Karen Molina
Orientalism and Occidentalism
Dr. Metcalf
Spring 2009
The “clash of civilization” between East and West mentioned by many authors, including Edward Said, seems to be a growing barrier amongst the people of these areas. This barrier has not only been around in the present time but developed over many years after the interaction of different people. The labeling and stereotypes developed by people for one another may be suggested as the reason for this “clash”. Also, the feeling of not getting along with “different” people and feeling that one’s way is the right way have not helped bring people to understand one another. These feelings also paved way to a position of supremacy over another and this is shown through out history. Through various forms this clash resonates and seems almost irreversible.
European supremacy is discussed in Edward Said’s book titled Orientalism as dating back to ancient Greece and the time of Xerxes of Persia. Said includes a passage from Aeschylus’s play The Persians, which is the earliest Athenian extant. In this play a chorus section by the Persian army after they were defeated by the Greeks brings out a notion of European supremacy and Asian inferiority. Through the words expressed Asia speaks through and by virtue of the European imagination, which is depicted as victorious over Asia, that hostile “other” world beyond the seas (Said, pg. 56). Plays in the ancient world served as the media services we have today. People who did not travel and did not experience contact with the “other” relied on things such as this to get an idea of what the others are like. In this play, for example, the defeated Asians were portrayed as weak, empty and without hope. It seems to be a region’s mission to make itself seem the higher status group. In classical Greece and Rome geographers, historians, public figures like Caesar, orator, and poets added to the fund of taxonomic lore separating races, regions, nations, and minds from each other; much of that was self-serving and existed to prove that Romans and Greeks were superior to other kinds of people (Said, pg.57).
Feelings of superiority, although Said greatly focused on Greece and Rome, were displayed in other areas of the world. This can be seen on the African continent where a vast civilization enslaved a whole group of people. It is known that in Ancient Egypt there was also a feeling of superiority over others and in this case it was the Jews. Those who were enslaved helped build the magnificent civilization but where shunned away from being equally treated in society. Every early civilization may it be on the African continent, in Mesoamerica (which held the Aztecs and Mayans), or South America (which held the Incans) displayed and took actions that could be proof of the feeling of power compared to others.
An example of the phrase “clash of civilizations” during the 20th century occurred after the development of Israel after the Second World War. This brought great problems as the Palestinians that lived in those land were forced to share it with the newcomers. Tensions have occurred through out the years and continue to this present day as the recently established Israel began to take more than its assigned share. Israel has managed, with the aid of other nations, to develop an organized army which it uses to acquire the segments of the Palestinian territories. Many Palestinians are forced to leave their homes, live in refugee camps in other countries, and many casualties have disrupted families. In the film, The color of olives we can see the restricted life that a Palestinian family lives under. They were able to keep their home but it is under Israeli military land which affects whether or not they can leave anywhere else. The film shows the family’s struggle to keep their lands running smoothly even though the short trip to them from their home has become a longer more restricted journey through Israeli checkpoints.
Another film that shows the terrible life that Palestinians must live under is titled Private. In this film a Palestinian family is shown through its daily struggles when Israeli soldiers take their second floor for military purposes. The whole family is forced to live downstairs and is restricted in through out their home. The most moving scene of this film takes place when the family is forced into a room by the Israeli soldiers and they start firing their arms outside. The father of the family realizes that their younger daughter is not among them. He quickly calls her to come close to the door and calms her down through the opposite side. The little girl spends all night away from her family blocked by the locked door, which is opened once again in the morning. This shows how the soldiers have no pity over the lives of anyone, not even children, that they see as the “other”. Both the Palestinians and Israelis have fought for many decades and until there is a solution it will continue to destroy lives. Both are angry at each other, both see the other as wrong, and both want the other out. This constant battle over land has created what Said calls clash of civilizations between people that live closely together in a single nation.
A more current clash of civilizations occurred after the events of September 11 which developed a barrier between the people of the United States and the Middle East. After the terrorist attacks, the United States told its people that men of Middle Eastern origin had been responsible for such gruesome acts against innocent people. After that day feelings towards all people of the Middle East changed. People became skeptical and to a point perhaps paranoid in the presence of the “other”. The government has a close watch over what people of those countries of origin are doing and make sure that any mysterious actions are investigated. As a form of national security people saw this as best but it took it to greater levels that could be linked to discrimination. After 9/11 people of Middle Eastern descent were discriminated against and stereotyped in all forms. Some people that encountered them keep a watchful eye and report any suspicious actions. Some are falsely accused and sentenced without having any evidence.
A good film that represents this clash between people in the United States is titled American East. This film follows an Egyptian family through the daily struggled while living in L.A. The protagonist named Mustafa looses his son in an airport and begins calling his name, which is Mohammed. This creates chaos and makes him a suspect by the FBI. He is brought it for an interrogation after many Muslim items were found in his car. Once they ask him why he has each thing he is allowed to leave. Days later the FBI takes him in again after doing a background check on everything Mustafa does. It was found that he sends a high amount of money to Egypt which he is forced to explain or it will be taken as helping fund the terrorists. Once he clarifies that it is to buy the land of his father back, he is released and his frozen funds can once again be accessed. This shows the incredible paranoia that exists in the United States and also shows how the United States invades a person’s privacy in order find out everything they do. By doing this, the basis of this country which protects the rights of people has become one that no one follows anymore.
