Al-Ahram: A Diwan of contemporary life (488)
Minister of tradition
Mohamed Helmi Eissa, an Egyptian politician in the 1930s, was nicknamed the "Minister of Tradition". Although his every feature -- from his style of tarboush and expensive cane to his handlebar moustache and his glowering scowl -- virtually begged Egyptians to dub him so, Professor
Yunan Labib Rizk* writes that it was Eissa's policies which gave the public substantial cause to produce a new designation
Mohamed Helmi Eissa
|
The British Home Office file on Mohamed Helmi Eissa Pasha perhaps best helps us form a clearer impression of this politician dubbed the "Minister of Tradition". Initially a judge in the court of appeals, "what first drew attention to him was his success as provincial director of Al-Gharbiya, a post to which he was appointed under Prime Minister Tharwat Pasha in 1922. However, when nationalist leader Saad Zaghlul, who harboured a profound dislike for Eissa, became prime minister in 1924, he dismissed him from the post."
Fortunately for Eissa he was well connected within the royalist camp. Upon the fall of the Zaghlul government in November 1924, his star began to rise again, becoming appointed deputy minister of interior in the government of Ziyur Pasha, Zaghlul's successor. Eissa became more closely involved with the royalist elite when he participated in forming the Ittihad Party, a party whose connection with the palace were more than visible in the figure of Nash'at Pasha, deputy chief of the Royal Cabinet. It was largely in recognition of the energy and dedication he displayed in helping to form this party that Eissa was handed the Ministry of Transportation portfolio in 1925.
Eissa's predecessor in this post was Youssef Qatawi Pasha, a wealthy Jewish financier. It so happened the Qatawi had passed by Zaghlul's house to leave him a card congratulating him on the occasion of the anniversary of the birth of the Prophet. King Fouad, not one to forgive such a display of sympathy for his arch enemy Zaghlul, instructed the prime minister to pressure Qatawi into tendering his resignation and appointing Eissa in his stead.
Eissa was able to climb another step in November that year, replacing, this time, Ismail Sidqi, then minister of the interior. On this occasion, the Liberal Constitutionalists and the Ittihad Party -- coalition members in the Ziyur government -- were driven to loggerheads by the dispute over the controversial book Islam and the Principles of Government. Although Sidqi did not immediately resign with the rest of the Liberal Constitutionalists, he nevertheless felt that the royalist government was floundering and about to run aground and decided to jump ship before it was too late. In addition, the government was about to sign an agreement ceding Gagh'bub Oasis to the Italians, which he knew would come back to haunt him. He, therefore, left that task to Ziyur even though he had headed the negotiations that produced the terms of the agreement.
Returning to the Foreign Office file on Eissa, we discover that British authorities were not particularly impressed by his performance in his new post. One excerpt reads: "He was a very bad minister of interior, for which post he had neither the calibre nor the ingenuity required." Not surprisingly, therefore, he was dismissed soon after his appointment and handed the transportation portfolio again. But of course, a man with Sidqi's finesse and cunning was a very difficult act to follow.
When the first era of the first royalist ministry ended in 1926, Eissa retreated to the headquarters of the Ittihad Party where he remained for four years, waiting to see what changes time would bring. They were many. In this interval, a coalition government came to power in which the Wafd Party was the primary participant. This was followed by the government of the "iron grip" formed by Mohamed Mahmoud and consisting mainly of members from this prime minister's Liberal Constitutionalist Party. In the first half of 1930, Mustafa El-Nahhas came to power briefly again but was soon ousted by the Sidqi government in alliance with the two royalist parties, the Ittihad and Sidqi's own party, the Shaab. Finally, with this government, the doors of the cabinet opened to Eissa again. He was handed the Ministry of Awqaf (religious endowments), in which he served a year, after which he became minister of education for a year and a half. It was in the latter capacity that he earned his sobriquet, "the Minister of Tradition". No longer would he deal with agricultural inspectors or road works, but with the minds of the young, which he thought he could shape as he wished.
