Plain Talk

By Mursi Saad El-Din

---

I have just finished reading Seen and Heard by Dr Mona N Mikhail, professor of Arabic and Comparative Literature at New York University. Subtitled "A Century of Arab Women in Literature and Culture", the book offers a detailed and comprehensive account of women's social role in the Arab world, with a focus on Egypt, through a selection of essays and commentaries -- by women or about women.

Most impressive was the chapter titled "Women in the Discourse of Crisis", addressing what the author terms " Nahda " (Arab Renaissance and Islamic discourse) in relation to women's issues. According to the author, renewing the discussion around women's issues in the Islamic world "cannot be divorced from the phenomenon some call 'Islamic Revival' and others call 'Islamic fundamentalism'".

"Secterialism", as the author calls it, is a divisionary act that may start at any given time and, if not promptly contained, simply explodes, resulting in the break down of the individual "into male and female, into a relationship in which the male rules over the female totally and absolutely."

According to Mikhail, the 1967 defeat was the first in a series of political events in the Arab world which led the open discussion and questioning of taboos. Following the horror of the defeat, the "Sectarians", and others, reached for roots, for their heritage, which provided a representation of protection from the nakedness of the prevailing Arab shame. For others it was an opportunity "to question, to research, to study, to contemplate, to meditate". An interesting point in this chapter is the discrepancy between the " Nahda " movement and Islamic fundamentalism in their perception of the West, notably Europe, as well as their relationship with it.

The author concludes that there were two intellectual trends: Islamic fundamentalism on the one hand (with its different currents and trends) and secular humanism (with all its gradations and nuances) on the other. Thus rages the battle between Islamic fundamentalism and the scientific, logical, discourse.

In addressing what we now call national unity between Copts and Muslims, the author's attention is to the positive role played by women in the purpose of a unified society. Here, the difference between the " Nahda " discourse and contemporary Islamic discourse is that between an attempt at unifying and an attempt at breaking apart. It is, in the author's words, the difference between a "nation" which depends on the unity of the land, of history, of common interests and the concept or definition of religion, which depends on the unity of belief.

Dr Mikhail then goes on to discuss the relationship between the two discourses and the "other", i.e. Europe. The " Nahda "'s openness to accept the "other" in its progress and economic ambitions enabled it to absorb those European tradition that would allow a fair challenge, with equal "weapons". The Islamic discourse, on the other hand, adopts an inimical stance towards Europe, although this enmity does not prevent its political representatives from importing Western technology and investing large sums of money in the banks of the West.

Another difference between the two discourses becomes apparent when their respective positions vis-ˆ-vis heritage are analysed, says Mikhail. In the case of Islamic discourse, heritage "has become a cloak of identity and a specificity that signifies distinction". The position of the " Nahda " discourse is one of "mediation, questioning, investigation, and a refusal to compromise with it or with any of its currents and tendencies."

The question remains, however, how do these differences reflect on women? This shall be answered in next week's column, with reference to the author's premise.