The basis of this clash of civilizations involves not understanding those viewed as the other. For example, the United States through the news and popular media depict the people of the Middle East. This alters the view of the people and further creates a barrier among people. TV culture in the United States has placed people of Middle Eastern descent as the barbaric terrorists who are just looking for a chance to kill innocent people. Things are taken farther in proportion and have developed stereotypes that have make people skeptical and feel “unsafe” around the other. The clash of civilizations discussed are conflicts that may be resolved if an understanding of the other can take place. This can be hard, especially when dealing with the Arab-Israeli conflict, due to the irreversible actions already taken. Both groups have developed a vision of the other as the enemy and this feeling is passed down to future generations. It is a hard issue to resolve since both want the same thing and will not back down from getting it. This issue is a clash of civilizations within a single nation among people who view themselves as so different that it is hard to coexist. Edward Said is correct when he says that there is a barrier between East and West. The clash, with evidence of the news and other popular media, does resonate. But it is also seen that clashes can be within a single area or miles apart. This is especially seen between the U.S. and the Middle East. The United States has its own vision of the East and the people of the East also have a view of the U.S. as a dominating tyrant nation. Stereotypes are everywhere and amongst all people but the clash of civilization took it to the next level. Stereotypes have become one that could affect a person’s life significantly and cause great divisions among people.
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Week 14- Private
The film titled Private, in my oppinion, was one of the most conmovating films we have seen in this class. The setting is in a quiet section of Palestine where a family lives out its normal life. The family is formed by two parents and their five children of varying ages. One night Isreali soldiers come into their home and lock the family into a single room. An Israeli soldier tells the father that their house has been confiscated by the Israeli army to be used as an observation post. The soldiers place rules that the family must obbey or risk death. The house is divided the second floor is off limits to the family as it belongs to the soldiers and the first floor is the only place the family can reside in. All of the belongging from the bedrooms are off limits and the family only has a few clothing the father was allowed to obtain for each family member. The children continue to go through their lives including going to school and the father (Mohammed) continues to work. The one who is mostly exposed to the dangers of the soldiers is the mother (Samia) who is a housewife hence remains alone at home. When her friend does arrive she is interrogated by an Israeli soldier and told to leave and never come back to the house. When Samia tries to explain for her friend she is abruptly told to be quiet.
The most moving scene, for me personally, was the scene where the family was locked into a room due to a cross-fire by the soldiers. Mohammed realized that his youngers dughter is not with them but at the other side of the door. He stays next to the door conforting her until the doors open again in the morning. The child is traumatized by this event but when given a choice to stay home with her mother, she refuses and goes to school. This shows how she will do anything but stay home. Through the film the family becomes divided as Mohammed wants to stay in "his home" rather than leave while Samia fears for the life of her children and thinks its better is they leave. This film further displays the cruelty and manipulation of the Israeli soldiers on innocent Palestian families. After watching this, is it surprising that there is a clash of civilizations??
The most moving scene, for me personally, was the scene where the family was locked into a room due to a cross-fire by the soldiers. Mohammed realized that his youngers dughter is not with them but at the other side of the door. He stays next to the door conforting her until the doors open again in the morning. The child is traumatized by this event but when given a choice to stay home with her mother, she refuses and goes to school. This shows how she will do anything but stay home. Through the film the family becomes divided as Mohammed wants to stay in "his home" rather than leave while Samia fears for the life of her children and thinks its better is they leave. This film further displays the cruelty and manipulation of the Israeli soldiers on innocent Palestian families. After watching this, is it surprising that there is a clash of civilizations??
Week 13- The Color of Olives
The Color of Olives shows the life of the Amer family who once lived in the Masha village in Palestine, which is the last village at end of phase A. The lands around the family's home was obtained by Israel and made part of their expanding collection of Palestinian land. The family for generations has cultivated many products and spent all of their effort on the lands they owned. Today, after Israels' entry, life is different. The family is restricted to go anywhere they want. If they want to do something outside the home, like working on their lands, they must wait on the soldiers to open gates. When they are able to travel out of their homes, a short journey to the lands prior to the invasion, now takes more time due to the various checkpoints set up by soldiers. At the checkpoints they have to show identification, explain where they are going, and answer any other questions since failure to do so may not allow them to pass.
The film provided pictures of the lands before the entry of soldiers and it displayed a sort of paradise full of vegetation. Now the lands do produce still but the lands are not as they were before. Also, structures such as the chicken coop were destroyed and the remains are still at the site. This film provided a insight of how oppressed living in such conditions can be for a family but it also shows how despite adversity the family still stands firm.
The film provided pictures of the lands before the entry of soldiers and it displayed a sort of paradise full of vegetation. Now the lands do produce still but the lands are not as they were before. Also, structures such as the chicken coop were destroyed and the remains are still at the site. This film provided a insight of how oppressed living in such conditions can be for a family but it also shows how despite adversity the family still stands firm.
Week 12- Orientalism and Occidentalism Now
The film Al-irhab wal kabab or "terrorism and bbq" provides a inside view of how people Egypt view terrorism. This film is a comedy which is great at exaggerating stereotypes that people have amongst themselves. The protagonist is named Ahmed and is postrayed as a hard working man who is trying to keep his family in the middle class. It was funny to watch stereotypes such as the typical unpleasable loud wife who happens to be under a "dozen" comforters being included in this film. The great struggle in govenrment buildings is also included in this film when
Ahmed is forced to take a day off in order to arrange with school officials for his children attend a school nearer his home. Once in the building it is so crowded that he misses the office he needs a couple of times until he reaches it. Once he does, the person in charge is not in. Instead a man praying at all hours of day is there along with a very loud secretary. Since he is not able to get it done he takes off another day from work. When he is not able to get help again he starts a simple argument that places him as a terrorist without him realizing it. Eventually he walks out along with the captives due to the relationship he had developed with them. I found it very interesting how the women are portrayed in this film. The western world view of women as inferior and oppressed is clearly challenged in this film. Starting with Ahmed's wife who is a strong standing character the view of women is shown differently. Women put fear in men and are very effective in getting their way as it was seen in the woman who's boy went in the building. This film was very funny and a kind of film that gives us an idea of how the "other" sees themselves.