On 4 August 1931, under the headline, "The fate of the Drama Institute: it has become a lecture hall", Al-Ahram published the Ministry of Education's final decision on this simmering issue. The ministry stated that it had received numerous complaints, all of which indicated that the academy was an affront to "the customs and traditions observed in the Egyptian environment". It was imperative to confront this problem and reconsider how to promote drama in a manner that would serve art while not impairing morals.
The ministry pledged to encourage and assist theatre companies through arranging study missions abroad and promoting play writing and the adaptation into Arabic of foreign plays. On the "moral" side, the current system of instruction followed by the academy would have to change. "Current actors and other members of artistic clubs could all benefit once the academy is transformed into an auditorium for the dramatic arts." Lectures would cover the history of the theatre, elocution, drama skills and the Arabic language. Sports, dance, fencing and other subjects that had aroused popular criticism would be abolished from the curriculum.
The minister of education's decree came only nine months after the founding of the drama academy (November 1930). Throughout that interval the fledgling institute was caught in a storm of controversy between the advocates and opponents of modernisation. At the forefront of the conservatives was Sheikh Mahmoud Abul-Uyun, who condemned the instruction of ballroom dancing as indecent and inconsistent with Egypt's customs. "It is not one of our national morals to allow virgins to leave the shelter of their home in order to attend an official institute that teaches dancing, obscene or otherwise," he proclaimed. He added that young women may engage in all the innocent games they please in their homes, but for them to associate with young men in dancing lessons in which they hold hands together in a circle is an offence to public morals.
Advocates of modernisation pursued a number of steps to defend the new institute against the onslaught. Al-Ahram reports, for example, that school drama societies appealed to the ministry to engage professors from the academy to help organise their activities. A second item reports that Zaki Tuleimat, the famed playwright and the institute's director, travelled to Europe "to apprise himself of the latest developments in the dramatic arts". Keen to widen its scope of influence, the institute also hosted a celebration of the king's birthday. Moreover, it received many encouraging gestures from the authorities. Murad Sayed Ahmed, the minister of education in those initial nine months, announced that he would take measures to increase the number of female students in the institute. Indeed, the ministry announced that if it found enough candidates it would have no objection were there to be twice as many female students as male. But then, on 10 June, Eissa assumed power as minister of education and everything changed.
Within three weeks of Eissa coming to office, a student from the Royal College of Law wrote to Al-Ahram to express his surprise and dismay at "the silence that has befallen us after the encouragement the Ministry of Education had initially displayed towards the Drama Institute". He continues: "We wonder what might be the cause of this grievous and suspicious neglect. The ministry had been most keen in its desire to promote and augment the number of study missions, then suddenly they came to a halt and have not shown a breath of movement since. Odder yet is the rumour, which one still has difficulty in bringing oneself to believe, that the Ministry of Education is contemplating transforming the Institute of Drama into a lecture hall that can be attended by all and sundry."
Evidently, the rumour had spread to such a degree that writer Ahmed El-Sawi Mohamed dedicated one of his "Short but Significant" columns to it. In Al-Ahram of 7 July 1931 he wrote: "Within the space of a year, we saw the students of the Drama Institute develop a remarkable adeptness in the skills of the theatre and the plays they produced give great hope for the future. It is difficult to fathom how all this can be erased with the stroke of a pen."
Al-Ahram was not the only newspaper to air such concerns. Abul-Hol expressed alarm over the rumour that the Ministry of Education intended, not to increase female enrollment in the institute, but to in fact seriously curtail it. Among the restrictions it heard that the ministry was considering was that female applicants would have to come from families of unquestionable reputation, be virgins and be secondary school graduates.
On the other hand, Al-Ittihad, the mouthpiece of the party to which the new minister of education belonged, made it clear what exactly Eissa had in mind. "Not even Paris has this type of academy. It is our pleasure to note that His Excellency Helmi Eissa Pasha has taken interest in all that has been written on this subject and is shortly due to take a decision that will greatly conform with the traditions of this country and the customs of its people."
The decree transforming the academy into a lecture hall was forthcoming on 3 August. With regard to the 24 students currently enrolled (20 males and four females), the ministry would "view them with compassion". By this it meant that "they could benefit from the lectures that will be delivered in the institute" or "the ministry will facilitate to the best of its ability the return of those who wish to return to their original occupations."
