Four participants assess and digress
Haydar Ibrahim, Sudanese writer
Any assessment of a conference about renewing cultural (including religious) discourse must take on board two entirely separate topics. First, there is the question of the event itself: the presence on the same occasion of so many Arab intellectuals from a variety of backgrounds and with diverse orientations and priorities, all intent on approaching the topic. Secondly, there is the issue of the content of the proceedings -- what is being said, how relevant it is to reality and whether or not it could have a tangible effect on the way things are progressing.
The simple existence of the conference underlines the feeling that it has become necessary to forge a new cultural discourse. This necessity is not a subjective wish but emerges out of objective circumstances that oblige Arabs to adopt a new perspective if we are to continue being part of the contemporary world. At one level, therefore, you see numerous intellectuals striving to answer the question of how to forge a collective, critical view of the conditions under which cultural discourse operates. And this is important in itself.
On another level, however, looking at the papers submitted and the roundtables taking place, you can see there is a profound sense of crisis -- an awareness that something is wrong. Yet the actual diagnosis has yet to shed its predilection for stereotypical thinking, for the very modes of discourse that the conference sets out to transcend. There is, for one thing, the tendency to view the crisis as if it were a problem of the intellect or the mind, not something to do with reality or society. This is a major problem as far as I'm concerned. You'd think it's well- known by now, with so many people who never tire of repeating it: the answer to Arab problems resides, first and foremost, in reforming Arab societies. In an atmosphere of conservative stagnation it is impossible to maintain, let alone renew, culture. Until social relations are transformed attempts at renewing culture will remain confined to the kind of isolated archipelago of elitist concerns. The most important means to renewal is the democratisation of culture. Nothing of any magnitude can take place until cultural discourse reaches out to the broadest spectrum of people. And in this context quantity is just as important as quality. People have to be party to the discourse directed at them, they must actively participate in the process of transformation or renewal.
Taking religious discourse as an example, it is pointless to commend the potential of a fundamentalist orientation in effecting change before discussing the ways in which such an orientation might be mobilised in the progressive struggle, integrated into progressive culture. This and other questions relating to the role of culture in political and social reality are the more pressing challenges, and I don't think they've been adequately addressed. Perhaps they could not have been, given the constraints of a three- day event. Yet stereotypical modes of interaction persist, and it's up to the Arab intellectual to excise them. What is needed is a cultural act backed by powerful theory, not simply theoretical debate.
Will the conference make a contribution to the renewal of culture and cultural discourse? My hope is that there will be a set of recommendations at the end which could be followed up through some form of organisation or body. If such a body comes into existence the conference will have moved in the direction of an effective intervention, and all this theory will be matched by practice.
Al-Afif Al-Akhdar, Tunisian critic
Forgive me, but I've lost my voice. It's the air-conditioning system at the hotel and all those speeches, yes. Next time I come to Cairo I will not stay at this hotel. I've ordered some aniseed, maybe when it arrives my voice will improve. I think I will only answer your first question, though, about a general assessment of the conference. There is very little I can say about the details of the proceedings.
It is impossible to conceive of a direct, immediate reward in the context of cultural endeavour. Things take time, a long time, before they begin to materialise; and then sometimes decades will pass and the situation will not have changed. My feeling is that the most important achievement of this conference lies in its having been held. The fact that many rejected the invitation to participate, histrionically, for ideological reasons, only goes to show that culture is still ludicrously mixed up with politics, and events like this conference help clear up this confusion. [Mohamed Selim] El-Awwa, the Islamist writer, for example: he rejected the conference on the grounds that it failed to take account of the American invasion of Iraq. [Algerian novelist] Al-Taher Wattar sent an open letter, which was published in Akhbar Al-Adab, in which he railed against the very notion of holding such a conference, again for ideological and political reasons. These are wrong reasons to reject or endorse a cultural event. They underestimate the potential of culture.
A long time ago Tewfik El-Hakim suggested converting the Arab League into a Culture League. Arabs disagree on politics, they agree on culture. There is a lot of truth in this. It was one of the points El-Hakim made, and it's something of which I am entirely convinced. Had the League turned into a cultural organisation, unexpected things might have happened. As it is the League remains as impotent and ineffectual as it's always been. You know why? Because no collective action is possible without a modicum of agreement, and in the political arena no such agreement among Arabs is forthcoming. In culture there is more scope for accomplishment.
When Amr Moussa was elected to the position of secretary-general of the Arab League I sent him an open letter -- it was published in Al-Hayat -- in which I called on him to prioritise cultural over political endeavours in the League's agenda. For one reason or another this was never taken very seriously.