Ahmed is forced to take a day off in order to arrange with school officials for his children attend a school nearer his home. Once in the building it is so crowded that he misses the office he needs a couple of times until he reaches it. Once he does, the person in charge is not in. Instead a man praying at all hours of day is there along with a very loud secretary. Since he is not able to get it done he takes off another day from work. When he is not able to get help again he starts a simple argument that places him as a terrorist without him realizing it. Eventually he walks out along with the captives due to the relationship he had developed with them. I found it very interesting how the women are portrayed in this film. The western world view of women as inferior and oppressed is clearly challenged in this film. Starting with Ahmed's wife who is a strong standing character the view of women is shown differently. Women put fear in men and are very effective in getting their way as it was seen in the woman who's boy went in the building. This film was very funny and a kind of film that gives us an idea of how the "other" sees themselves.
Week 10- Terrorism, Fundamentalism and Crusaders and Conspiracy Theories
The film we watched today was about a man that interviewed different people asking them the same question: what is terrorism?
This film gave us an idea of how differently people define terrorism but also how it is linked with stereotypes. The filmaker travels to the Middle East, to Europe and the United States noting what the common person, intellectuals, and government position holders have to say on the matter. In the film there is a long clip of definitions on terrorism by government officials. Each one has a different definition, some linking it to fear placed on people and others take it to the extent of innocent people being killed. It was specially interesting to see the definitions of nations that we do not focus on in this class. The speaker from Spain goes on about how it places fear in people and how that is the intension. It was also interesting listening to the different definitions by Israel and Palestine since they continously are involved in what each calls "acts of terrorism".
Personally I found it interesting what the common person had to say about terrorism. In some places it was clear that the people, when defining terrorism, insinuated people of the Middle East. One woman stated that she is fearful and does not understand why "they" would do such thing. In the minds of most people, especially in the U.S. due to September 11, the word "they" is linked directly to a group of people. What gets me upset is that most people do not know much of the history nor current events of situations. I think most base it on a news article title or quick news coverage that they encounter and after which they assume they know enough to make a judgement.
This film gave us an idea of how differently people define terrorism but also how it is linked with stereotypes. The filmaker travels to the Middle East, to Europe and the United States noting what the common person, intellectuals, and government position holders have to say on the matter. In the film there is a long clip of definitions on terrorism by government officials. Each one has a different definition, some linking it to fear placed on people and others take it to the extent of innocent people being killed. It was specially interesting to see the definitions of nations that we do not focus on in this class. The speaker from Spain goes on about how it places fear in people and how that is the intension. It was also interesting listening to the different definitions by Israel and Palestine since they continously are involved in what each calls "acts of terrorism".
Personally I found it interesting what the common person had to say about terrorism. In some places it was clear that the people, when defining terrorism, insinuated people of the Middle East. One woman stated that she is fearful and does not understand why "they" would do such thing. In the minds of most people, especially in the U.S. due to September 11, the word "they" is linked directly to a group of people. What gets me upset is that most people do not know much of the history nor current events of situations. I think most base it on a news article title or quick news coverage that they encounter and after which they assume they know enough to make a judgement.
Week 9- Occidentalism
We further explored the conspiracy theories in the United States and the manipulation of the people by those in higher positions of government. The film Hijacking Catastrophy helped provide the glimpse of the other side of current events. The film begins with a quote.
"All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the counntry to danger- it works the same in any country."~ Nazi Reich Marshall Hermann Goering at War Trials.
This is a good introduction to the motif of this film but it is fighting to see a comparison of the U.S. today with the German Nazi regime. Germany under the Nazi regime was the perfect example of manipulation by the government, or in this case a single leader. People supported the idea of superiority of the race and helped in the actions taken against the Jews. No one said anything as most supported what was happening or were scared of the consequences for defying the government. Many innocent lives were killed during the reign of this regime which was kept alive by the people convinced it was the right way of things.
The United States, in this film, is portrayed as a manipulating nation especially after the events of September 11. With the support of the people the U.S. took the opportunity to pass laws that would have never been supported previously. The feeling of loss of the people was taken advantage of to allow U.S. forceful interactions with other nations. the media also had a big role in maintaining the people cnvinced that what is being done is backed up by evidence. Using this tactic the war on Iraq was declared, Saddam Hussein was captured and executed, and the U.S. was able to brin gits influence into other nations. This film proves evidence through out and makes the audience question if this is the real intention of the nation we hold highly of for its "land of the free".
"All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the counntry to danger- it works the same in any country."~ Nazi Reich Marshall Hermann Goering at War Trials.
This is a good introduction to the motif of this film but it is fighting to see a comparison of the U.S. today with the German Nazi regime. Germany under the Nazi regime was the perfect example of manipulation by the government, or in this case a single leader. People supported the idea of superiority of the race and helped in the actions taken against the Jews. No one said anything as most supported what was happening or were scared of the consequences for defying the government. Many innocent lives were killed during the reign of this regime which was kept alive by the people convinced it was the right way of things.
The United States, in this film, is portrayed as a manipulating nation especially after the events of September 11. With the support of the people the U.S. took the opportunity to pass laws that would have never been supported previously. The feeling of loss of the people was taken advantage of to allow U.S. forceful interactions with other nations. the media also had a big role in maintaining the people cnvinced that what is being done is backed up by evidence. Using this tactic the war on Iraq was declared, Saddam Hussein was captured and executed, and the U.S. was able to brin gits influence into other nations. This film proves evidence through out and makes the audience question if this is the real intention of the nation we hold highly of for its "land of the free".
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Paper 3- Comparing news reports
Karen Molina
Dr. Metcalf
Orientalism and Occidentalism
Spring 2009
Due: April 9, 2009
Comparing News Reports
News broadcast along with other forms of media have facilitated the connection or communication between the nations of the world. Although the focus is the nation’s issues, international concerns and incident discussions are also available to everyone. There are numerous news groups and journalists that provide their version of an incident, which sometimes lead to a confusion of what is really true. The ways in which the news is written also depends on the views of the news corporation and the people who run it. In the present time the Israeli- Palestinian conflict has been a major focus in the world and has been a perfect example of the difference in news reports.
