, federal parlimentary republic" according to it's constitution, with 18 regions, called governorates. But with the current war it is hard to know what is the actual status of Iraq and it's regions. Kurdistan is the only region with it's own government and militia.

So there you go! A few facts about Iraq and Iran, but there are many many more!! :D

Speakers

Tuesday Gulnar Hussain joined us to talk about women in Islam. I thought she did an excellent job, and her presentation was thorough and informative. I loved that she tied her own experiences into the general information, and thought she did a great job of balancing the two. I found it especially interesting that unlike many other people I have heard or read about that chose to immigrate to the United States, Ms. Hussain came here expecting that she would return soon to live with her and her husband's family. In some ways it is quite a romantic story: She came to the US to be with her husband who was attending graduate school, and also fell in love with Kalamazoo. It was cool to here that even someone with from somewhere as incredible as Pakistan found our little city the perfect place to settle.

Ms. Hussain also talked about how she came to wear the hijab, and that it wasn't something she had always done, but found herself wanting to do after her studies of the Qur'an. In Arabic, the hijab is not just a head covering, but the entire modest dress of Islamic women, covering everything but the hands and face. When Ms. Hussain told us that her daughter had begun to wear the veil, I missed whether or not she said hijab. I wonder if she has begun wearing the hijab or just the veil. I also wanted to know what her reasons were when she said that if it were her choice, her daughter would have waited to start wearing the hijab/veil. Did she think she was just too young, or perhaps she should study Islam more before she does? I wish we would have had more time at the end of class to discuss this, as well as all the other questions I am sure many people would have asked.

I thought that this class session was quite informative and enjoyable. I only wish we would have had more time! The fact that we didn't even have time to really hear from both of our speakers or ask many questions was a bit frustrating. All-in-all, however, I think everyone learned a lot, and I am looking forward to our discussions tomorrow!

Oh! And don't forget to reserve your seats!!

http://www.islamfortoday.com/hijabcanada4.htm

Professor Mustafa Mirzeler

I thought that Prof. Mirzeler did an amazing job on Tuesday of explaining Turkey, honor killings, and the head scarf dilemma there. I loved seeing all of the images of Turkey that he put into the power point, and I was impressed that he put so much effort into it at the last minute to give us a great presentation. His passion for his country was impressive, and it was heartbreaking when he spoke about not wanting to go back because of the changes that have occurred there.

The part of his talk that I found most compelling- as did the rest of the class- was his discussion of the honor killings in Turkey. I found myself completely absorbed in his story of his family and the decision they had to make about his sister. It was terrible to listen to the pain he went through as the family tried to decide what to do. I kept wondering, how would his life be different if he would have had to go through with it? Would he have had to remain in Turkey? Faced punishment despite being ten years old? I can't imagine he would have achieved everything he has if he would have had to participate in the killing of his sister. It really made me think about the pressures a community can put on its members.

The thing that astounds me about honor killings is not that a family could kill one of its members- although it is heinous and incredible to think about-  but that the community could want such a thing to happen. Families will go to extreme measures to protect the ones they love, and if that means sacrificing a member to protect all the rest, maybe that is what has to happen. It is easy for us to say that they could just ignore it or leave, but for a family that has nothing but a few possessions and maybe a little bit of land, leaving may be impossible. That leaves the community to blame. If any family can be dishonored, can become a victim of a rape or divorce or anything, then why not stand up as a community and say we don't want this to happen anymore? That you don't want to kill your neighbor? Would other people in the community come after you and your family? Everything about this blows my mind!

Gold Dust

When I first started reading this novel, I thought, "I cannot sit through 160 pages of a dude talking about how great this camel is." So I was a bit surprised when, probably around 75 to 100 pages in, I found myself wondering what was going to happen next. A novel about a man losing everything for a camel might seem a little extreme, but I found it to be an interesting look into the hearts of men and how that is shaped by so many things; climate, weather, animals, superstition and religion, play as important a role as the other human characters.