The decree signalled the beginning of another confrontation on the pages of Al-Ahram between the proponents of renewal and the advocates of tradition. Al-Ahram reader Abu-Hilal was the first to declare his support. "Long live Sheikh Abul-Uyun!" he proclaimed. "We congratulate him for having prevailed in abolishing ballroom dancing. And we repeat our congratulations for he obtained the highest degrees of preserving the morals of this country in spite of the persecution and tyranny generated against him day after day by the fair sex."
The opposing camp naturally found support in the statements issued by government and religious authorities, foremost among which were the minister of education and the sheikh of Al-Azhar. In a lengthy statement to Al-Ahram, Eissa explained the reasons behind his actions. In addition to the complaints he had received regarding the behaviour of the academy's students, it was also his desire to extend the benefits of the institute to others. By transforming it into a lecture hall, actors and actresses already engaged in the theatre and other promising talents could attend the lectures together with the students. More importantly was his belief that acting required, more than anything else, a certain freedom, and, as long as that was the case, "it should be practiced outside a government framework for the government does not violate national traditions and Islamic morals." In addition, "if dance is necessary to theatre then those who wish to learn it should do so in the proper places and at their own expense, not in a government institute and at government expense."
The sheikh of Al-Azhar welcomed the decree. "It is a major step towards observing the hallowed principles of Islam which constitute the foundation of morals and virtues. It is forbidden for the Muslim woman to dance in front of men and under any circumstances in front of foreign men."
Two other important figures allied themselves with the conservative camp: Mohamed Farid Wagdi, a writer on Islamic affairs, and Hassan Mohamed El-Rifai, a lawyer in the Ministry of Awqaf. In the opinion of the former, the influx of materialist morals was transforming the East into "a vast playground the observer of which can only think that the life of the people here has become a farce". Wagdi continues: "We hope that the minister who has razed the institutes of drama and dance will now turn his attention to the various forms of games and entertainment that have been introduced into our schools. He should also take the opportunity to remind those writers who spout so much about the fine arts -- such as drama, dance and singing -- that these arts only came into being after the establishment of schools of chivalry and valour." The second, El-Rifai, contributed two lengthy articles appearing under a single title, which sums up their substance: "Islam in the state: on abolishing the institute of dance and the co-mingling of the sexes."
Conservatives were also joined by the Society of Muslim Youth which issued a statement addressed to Eissa. Appearing in Al-Ahram of 31 August, it read: "Matters had reached such a scandalous state prior to Your Excellency's incumbency that the former minister of education had heeded the opinion of a woman who does not claim Islam as her religion and founded an institute of drama complete with women dancers and depravity." The society lauded the minister for having rid the Muslim people from that heretic innovation.
Among the foremost champions of cultural renewal was Al-Ahram, evidence of which can be seen in the fact that one of its top writers, Ahmed El-Sawi Mohamed, spearheaded its campaign to save the academy. In his regular column, "Short but Significant", El-Sawi reproached the minister for abolishing the name of the institute and four subjects: dance, sports, fencing and French. He found it ironic that ballroom dancing should be abolished in the institute when it was still taught in all other government schools, albeit under the name folk dancing. It was not amusing, however, that sports and fencing should be taken off the curriculum in that these were essential to the arts of acting. "As for French, Your Excellency, it proved an excellent foundation for the study missions which had preserved that tradition. Unfortunately, the actors who will now be selected to perform from Emadeddin Street will be proficient in neither Arabic nor a foreign language."
Apparently, El-Sawi felt that the issue was far too important to be restricted to his small column for he also dedicated two separate articles to it. The first was entitled, "Drama Institute: to be or not to be", and the second, "The traditions curriculum". Under the latter, he asks whether the Ministry of Education intended to adjust all its educational programmes on the basis of the word "tradition". Had the ministry defined these "traditions" and will it actually abide by them in all facets of its programme to promote education and the arts in Egypt? If so, it will be a retreat from progress in all areas. Unless perhaps "traditions" in Egypt change from one year to the next.