In November 2008 a blockade of the Palestinian Gaza strip by Israeli forces terrified the world, as trapped civilians suffered cruel conditions. News coverage through newspapers and television gave the people of the United States, among other countries, coverage of casualties as well as the progress of cease-fire. One of the most controversial events during the Israeli invasion was the attack on United Nations schools located in the Palestinian Gaza territory. These schools served as refugee shelters for a number of desperate Palestinians looking for refuge from the constant attacks on civilians. This event shocked the world and was a center of interest due to it being a U.N. school. Although it was one event, the news articles on the same incident were quite differently presented.
An article of the Arab News on the incident taking place Tuesday January 7, 2009, was presented quite differently than that of the New York Times. The first difference can be noted in the title of the articles. In the Arab Times the title of the article is “Massacre at refugee shelter” and was written by Hisham Abu Taha. The article, discussing the same incident, in the New York Times is titled “Israeli Shells Kill 40 at Gaza U.N. School” and was written by Taghreed El-Khodary and Isabel Kershner. At first glance the titles of the articles give a different perspective on the incident. The word “massacre” is used to describe the incident through a Middle Eastern perspective and is a strong word to emphasize the casualties that occurred. Other important words used were “refugee shelter” which was the exact purpose of the U.N. school. The New York Times, compared to the Middle East, uses less descriptive language to headline the incident. The title does not mention it was a massacre of a refugee shelter but rather describes the incident with a basic overview of whom and what was involved. The “who” is Israel, the “what” is a U.N. school, and instead of a massacre it is mentioned that 40 people were killed.
In further reading the article by the Arab Times it is clear that it provides an Arab interpretation of the incident, while the New York Times mainly focuses on Israel’s actions. Taha mentions that 43 people were killed and dozens were wounded in the incident compared to the 40 stated by El-Khodary. This shows the inaccuracy of the information but leaves someone wondering and questioning the right number of casualties. The New York Times fails to name the school in which such casualties occurred, while the Arab News gives the name Al-Fakhora School. The name of the school, although foreign to those not from the area, is important information that gives the institution its identity. In this article, it seems as the focus is on the actions of Israel rather than the school and the civilians within. In the opening paragraph, the New York Times mentions that the motif of the attack was that Israel believes that Hamas fighters had fired from the school. Arab News does not mention such thing but does say that the “United Nations regularly gave the Israeli army exact geographical coordinates of its facilities” to keep them safe as they served as refugees, which is missing in the other article. Such information further leaves a person uncertain of the real situation and cause of the attack.
A favorable attitude towards Israel is present in the New York Times article and remains as such through out the news. Perhaps it is due to the alliance between Israel and the United States as well as the post 9/11 view of the Arab nations. An example of such preference in the article is the mention of the Prime Minister of Israel and his planned visit to Egypt to discuss cease fire. This is clearly off the topic but is described after the opening paragraph. At this section of the article more about the incident should have been mentioned rather than what was included. An inappropriate statement by El-Khodary was about a rocket that was launched by Hamas and is said to have wounded an infant. This information has no reason to be mentioned as Palestinian casualties specifically those of numerous innocent children, were not included. An infant wounded is awful but if that is to be mentioned, for what reason is the death by gun shot of many innocent children not mentioned as well. The article also includes the Israeli view of Hamas as callous towards the lives of the Palestinian civilians. This should not be a subjective news article about Hamas but should have the role of informing of the incident. After a long introduction to an Israeli point of view, the article by El-Khodary ends with a short casualty report, actions taken by the Palestinian president, another school incident, and a few words of rage by a U.N. relief member. Despite their mention, the information was shorter and less descriptive than the beginning of the article.
The Arab News provides a closer look into the incident and continues to look at other forms of aid to the Palestinian people. The allegations that the coordinates were given to Israel, if true, clearly shows Israel as the worst, deceiving, and heartless enemy. This article clearly argues that the location of the refugees was known and targeting it showed no mercy for the refugees. It is also revealed that when reporters asked the Israeli Foreign Minister about the deaths, she was “not familiar” with such occurrence. In the article ambulance and medic targeting is also discussed as they not being able to help injured people since they are shot by assault helicopters. Like the article by the New York Times this information goes of the main topic of the incident but links it since it deals with the impediment of humanitarian aid.
A final and important aspect of both news articles is the photograph included at the top of each article. The New York Times included a picture of a young wounded Palestinian being carried by others. This photograph demonstrates the chaos and anger seen in the faces of the people present the day of the incident. The Arab News presents a more graphic and heartbreaking image of the casualties, but it is not one taken of the incident discussed. Instead a picture of a man trying to pull out the body of a child out of the rubble is shown. The use of a child in such condition could be used to capture the cruel reality of the blockage but can be seen as being too dramatic with the purpose of obtaining increased pity from the people. The use of imaging is important and different depending on the message being transmitted by the article.
The bombing of the Al-Fakhora School in Jabaliya on the 11th day of the war on Gaza demonstrated the extent of Israel’s invasion. Refugees sought shelter but they soon realized that there is not safe place. The news of the incident spread through out the world, but different views developed due to the way it was presented to the public. As a person reading the article by the New York Times, more knowledge is received about the actions being taken by Israel. On the other hand, a person reading the article by the Arab News is informed of the lack of respect by Israel towards humanitarian groups in Gaza during the blockage. Both articles mention the school bombing, but the information included varies depending on the newspaper. This creates a problem as people are oriented and manipulated by what they read, which may not be the entire truth.