I also found that I had to keep adjusting my image of the characters and setting throughout the novel. When someone says "desert" I tend to picture a vast wasteland, with maybe a cactus or a dead tree, a camel or perhaps a scorpion the only signs of life. But in Gold Dust, the desert is both death and life. It hides oases, mountains, and valleys. There is life to be found for those that know what they are looking for. Also, I had to adjust my idea of what the people living in this region look like. Until I understood that these were Bedouin people, I had trouble picturing the men in "veils". Eventually I looked up a picture, and I thought, "Oh yeah! I get it now!" I liked that the translator took time in the afterward to address the veil, saying that it was not a religious or practical item, but rather a social one, used to manipulate emotion or intimacy. The author makes use of this in the novel; Ukhayyad often will cover his face more when he is confused or hiding something, or when he is unsure of himself. Dudu uses the veil to hide his true nature, even wearing two so that Ukhayyad struggles to understand the meaning of his actions and words.

While I will admit that Ukhayyad's love of his camel is baffling, I enjoyed the anthropo- morphic nature of the novel. If the author had chose to just say, "The camel ran away," "The camel was bleeding," or, "The camel cried out in pain." It would not have had the same effect as, "The camel's heart was not soothed. Distress flickered from his fear-stricken eye sockets(117)." In fact, my heart went out much more to the camel, who was the truest victim of the novel. He was just being a loyal animal, and despite what Ukhayyad felt, could not possibly have understood his circumstances! I wanted to hug him as much as Ukhayyad, despite the fact that most camels are vile creatures. The author is at his most poetic when discussing the camel and his emotions, and gave it feeling of being whimsical while at the same time so tragic. How Shakespearean.

Children's Books!

I was so surprised to hear that so many of the people in our class had not read a children's book in a long time, or that they were not exposed to books like these two when they were growing up. Maybe I am a bit of a dork, but I love children's books and still like to read them, although it is usually for a family member or because I have picked it up in a doctor's office or a friend's house from it's place on the coffee table. When I was a kid, I wanted to write and illustrate children's books, even long after I had moved on to Boxcar Children, Babysitter's Club, and Judy Blume.

I try not to judge children's books to harshly, for the most part. Whenever you are writing about something in a way that is supposed to be simplistic but also will grab the attention of a child, it can be hard to avoid images or texts that some may see as stereotypical or even racist. I think both the stories that we read were wonderful, especially the first one, but it is still important to take the discussion further. Perhaps you could ask the child afterward, "Where do you think this story took place? What is it like there? What are the people like?" And then help them to understand not only how they are different from the child, but also how they are alike. For example, in the first story, you could ask, "Why do you think Ahmed writes his name so differently from how we would write it?" or, "Do you think that everyone in Cairo dresses this way?" Reading to children is important, but it is only a small step in their development. If there is no discussion about the issues, the story may be remembered for it's bright colors, and nothing more.

I thought I would include some books on here that are different than what most of us think of when we are talking about children's literature:

I remember reading this book in elementary school. It's about a boy learning about his grandfather and the Vietnam War. I don't remember much about it, except it made me kind of sad and I wanted to go look at the wall.










This book tells the story of a family going through a divorce, and how although it is difficult, Dinah's parents still love her, and although things are changing, many things will be the same. My cousin's had a book very similar to this one when we were growing up. I remember it scared me but also helped me understand what they were going through.




This is a story about four animals that live together, but then the fox dies. The book talks about remembering all the wonderful things about Fox, and about how that keeps him with the other animals in their hearts. I also had a book similar to this one growing up. I don't remember when it was originally bought for me, but I do remember reading it and being just... mad. So I guess it moved me on to that second stage of grief! Oh well...

And there are books that deal with even heavier subjects...

Some of the best new books deal with different families...