Another defender of the institute was the well known actor Mohamed Abdel-Quddous. Responding to Wagdi's contention that the institute paved the way for profligacy, he asks, "What bearing does drama and its institute have on a situation which should not be ignored by writers covering social affairs. This situation is of such gravity that if we persist in ignoring it, it will generate a nation of unrestrained barbarity at a time in which we claim that we have become civilised."
The second action that earned Eissa his reputation as the "Minister of Tradition" was to ban coeducation. In an interview with Al-Ahram appearing on 2 September 1931, he said by way of justifying his decision, "Several newspapers have complained of the intermingling of the sexes on the beaches in Alexandria and the moral catastrophe that causes." When Al-Ahram asked what the fate would be of female secondary school graduates who wanted to obtain higher degrees, he answered, "We can create a special department for them in the School of Education or even a separate institute. However, we refuse to allow them to mix with male students regardless of the academic benefit that may be derived from that. We have a greater duty, which is to safeguard morals, and when education conflicts with morals we refuse to sacrifice the latter."
Al-Ahram persisted with its original question: "If a girl has obtained a secondary school certificate and wants to complete her education what is she to do?"
"Her parents or guardians can send her to Europe," the minister replied.
"However, in Europe she will be exposed to coeducation and the very corruptive elements you speak of."
"That is not our concern. Her parents or guardians are responsible for their choice. Here in the ministry we are concerned only with our actions, not those of parents."
Al-Ahram rejoined: "There is a form of coeducation in the Faculty of Medicine."
"The system currently in operation in the Faculty of Medicine effectively prevents the intermingling of the sexes since the female students are seated separately and male and female students do not co-mingle after lessons are over."
"In the Faculty of Law there is a single female student who also happens to be one of the top students. What is to be her fate?"
"That student can sit in a corner of the auditorium by herself. That would not be deemed coeducation."
Naturally, the mouthpiece of the minister's party praised his decision and accused those opposed of turning a blind eye to reports in the European press on the opinions of psychologists and ethicists. These experts had come to conclude that "the source of corruption and moral degeneracy in society can be traced to coeducation."
The sheikh of Al-Azhar echoed the minister's views: "Islam encourages the education of women just as it does the education of men, but only within those bounds that prevent the spread of corruption. Experience has shown that coeducation, regardless of its theoretical justifications or financial pretexts, generates a situation that does not conform to social morals in general and Islamic morals in particular."
Once again, Al-Ahram deployed one of its top writers, Abdullah Hussein, to challenge the ministerial decree. Egyptians are no less keen than the minister to safeguard morals, he wrote, "However, the evil to which women are exposed to by sitting besides male students in the classroom, is far less than the evil that awaits a young woman who obtains a secondary certificate and is then frustrated in her hope of obtaining a higher educational certificate, condemned to remain idle in the home and fall into despair."
Hussein continues: "the Ministry of Education is incapable of preventing coeducation in its own schools, even if it is made into law. Can it, for example, maintain that the current system in the Faculty of Medicine prevents male and female students from becoming acquainted or inhibits conversation between the two camps? And outside the college the intermingling of female students from the Faculty of Medicine and other faculties with male students from this faculty or others is very possible indeed."
However, the most categorical response came from an Al- Ahram reader who signed herself "a woman". The only argument the ministry cited against coeducation was that some newspapers complained of women and men swimming together in the beaches of Alexandria, she observed. Such a flimsy justification was deeply offensive to women who aspire to attend the "houses of knowledge solely in order to drink from their sweet fonts and to serve the nation with skill and dedication". What, she wondered, inspired the minister to invoke the restrictions and delusions of the Middle Ages? There has never been an instance when coeducation had corrupted morals. "On the contrary, it is a very important aspect of the process of educating, enlightening and refining the two sexes." Finally, the unidentified writer scoffed at the minister's suggestion that women who wanted to complete their education should leave for remote Western nations so that he could wash his hands of any responsibility for the corruption caused by coeducation. Such sarcasm became inextricably linked with the "Minister of Tradition" thereafter.
* The author is a professor of history and head of Al-Ahram History Studies Centre.