Dr. Metcalf
Orientalism and Occidentalism
Spring 2009
Due: April 9, 2009
Comparing News Reports
News broadcast along with other forms of media have facilitated the connection or communication between the nations of the world. Although the focus is the nation’s issues, international concerns and incident discussions are also available to everyone. There are numerous news groups and journalists that provide their version of an incident, which sometimes lead to a confusion of what is really true. The ways in which the news is written also depends on the views of the news corporation and the people who run it. In the present time the Israeli- Palestinian conflict has been a major focus in the world and has been a perfect example of the difference in news reports.
In November 2008 a blockade of the Palestinian Gaza strip by Israeli forces terrified the world, as trapped civilians suffered cruel conditions. News coverage through newspapers and television gave the people of the United States, among other countries, coverage of casualties as well as the progress of cease-fire. One of the most controversial events during the Israeli invasion was the attack on United Nations schools located in the Palestinian Gaza territory. These schools served as refugee shelters for a number of desperate Palestinians looking for refuge from the constant attacks on civilians. This event shocked the world and was a center of interest due to it being a U.N. school. Although it was one event, the news articles on the same incident were quite differently presented.
An article of the Arab News on the incident taking place Tuesday January 7, 2009, was presented quite differently than that of the New York Times. The first difference can be noted in the title of the articles. In the Arab Times the title of the article is “Massacre at refugee shelter” and was written by Hisham Abu Taha. The article, discussing the same incident, in the New York Times is titled “Israeli Shells Kill 40 at Gaza U.N. School” and was written by Taghreed El-Khodary and Isabel Kershner. At first glance the titles of the articles give a different perspective on the incident. The word “massacre” is used to describe the incident through a Middle Eastern perspective and is a strong word to emphasize the casualties that occurred. Other important words used were “refugee shelter” which was the exact purpose of the U.N. school. The New York Times, compared to the Middle East, uses less descriptive language to headline the incident. The title does not mention it was a massacre of a refugee shelter but rather describes the incident with a basic overview of whom and what was involved. The “who” is Israel, the “what” is a U.N. school, and instead of a massacre it is mentioned that 40 people were killed.
In further reading the article by the Arab Times it is clear that it provides an Arab interpretation of the incident, while the New York Times mainly focuses on Israel’s actions. Taha mentions that 43 people were killed and dozens were wounded in the incident compared to the 40 stated by El-Khodary. This shows the inaccuracy of the information but leaves someone wondering and questioning the right number of casualties. The New York Times fails to name the school in which such casualties occurred, while the Arab News gives the name Al-Fakhora School. The name of the school, although foreign to those not from the area, is important information that gives the institution its identity. In this article, it seems as the focus is on the actions of Israel rather than the school and the civilians within. In the opening paragraph, the New York Times mentions that the motif of the attack was that Israel believes that Hamas fighters had fired from the school. Arab News does not mention such thing but does say that the “United Nations regularly gave the Israeli army exact geographical coordinates of its facilities” to keep them safe as they served as refugees, which is missing in the other article. Such information further leaves a person uncertain of the real situation and cause of the attack.
A favorable attitude towards Israel is present in the New York Times article and remains as such through out the news. Perhaps it is due to the alliance between Israel and the United States as well as the post 9/11 view of the Arab nations. An example of such preference in the article is the mention of the Prime Minister of Israel and his planned visit to Egypt to discuss cease fire. This is clearly off the topic but is described after the opening paragraph. At this section of the article more about the incident should have been mentioned rather than what was included. An inappropriate statement by El-Khodary was about a rocket that was launched by Hamas and is said to have wounded an infant. This information has no reason to be mentioned as Palestinian casualties specifically those of numerous innocent children, were not included. An infant wounded is awful but if that is to be mentioned, for what reason is the death by gun shot of many innocent children not mentioned as well. The article also includes the Israeli view of Hamas as callous towards the lives of the Palestinian civilians. This should not be a subjective news article about Hamas but should have the role of informing of the incident. After a long introduction to an Israeli point of view, the article by El-Khodary ends with a short casualty report, actions taken by the Palestinian president, another school incident, and a few words of rage by a U.N. relief member. Despite their mention, the information was shorter and less descriptive than the beginning of the article.
The Arab News provides a closer look into the incident and continues to look at other forms of aid to the Palestinian people. The allegations that the coordinates were given to Israel, if true, clearly shows Israel as the worst, deceiving, and heartless enemy. This article clearly argues that the location of the refugees was known and targeting it showed no mercy for the refugees. It is also revealed that when reporters asked the Israeli Foreign Minister about the deaths, she was “not familiar” with such occurrence. In the article ambulance and medic targeting is also discussed as they not being able to help injured people since they are shot by assault helicopters. Like the article by the New York Times this information goes of the main topic of the incident but links it since it deals with the impediment of humanitarian aid.
A final and important aspect of both news articles is the photograph included at the top of each article. The New York Times included a picture of a young wounded Palestinian being carried by others. This photograph demonstrates the chaos and anger seen in the faces of the people present the day of the incident. The Arab News presents a more graphic and heartbreaking image of the casualties, but it is not one taken of the incident discussed. Instead a picture of a man trying to pull out the body of a child out of the rubble is shown. The use of a child in such condition could be used to capture the cruel reality of the blockage but can be seen as being too dramatic with the purpose of obtaining increased pity from the people. The use of imaging is important and different depending on the message being transmitted by the article.
The bombing of the Al-Fakhora School in Jabaliya on the 11th day of the war on Gaza demonstrated the extent of Israel’s invasion. Refugees sought shelter but they soon realized that there is not safe place. The news of the incident spread through out the world, but different views developed due to the way it was presented to the public. As a person reading the article by the New York Times, more knowledge is received about the actions being taken by Israel. On the other hand, a person reading the article by the Arab News is informed of the lack of respect by Israel towards humanitarian groups in Gaza during the blockage. Both articles mention the school bombing, but the information included varies depending on the newspaper. This creates a problem as people are oriented and manipulated by what they read, which may not be the entire truth.