War in the Land of Egypt

I just got War in the Land of Egypt in the mail Saturday (thank God, no mail on Columbus Day!), and finished reading it this morning. It was an easy read, and pretty interesting. I liked the idea of each progressive character tell a part of the story, it was a neat way get all the perspectives without being in third person. Sometimes at the beginning of new chapters I would have to remind myself who was speaking, but after a page or two it wasn't a big deal. I also liked how the characters talked to the reader, but not that they were aware of being in a chapter in a book. It kind of reminded me of 9 Parts of Desire, but the play made it seem like you were a witness to the events, the characters didn't know that they were actually in a play. Whenever they would say something like, "As the author of this chapter..." I would become annoyed that they were taking me out of the story. For something so emotional, I don't want to be constantly reminded I am reading a book, I want to use my imagination! Isn't that what we learned on Reading Rainbow?

The story itself was quite good; original and heartbreaking, while still being relatable and at times even ironic or comical. I found myself at first understanding the umda, but then later hating him. I was astonished at the watchman for allowing his son to go in place of the umda's son, then heartbroken when I saw him struggling with his son's death and with a force larger than himself. The Friend makes us see Masri as a human being, struggling with his ideas about family, country, duty, and self. One can feel the Officer and the Investigator's stories make us feel their frustration as the powers that be rule over everyone and make the final decisions.

The government and the bureaucracy surrounding it are so ridiculous it is hard not to find comedy in it's dark topics. The satire at times drips from the pages, as we see the auther, Yusuf Al-Qa'id writing a dark critique of the Egyptian government around the time of the 1973 October War between the lines of the novel. In fact, it is mentioned on the back of book that it was banned in Egypt.


More to come.. break time!

The Road to Love

(Warning: The following is quite rambling, I had no idea what I was going to say!) 

I have mixed feelings about the movie that we watched in class last Tuesday. I thought that the issues in the Arabic and Muslim community dealing with homosexuality were important to talk about, and made for a great discussion. I also thought that it was daring and admirable to talk about a topic that is considered by many to be taboo. But I had a difficult time connecting with the characters in the movie, mostly I believe because of the style it was shot in. I liked the idea of it being a "documentary," but I think that they could have done a better job of making the movie run seamlessly. If they hadn't been so focused on making the movie look like a documentary, I think we could have gotten a better understanding of the characters if it was addressed from an omniscient view instead.

However by the end of the movie, I found the lead character, Karim to be a relatable, sympathetic character. I found it interesting that the character was struggling with his sexuality in his later twenties, but thought it made sense, being that homosexuality is seen as such a taboo among many Muslim people. That may have been one of the most important issues brought up in the movie. In Western culture, many people find themselves learning about their own sexuality somewhere between middle school and college. They are often allowed much more contact with not only people of the opposite sex, but outside their own families in general, and can develop their own sense of self away from the expectation of their family.

I wish we would have seen more about Karim's relationship with his girlfriend, and how if changed as he allowed himself to understand who he was. I especially would have liked to see relationships between gay men that were not so adolescent and more mature, so it did not seem like sexuality was a game being played by a bunch of kids. The relationships between the men in the movie came off extremely awkward at times, but that makes sense, because Karim was at a place where he was just learning how to act in this new part of himself. Have you ever seen middle school kids flirting at the mall? That is what it felt like watching the movie. I found it hard to watch at times not because of the gay relationships, but because it made me remember my own early fumblings into adulthood. Oh, cringe!

9 Parts of Desire

Last Thursday I went to opening night of 9 Parts of Desire at the York Arena Theater. It is a play by Heather Raffo, which she performed as a one-woman show. In Western's production, six women took on the nine varying characters, which include a doctor, intellectual, expatriate, and a young American woman, to name a few. The York Arena Theater is a black box theater, and the actors performed in the middle of the room surrounded by the audience. I love black box theaters, and thought it was the perfect choice for such an intimate play.

All of the actors in the play did a spectacular job of truly embodying the women they were portraying, and their heart-felt portrayals made it seem like you were a part of the characters' stories. One of the best parts of the event actually occurred after the play, when they held a talk-back with the actors and director. One audience member brought up that he was very impressed with the women's accents, and they revealed that they had worked with the family that owns Tiffany's Liquor on their authenticity. The family was actually in the audience, and it was touching to see them speak with the women about the relationship they had developed. The family had emigrated to the US 40 years ago. They said that the play was more than they could have imagined, and they saw themselves and their friends from Iraq in the characters. (I'm sorry I don't have their names in here, I am sure they are in the program, but I don't currently have it with me!)