Yet it seems that the Supreme Council and Ministry of Culture here in Egypt are undertaking the role of an alternative or parallel Arab cultural league. All I can say about the conference is that it exemplifies this tendency, and that it thus remains a positive and promising initiative irrespective of political orientation.
Adel El-Siwi, Egyptian artist
Are such events of any use? No. I believe it's a question of quantitative activity rather than any genuine desire for change. There are no specific goals, no adequate preparations, no particular point to the whole event except to have held a large-scale conference. Neither the quality of the papers submitted nor the structure of the programme is conducive to effective discussion. As you can see upstairs, two seminars take place side by side -- if you attend one of them you cannot attend the other. Topics are all over the place. Of course, had it been more sensibly organised you could have had a variety of topics that gradually came together to form a whole picture in the end. Yet as it is, however many activities you attend you cannot come out with a whole picture of the event in your mind -- just disjointed bits and pieces, separate ideas and suggestions.
The papers are not distributed to people. To my mind the whole point of discussion seminars is to talk about the paper you submitted to people who have already read it and want to discuss it with you. Yet nobody ever sees any papers.
There is no attempt at reaching conclusions. No day is allocated to recapping or assessing the proceedings. Instead the conference ends with a party. It's as if you can't wait for it all to end -- so that no sooner are you done than you begin to celebrate. All that was said is forgotten.
All the participants are old. The young are completely absent. How can you claim to be discussing the future of culture if those in their 30s and 40s, the very people to whom this future belong, are systematically excluded? It's as if old age automatically implies wisdom, which is the kind of idea that goes against the grain of the event's stated objectives of renewal.
I was very pleased with Mohamed Berrada's paper, which discussed the connection between political and cultural reform. The strangest thing is that there was not a single politician present, as if the Council was purposely demonstrating its complete lack of interest in transferring theory to practice.
My own paper, entitled "Flying Without Wings", suggested that the council should be made independent of the Ministry of Culture, and that its secretary should be independently elected and enjoy the right to appoint or dismiss whoever. Because I happen to know that Gaber Asfour did not select a single member of the council's Plastic Arts Department; all were appointed by the minister, who has the right to pick and choose with unlimited freedom.
One objection, voiced by Rifaat El-Said and George Tarabishi, was that the council depended on the ministry for funding. This made me wonder about the connection of public funding to decision making. Why should I have absolute decision-making power simply because I happen to be in a government post that allows me to allocate funds for a particular activity?
Nabil Soliman, Syrian novelist
In the wake of "the destruction of Basra", which is falsely described as the liberation of Iraq, it became necessary for those Arab intellectuals who could do so to gather under one roof to discuss the issue. It is a decisive juncture, the fall of Baghdad; a particularly painful example of Washington's flagrant invasion of the region, and the entire world. Intellectuals are in a position to observe and comment even if they are not always in a position to influence events.
And this -- the need to review and come to terms with what happened in Iraq -- is where the present conference derives its importance. It is also significant that such an event should be taking place in Cairo, which remains, whether you like it or not, the centre of Arab intellectual life. Many of the papers submitted, the roundtables, formal and informal discussions testify to the harrowing effects of the invasion of Iraq on Arab writers, artists and academics. The Iraqi crisis emerges in many forms: as the inevitable -- if unexpected -- fall of an Arab regime, the unique dictatorship of Saddam Hussein; as evidence of the failure of Arab governments to adopt an effective position on American intervention in the region; as a testimony to the resilience of the Arab peoples, who went out in their thousands to demonstrate against it. American intervention is evident not only since 20 March in Baghdad but, perhaps even more obviously, in Palestine, where the progress of injustice and destruction is unhindered; that too has had its share of discussion and debate.
Of course it is not to be expected that the conference will transform the reality of the region overnight. Few if any tangible effects can be anticipated. But equally one could say that it is an initial step on the way to dealing with Americanisation, otherwise known as globalisation, which is the worst danger that faces the nation and the world today. An intellectuals' conference is better than nothing at all.
My principal gripe with the conference is that it is too intensive. There are too many proceedings for the allocated time, which is very brief. Consequently there is not enough chance for the participants to interact or the ideas, orientations and positions to fully register or be integrated into a coherent whole. Another gripe is the prevalence of older participants, somewhat remedied by the participation of young people in the discussions. But I would definitely suggest that in future conferences of this kind more time should be allocated to the proceedings, especially when the number of participants is this huge. That is all I have to say.
C a p t i o n :
Raoul Hausmann, Tatlin at Home, 1920
Al-Ahram Weekly Online : 10 - 16 July 2003 (Issue No. 646)
Located at: http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2003/646/cu2.htm