Week 8- Views of the self or views of how others view us
The film "Loose Change" brings about new ideas of what really happened on 9/11 that seems almost wrong to think about as Americans. Personally I have never heard such ideas or questioned what happened on that day. This film speaks of planned demolition and framing of people, quite outragious and something seen in movies. The idea that the World Trade Center collapse was due to explosions within the building and not for the reason we are given was very scary. Many people died through the collapse of the towers and to think that their deaths were planned is hard to grasp. How can a government allow such actions to take place if it is true? When the film first mentions the idea I did not believe it but as the sound of explosions where pointed out in videos of the day, I began to give the idea some thought.
The part of the film that really captured my attention was when evidence from the terrorists such as a bandana, passports, and drivers license that were found in various sites. It is interesting how such things survive a crash, fire, or building collapse and still remain intact. Due to this discovery it is not hard to not believe in framing since the FBI used such documents to determine those responsible. Overall, this film was very scary and creates doubt about the government.
The part of the film that really captured my attention was when evidence from the terrorists such as a bandana, passports, and drivers license that were found in various sites. It is interesting how such things survive a crash, fire, or building collapse and still remain intact. Due to this discovery it is not hard to not believe in framing since the FBI used such documents to determine those responsible. Overall, this film was very scary and creates doubt about the government.
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Paper 2: Film Analysis
Karen Molina
Spring 2009
Orientalism and Occidentalism
Due: March 19, 2009
Film Analysis: The Kingdom
For many years people of Middle Eastern decent have been depicted as villains in various Hollywood films. Events of terrorism and wars occurring in the Middle East have been used as the worst case scenario in the eyes of the average American citizen. These scenarios have developed discriminating stereotypes that have offended many people. An example of a film that not only causes fear, but portrays the villainous characteristics of Arabs is The Kingdom. This film, directed by Peter Berg, is based on the bombings that took place in 1996 and 2003 in American housing compounds in the kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
The film opens with an overview of the relations between Saudi Arabia and the United States. These include the oil drilling that created problems due to the competition for ownership and the 9/11 involvement of Saudi Arabian terrorists. This beginning provides a brief concept of complicated and extensive issues that make Saudi Arabia seem like a dangerous place for Americans. For a viewer that has no historical and current knowledge of issues in the Middle East, this country seems full of terror, corruption, and mystery due to the different culture.
After the opening summary, which is brief and vague, American citizens in their oil company’s housing compound appear playing softball peacefully. In no time two terrorists kill and take the place of the Saudi State police in order to enter the compound to kill American civilians. These terrorists begin shooting through the housing complex, even killing a small child riding a tricycle on the sidewalk, until they are finally killed by a Saudi police officer. Another Saudi, which appears to be helpful in evacuating the people in the playing field, is in fact a suicide bomber that kills many more civilians. Before he pulls the trigger he says the prayer that has been linked to terrorists through out Hollywood, “La illaha ila Allah Mohammed rasul Allah” which means “there is no God but Allah and Mohammed is the messenger”. In Hollywood, this phrase and “Allah Akbar”, which means “God is the greatest”, have been common phrases used by terrorists right before an attack or suicide mission. These phrases clearly insinuate that Islam is the religion associated with the terrorism. Religious people find this association degrading and insulting to their religion, as such acts are not part of the Muslim practice. It also gives the American audience a sense that all Muslims are violent and could pose a potential threat to their safety. Also, the fact that Saudis kill their own countrymen shows a country that is torn amongst its people and where trust is hard to find. For an American it is a horrifying scenario as is it difficult to tell who the enemy is and who is there to protect them. The Americans in the film are living in a foreign land that does not want them there, which can be seen clearly as they are isolated into compounds,
While investigating the tragedy that same night, another bomb is set off killing more civilians and investigators. Later in the movie it is found that a hijacked ambulance was the source of the bomb, which shows terrorists having no remorse and being immensely deceitful. An ambulance, which serves the purpose of saving lives, is used as the source of terror and death in the film. After the attacks, four FBI agents are sent to Saudi Arabia to investigate, but are restricted access to the crime scene by the Saudi police. Upon their arrival the FBI members are transported at a fast speed to the safe grounds and when a suspicious car neared all guns were ready to fire. As they got closer only a camel was observed, clearly showing the paranoia that the police have while traveling through the streets. The agents are given rules that include not being able to be out at night, assuming that such time is the most dangerous. The FBI agents also met with Prince Rufus in public to promote his knowledge and cooperation with the involvement of the FBI. During this meeting the female agent was covered due to her tight revealing western clothes and is prohibited from attending a dinner at his palace. This shows the inferiority of women and how traditionally closed minded the men of the country can be towards the opposite gender. For the Western world this status of women and their appearance as the veiled silent citizens of the country seems extreme.
After a short investigation and raid of amateur teenage fighters, the FBI agents are escorted to the airport. But due to the knowledge of their presence by the terrorists, they become victims themselves. One of the agents is kidnapped by the terrorists but the others are quick to follow its trace. The race ends in a highly populated civilian city where other members of the terrorist group await the arrival of the agents. An attack begins with the use of guns and bazookas that have been linked as the preferred weapons of the terrorists. It is interesting to see in the film that bazookas are kept within common households in a highly populated civilian area. For an action fanatic this scene is the ultimate edge-of-your-seat fighting scenario. But for an Arab, the killing of more Saudis by the FBI agents, who only possessed guns and were outnumbered, seems unrealistic. Critics of the film have stated that it gives a sense of FBI worship like in other films where the few or even single American can defeat a whole group of highly armed villains.