Attached is a interview with Heather Raffo, with clips of her performing in 9 Parts of Desire:

Blood and Oil

I had never seen the movie Blood and Oil before, but most of the information was not new to me. Watching things like this just make me so angry. We are supposed to be the greatest country in the world, but even though we have know since after WWII that we were going to become dependent on other countries for oil to use in our energy needs, we did nothing about it. If we had vigorously invested in alternative energy research, where could we be at today? But instead we compromised our national values and made deal after deal with countries that were not democracies, that suppressed their own people and had horrible records when it came to environment, religious, and economic policies. We gave weapons to countries to defend the oil we wanted that were quickly turned around and led directly to the invasion of Kosovo by Iraq and the rise of the Taliban in Afghanistan. We helped to overthrow democratically elected leaders in order to put in radicals that happen to support our oil agenda.

I'll rant more on this later..

My paper!

Check out the isim.nl website at the bottom for more information about councils!
...
Blood Feuds in Aunt Safiyya and the Monastery Mimic Life

While reading Aunt Safiyya and the Monastery, there were many issues that stood out. I was especially captivated by the familial interactions, and the ways in which a family that was once so close can be quickly torn apart. For many people, it may be hard to understand how a family can be so quick to judge another, to demand blood for an alleged wrong. That is, until one understands the concept of vendettas - or blood feuds - which have existed in Upper Egypt as well as many other regions around the world for centuries. Despite the country's best efforts, the vendetta system still has a strong hold in rural parts of Egypt, and many go unreported as families believe it is a local matter and not a concern of the government. Under this context, it is easier to understand the desire Safiyya would feel to see justice carried out by her own son, rather than seeking appeal to the court system.

Vendettas have always existed throughout history, not just in the Middle East, but all around the world. I feud may start over a simple argument, but continue to escalate until a family believes there is no solution other than to take the life of a member of the other family. Blood feuds have especially been a problem in recent times in rural parts of Upper Egypt, where the central government has trouble controlling the villages because of their locality. This is why we also see the appearance of The Outlaws. There is simply not enough government control to reach all these small, remote places. In the case of Aunt Safiyya and the Monastery, tensions seemed to already be on the rise when Harbi came with the bey to ask for Safiyya's hand. It had always been assumed that she would marry Harbi, and I think that a part of everyone was hurt in one way or another by her marriage to the bey. Safiyya proves herself to be a bit of a loose cannon, when rumor are spread that Harbi wants to kill her newborn son and she throws herself into the gossip completely. Blood feuds almost always involve men, and Safiyya knows she is at virtually no risk as she spreads the lies around. The responsibility of maintaining a vendetta is almost always that of the closest living male relative, in this case Safiyya's son Hassaan.

Also according to the rules followed in a feud, if a person is unable to carry out the vendetta because of the death or disappearance of the accused, the man carrying out the vendetta can target the next closest member in the family. In the case of Aunt Safiyya and the Monastery, this would probably be the narrator or his father. Is this the reason we learn that they have ended up all leaving the village? Of course, we also learn that one of the narrator's brothers is working for Hassaan, so this does not seem likely. But the fact that they all ended up leaving  should not be seen a mere coincidence. A feud does not end with the death of the accused, but instead must now be carried out by the other family, and can extend until it has captured the lives of an entire community. Perhaps other villagers would begin to feel it was their responsibility to see to the vendetta, after all, the narrator does tell us at one point that everyone in the village is related in one way or another.

A huge story out of Upper Egypt which occurred on August 10, 2002, happened when a family known as the Hashanat were attacked in their village, leaving 22 men dead. The Hashanat family had been in a feud with the Abd al-Halim family since two children from each family had fought at a wedding more than ten years before. The fighting escalated until members of both families had been killed by the other. These revenge killings eventually led to a trial for the two Hashanat family members involved in one of the killings, but a car carrying family members to the ambushed on their way to the court date, resulting in the massacre. While the blood feud between families is, sadly, not unusual, what was unusual was the large number of people killed in one incident. For this reason it grabbed headlines around the world. However, learning about events like this make it easy to understand why the narrators family is so fearful from the beginning when the rumors first start to circulate. It is not just paranoia to worry that a small incident could turn into a horrific massacre.

Another example of an actual vendetta carried out in Egypt in a similar style can be found in an article dating from 2005, in which a farmer from the town of Dar Al-Salam was killed by five men in front of his wife and teenage son. He was a member of a clan known as the Hababza clan, which had been in a long feud with a clan known as the Barawra clan. The victim had done nothing wrong other than being a member of the wrong clan. He was walking home with his family at night at the time of the incident. In this aspect, it is probably easy for Americans to understand clan vendettas in comparison to current gang activity, or when compared to mafia activity such as that of Al Capone, or fictionalized in movies like The Godfather. A famous example stemming from the United States is that of the Capone-Moran gangs and the St. Valentines day massacre, in which seven men were lined up and killed. It was a retaliation killing for an attempt on a member's life.

Even more related to the plot of Aunt Safiyya in American culture is blood feud between that of the Hatfields and McCoys.  A member of the McCoy family was murdered after returning home from the Civil War for having joined with the Union Army. The feud escalated despite intermarriage in the families. From 1881 to 1891, it is believed that more than a dozen people on both sides were killed for the purpose of vendetta. Retaliation murders happened in both families, until the McCoys were forced to leave the area to escape the raids that were happening on their properties. The case eventually made headlines all over the United States, and even caught the attention of the Supreme Court. Eventually eight men from the Hatfield family stood trial for the murder of a McCoy woman killed in one of the raids, known as the New Years Massacre. They were all found guilty and given life sentences, and one member was hanged. This is seen by many as the last great family vendetta in the United States, although many have been reported in Appalachia throughout American History.

Today, the government of Egypt as well as it's citizens have done much to try and eliminate blood feud killings. On a day-to-day level, it is expected that if an argument breaks out in a public place, a person will step in to try and defuse the anger and resolve the problem. Elders who are influential in the community are often called on to help settle disputes between families. However, in the case of Aunt Safiyya and the Monastery, it is the villagers themselves who start the ball rolling in the feud, and one of the elder highest officials in the village - the bey - is involved in the argument. Perhaps this is why it escalated so quickly; with no one in the village to stand up to the families and help dissolve the conflict, it grows to a level where no one is in control. We do see some villagers trying to help Harbi when he is cornered by the bey in the field, but all they can do is send for the narrator's father, and are helpless against the bey and his armed guards.

Another way these arguments can be settled, although not mentioned in the book, is by council. Across Upper Egypt, councils based on tribal traditions rather than on state or sharia law are used to settle disputes among villagers and families. People who are in a traditional dispute can seek the help of these councils, which are often composed of elders and sheikhs. In a case like that of Aunt Safiyya and the Monastery, Harbi would have still been sent to a regular state court for sentencing, but when he was released he would go before a blood feud council in the village, instead of being hidden away in the monastery. The council would hear arguments from both sides, and then try and reach a settlement between the two in order to prevent further killings. After an agreement has been reached, the two parties must embrace and then statements are made concerning reconciliation, religion, and why it is important to avoid an on-going vendetta. These councils are highly respected throughout Egypt, and provide an indispensable service to the rural areas. Somehow, however, I cannot see Safiyya agreeing to go before such a council, so strong is her blood lust.

When the subject of vendetta and blood feuds quickly became a central theme of Aunt Safiyya and the Monastery, I at first had trouble wrapping my brain around the idea of killing just to get revenge. When anyone is angry, it is easy to imagine taking one's revenge on another, but it seems to rarely happen except in cases that end up on the national news. But after talking in class about the subject and completing research, I understood that it is not only about revenge, but also deeply rooted in tradition, which can be even harder to shake than feelings of anger and vengence.


http://www.isim.nl/files/newsl_13-12.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatfield-McCoy_feud
http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2005/739/eg3.htm
http://www.statemaster.com/encyclopedia/Feuds

Divorce and Year of the Elephant.