The kidnapped agent is used immediately for a terrorist filmed announcement, which also portrays terrorists as eager to show the world what they have done. The kidnapped agent is rescued and the leader of the terrorist group is killed. The agents finally go home after what seems to be an accomplished mission for Americans. At the very end of the film both the Americans and Saudis end by saying “We’re going to kill them all”. This ending to the movie showed no hope for peace between Saudi Arabia and the United States. The young boy who is told this line by his dying grandfather is yet another brain washed Arab whose focused enemy is the United States. The presumption that all children born in the Middle Eastern countries are brain washed to hate and be willing to take part in terrorism is yet another false stereotype developed by the media. In the film, during the rescue mission of the kidnapped FBI agent, a young teenager is killed after shooting the Saudi police officer named Faris. This shows the willingness to die so young for a cause said to be right by the elders. The character named Faris, as the colonel of the Saudi police force works hand in hand with Agent Fleury and both men even become good friends. Both characters talk about what is right and seem to have a lot in common in their views. Colonel Faris is shown in the film as a religious man who dreams of really helping his country end the fighting and places his life in danger in order to settle things the right way. This character, who could symbolize the good and hopeful change, dies by the hand of his countrymen in the end. The film uses this as a loss of faith and to show the true danger that can occur while intervening with terrorism.
The Kingdom is a great example of the portrayal of the Middle East in the present time. Especially for Americans, after 9/11, the countries of these areas are seen as dangerous and full of people waiting for the chance to kill Americans. The presence of American civilians working with oil companies is clearly viewed as invading and those living there are not welcome in the country. Due to their presence, terrorist actions are planned and executed, which cause many casualties. The film incorporates many aspects of the Middle East that are commonly seen in the media including suicide bombers, ransom videos, weapons, women inferiority, American hatred, and killing of civilians. Such films, although based on true stories, do twist the truth and add what may seem to be the action that would be taken by a terrorist. If such films continue to flourish, the hatred and view of Arabs as villains will not decrease among Americans but in fact will grow far greater for years to come.
Spring 2009
Orientalism and Occidentalism
Due: March 19, 2009
Film Analysis: The Kingdom
For many years people of Middle Eastern decent have been depicted as villains in various Hollywood films. Events of terrorism and wars occurring in the Middle East have been used as the worst case scenario in the eyes of the average American citizen. These scenarios have developed discriminating stereotypes that have offended many people. An example of a film that not only causes fear, but portrays the villainous characteristics of Arabs is The Kingdom. This film, directed by Peter Berg, is based on the bombings that took place in 1996 and 2003 in American housing compounds in the kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
The film opens with an overview of the relations between Saudi Arabia and the United States. These include the oil drilling that created problems due to the competition for ownership and the 9/11 involvement of Saudi Arabian terrorists. This beginning provides a brief concept of complicated and extensive issues that make Saudi Arabia seem like a dangerous place for Americans. For a viewer that has no historical and current knowledge of issues in the Middle East, this country seems full of terror, corruption, and mystery due to the different culture.
After the opening summary, which is brief and vague, American citizens in their oil company’s housing compound appear playing softball peacefully. In no time two terrorists kill and take the place of the Saudi State police in order to enter the compound to kill American civilians. These terrorists begin shooting through the housing complex, even killing a small child riding a tricycle on the sidewalk, until they are finally killed by a Saudi police officer. Another Saudi, which appears to be helpful in evacuating the people in the playing field, is in fact a suicide bomber that kills many more civilians. Before he pulls the trigger he says the prayer that has been linked to terrorists through out Hollywood, “La illaha ila Allah Mohammed rasul Allah” which means “there is no God but Allah and Mohammed is the messenger”. In Hollywood, this phrase and “Allah Akbar”, which means “God is the greatest”, have been common phrases used by terrorists right before an attack or suicide mission. These phrases clearly insinuate that Islam is the religion associated with the terrorism. Religious people find this association degrading and insulting to their religion, as such acts are not part of the Muslim practice. It also gives the American audience a sense that all Muslims are violent and could pose a potential threat to their safety. Also, the fact that Saudis kill their own countrymen shows a country that is torn amongst its people and where trust is hard to find. For an American it is a horrifying scenario as is it difficult to tell who the enemy is and who is there to protect them. The Americans in the film are living in a foreign land that does not want them there, which can be seen clearly as they are isolated into compounds,
While investigating the tragedy that same night, another bomb is set off killing more civilians and investigators. Later in the movie it is found that a hijacked ambulance was the source of the bomb, which shows terrorists having no remorse and being immensely deceitful. An ambulance, which serves the purpose of saving lives, is used as the source of terror and death in the film. After the attacks, four FBI agents are sent to Saudi Arabia to investigate, but are restricted access to the crime scene by the Saudi police. Upon their arrival the FBI members are transported at a fast speed to the safe grounds and when a suspicious car neared all guns were ready to fire. As they got closer only a camel was observed, clearly showing the paranoia that the police have while traveling through the streets. The agents are given rules that include not being able to be out at night, assuming that such time is the most dangerous. The FBI agents also met with Prince Rufus in public to promote his knowledge and cooperation with the involvement of the FBI. During this meeting the female agent was covered due to her tight revealing western clothes and is prohibited from attending a dinner at his palace. This shows the inferiority of women and how traditionally closed minded the men of the country can be towards the opposite gender. For the Western world this status of women and their appearance as the veiled silent citizens of the country seems extreme.
After a short investigation and raid of amateur teenage fighters, the FBI agents are escorted to the airport. But due to the knowledge of their presence by the terrorists, they become victims themselves. One of the agents is kidnapped by the terrorists but the others are quick to follow its trace. The race ends in a highly populated civilian city where other members of the terrorist group await the arrival of the agents. An attack begins with the use of guns and bazookas that have been linked as the preferred weapons of the terrorists. It is interesting to see in the film that bazookas are kept within common households in a highly populated civilian area. For an action fanatic this scene is the ultimate edge-of-your-seat fighting scenario. But for an Arab, the killing of more Saudis by the FBI agents, who only possessed guns and were outnumbered, seems unrealistic. Critics of the film have stated that it gives a sense of FBI worship like in other films where the few or even single American can defeat a whole group of highly armed villains.