The title story from Year of the Elephant revolves around a woman coping with a divorce from an unloving husband. Despite this, the divorce comes as a shock, and she must learn to cope with what little she has left. Luckily in Islam the Prophet Mohammed spoke of divorce and set aside allowances for women that were not there before. Before the Prophet, divorce was in some places was illegal, while in others a man could leave his wife with nothing. But after, it became legal to divorce, although it was still seen as a terrible thing, and a last resort. In marriage, a woman gets to retain all the property she owns, and it belongs only to her and not her husband. Because of this, the narrator of Year of the Elephant is able to return to her hometown, where all she owns is a room. She is in shock from the divorce, and thinks repeatedly of her husband saying to her, "Your papers will be sent to you along with whatever the law provides." While this ends up being very little, and is still unjust, it is important to recognize that Islam was once revolutionary for setting aside these things for a divorced wife.

The Prophet Mohammed had said, "Among lawful things, divorce is the most hated by Allah." I really like this statement, because I think all people should think of marriage in terms similar to these. Whether a person believes in God or not, marriage should be seen as a life-long commitment. The important thing to recognize in the Prophet's statement, is that it is still legal. When you think about it, most things that are seen as bad in any culture are often illegal. The fact that Islam recognizes that problems can arise that make staying together impossible is very forward-thinking. Some of the reasons that are widely accepted as reasons for divorce are: infidelity, abuse of any kind, or refusal to fulfill marital duties. The last of these can be anything from refusal to work and support the family to refusal to "share the marital bed." This however, is not considered a valid reason if it is impossible due to physical limitations. There are, of course, exceptions to these rules, and women have been divorced for reasons beyond their control, such as being unable to have children.

Many people have heard of the notion that in Islam a man only has to say "Talaq" or "I divorce you," three time and a woman has no other choice in the matter. While this practice still exists in some places, it is seen as wrong and often condemned. Many countries, including Turkey, Tunisia, Algeria, Iraq, Iran, Indonesia, and Bangladesh have banned the practice completely. Other countries have governmental systems established to try and help people save their marriage, and a trial is necessary to receive a divorce.

Divorce laws in Islamic countries are changing and evolving all the time. I think it is important to remember that most people and their governments only want the best for women living in their country. Today in Morocco, where Year of the Elephant takes place, a woman by law no longer has to obey her husband, although divorce is still seen as shameful. However, in other parts of the Western Sahara, divorce is seen as a happy thing for women, and carries little to no stigma. Many men are happy to marry a divorcee, believing that she is "more experienced and sure of herself." For them, the new laws of Morocco, which govern them as well, are seen as a step back, not a step forward. Now a woman cannot divorce her husband without appealing to the courts, whereas before she had only to get a letter from an Islamic official.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/mohd.htm
http://muslim.families.com/blog/divorce-in-islam
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3532612.stm

Independent Reading

I just started the book that I am reading independently last night, thanks to Amazon/UPS taking their sweet time to get it here, but so far it is very interesting. It is called Year of the Elephant: A Moroccan Woman's Journey Toward Independence and was written by Leila Abouzeid. It was first published in English in 1989. What makes it unique is not only that it is written from a woman's perspective, but it is one of the first books to be written in Arabic and translated into English to come out of Morocco. Most books that come from Morocco are written in French, due to the fact that Morocco was a French colony until the 1950's, and most elite schools still use French as the language that literature and writing are taught in. However, Abouzeid went to a school that taught both French and Arabic, and chose to write in Arabic for personal and political reasons. Year of the Elephant is actually the title of the novella which begins the book, but it also contains eight other short stories, ranging in themes from "A Vacation" to "Divorce". The entire book is less that 100 pages long, and I am sure I will tear through it as fast as I did Aunt Safiyya.

Aunt Safiyya and the Monastery

Despite what I gather from some other blogs, I thought that Aunt Safiyya and the Monastery was a very interesting, unique book. Although it was a short read, it kept me wondering what was going to happen next, and I finished the book in two sittings. The relationships between the characters was complimented by the scenery, and I appreciated the sometimes lengthy descriptions the author used to set not only the physical but also emotional tone of the story.

The relationship between the narrator and his father was especially interesting. His father brought him along on many of the important events he had to attend to, including bringing Harbi from the train station to the monastery and meetings with the outlaws. These things may seem like dangerous or complicated events to bring a child along, but his father trusts him and feels its important to include him in the happenings of their family and the village. I never got the feeling that the father distrusted his son, or that he was irrationally angry with him. They appeared to have a complex, deeply connected relationship, and I appreciated that in the story.

Others complained that the other characters in the novel, particularly the mother and her daughters, seemed stereotypical or one-dimensional. While at times I would have to agree and say that I also found it frustrating, I think that it may have been a choice by the author to write about them this way, not because they are women, but because they are just a step above the other villagers in their importance to the story. While it is important to see the reaction of the mother towards Safiyya and her family, as well as the daughters reactions, I believe the central theme centers more around the father-son relationship and what he learns from his father.

Finally, I would like to address the Epilogue. From a purely inquisitive standpoint, it was nice to know what happened to Safiyya, Bishai, his sisters, and the rest of his family, I thought most of this chapter was unnecessary. It might be satisfying to know what happened to all the characters, but I feel like the novel was over with the death of Harbi. The reader could have probably figured out on their own what was going to happen to Safiyya, and the other characters lives, while interesting, really aren't that important to the overall story. Whenever I read an epilogue like this one, I can't help but thin about the end of bad teen/college movies where we get a cute little summary of each character's life under a freeze-frame shot of them laughing and having a good time. Like I said, it is interesting to know, but kind of feels like the easy way out.

WMU Events!

Last year I had the privilege of attending "Why I am Still a Muslim," put on by the Muslim Student Association along with the Arab Student Association. It was an amazing evening, featuring a key speaker talking about his life as well as answering questions posed by the audience. There was also delicious foods,  a prayer, as well as relics and information from the Muslim faith. I believe that this year it is going to be November 20, and will post more when I get more information.
Until then check out the information below about last year's event.


http://www.msa-wmu.org/
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1306423996599197652#docid=-916558810431852832
http://www.wmich.edu/wmu/news/2008/11/015.html

"Reel Bad Arabs"

How sad that the idea of Arabic people in American Cinema is limited to that of the villian. We have actually come to expect it in the big action movies: Arnold Schwarzenegger overpowering the weak and clumsy, Harrison Ford outsmarting the simple and inept. But it is surprising how deep the stereotype runs. Who thinks of Steve Martin in Father of the Bride 2? Or Aladdin for that matter? It's almost a defeating feeling to realize that a movie that you could recite as a seven year old - could still sing along to the all songs - could be so offensive. First reactions may be to ignore it, or to deny that it is there. As a child, I had pajamas that were gauzy and loose-fitting except at the cuffs - I called them my Jasmine pajamas, after the female heroine of the movie. And this may lead you to think - as I did - is this a movie that I can show my children someday? It's like running into an old friend and hearing them spew racial slurs. But this is a person I once loved dearly, do I now want to write them out of my life?

It is also important to recognize that although Hollywood is responsible to some degree, the blame needs to be placed on many other sources. Educators need to do more to teach children about this rich culture, not just teaching them about the terrorists attacks and burkas. The government must make it clear to all their citizens that Arab- and Muslim-American deserve the same treatment as everyone else, and encourage them to learn more about the culture. Perhaps most important to dispelling stereotypes is the role the media plays. If the only images the national media presents Americans with are of  terrorism, repression, and turmoil, is it any surprise it is what comes out in our entertainment?

http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,1202224,00.html
http://www.nytimes.com/1993/07/23/opinion/l-change-in-aladdin-lyrics-looks-like-cowardly-censorship-165093.html