The kidnapped agent is used immediately for a terrorist filmed announcement, which also portrays terrorists as eager to show the world what they have done. The kidnapped agent is rescued and the leader of the terrorist group is killed. The agents finally go home after what seems to be an accomplished mission for Americans. At the very end of the film both the Americans and Saudis end by saying “We’re going to kill them all”. This ending to the movie showed no hope for peace between Saudi Arabia and the United States. The young boy who is told this line by his dying grandfather is yet another brain washed Arab whose focused enemy is the United States. The presumption that all children born in the Middle Eastern countries are brain washed to hate and be willing to take part in terrorism is yet another false stereotype developed by the media. In the film, during the rescue mission of the kidnapped FBI agent, a young teenager is killed after shooting the Saudi police officer named Faris. This shows the willingness to die so young for a cause said to be right by the elders. The character named Faris, as the colonel of the Saudi police force works hand in hand with Agent Fleury and both men even become good friends. Both characters talk about what is right and seem to have a lot in common in their views. Colonel Faris is shown in the film as a religious man who dreams of really helping his country end the fighting and places his life in danger in order to settle things the right way. This character, who could symbolize the good and hopeful change, dies by the hand of his countrymen in the end. The film uses this as a loss of faith and to show the true danger that can occur while intervening with terrorism.
The Kingdom is a great example of the portrayal of the Middle East in the present time. Especially for Americans, after 9/11, the countries of these areas are seen as dangerous and full of people waiting for the chance to kill Americans. The presence of American civilians working with oil companies is clearly viewed as invading and those living there are not welcome in the country. Due to their presence, terrorist actions are planned and executed, which cause many casualties. The film incorporates many aspects of the Middle East that are commonly seen in the media including suicide bombers, ransom videos, weapons, women inferiority, American hatred, and killing of civilians. Such films, although based on true stories, do twist the truth and add what may seem to be the action that would be taken by a terrorist. If such films continue to flourish, the hatred and view of Arabs as villains will not decrease among Americans but in fact will grow far greater for years to come.
Week 7- Views of the Self
The way that someone views himself in the society they live in is very important in the progress of everyday life. One cannot live in peace without being confident in the place where you are living. Upon watching the YouTube clip named Terror TV, which deals with a television show in Iraq that has the sole purpose of humiliating criminals, I got mixed feelings. This show is said to be funded by American money and as media separate from the government. But after watching it, maybe it is funded by the government (which is backed by the US) to show people how terrorists are handled. Public humiliation can be devastating for a person and deprives the people from their rights. Although they are criminals should they be exposed to everyone? Why publicly humiliate men if there is no message behind it? Personally I think that yes its a way to show how effectively the removal of terrorists is progressing, but it could be a way to cause fear among the people. Some of the men in the film could not be a criminal but someone set up by the show. Who really knows?
Minorities in the U.S. commonly share the same struggle to find their place in this nation. After the attacks on September 11, which were said to be done by Arabs, made the way of life for Middle Eastern people even harder. This film titled AmericanEast gives an interesting story about a middle class Egyptian family in the U.S. The family is constantly struggling in the a society that constantly criticises due to their nationality. In this film we can see many conflicts with one self. In the beginning, the young son named Mohammed is not satisfied with who he is. Everything about him including his religion and name bother him due to the actions of society. He constantly asks his father why he was named Mohammed and later on in the film he rejects prayer while in a mosque. As a young man in the U.S. he is confused and rather scared of his association to the Middle East. It is sad to see how society makes someone hide or even deny their nationality and religion. This is the case for many people who find it easier to hide their nationality to other so they are not subjected to rejection or nasty comments.
The character that I felt most sorry for was the character named Omar, who was an aspiring actor in Los Angeles. He was very talented but was always casted as a suicide bomber or a terrorist. Due to his nationality he was never given a chance to participate in a good role that did not involve stereotypes. He is even arrested after a few teenagers aggravated him by saying to move his book bag which he later said had a bomb just to agree with them. Due to his detainment he missed a very important casting call. Desperate and truly shattered, Omar decided to take hostage people running a film set which he is supposed to once again be a terrorist. He is killed without compromise. This film brought about many issues including detainment in an airport for speaking Arabic, investigation of transactions to home country, arranged marriage, and others that families go through everyday.
Minorities in the U.S. commonly share the same struggle to find their place in this nation. After the attacks on September 11, which were said to be done by Arabs, made the way of life for Middle Eastern people even harder. This film titled AmericanEast gives an interesting story about a middle class Egyptian family in the U.S. The family is constantly struggling in the a society that constantly criticises due to their nationality. In this film we can see many conflicts with one self. In the beginning, the young son named Mohammed is not satisfied with who he is. Everything about him including his religion and name bother him due to the actions of society. He constantly asks his father why he was named Mohammed and later on in the film he rejects prayer while in a mosque. As a young man in the U.S. he is confused and rather scared of his association to the Middle East. It is sad to see how society makes someone hide or even deny their nationality and religion. This is the case for many people who find it easier to hide their nationality to other so they are not subjected to rejection or nasty comments.
The character that I felt most sorry for was the character named Omar, who was an aspiring actor in Los Angeles. He was very talented but was always casted as a suicide bomber or a terrorist. Due to his nationality he was never given a chance to participate in a good role that did not involve stereotypes. He is even arrested after a few teenagers aggravated him by saying to move his book bag which he later said had a bomb just to agree with them. Due to his detainment he missed a very important casting call. Desperate and truly shattered, Omar decided to take hostage people running a film set which he is supposed to once again be a terrorist. He is killed without compromise. This film brought about many issues including detainment in an airport for speaking Arabic, investigation of transactions to home country, arranged marriage, and others that families go through everyday.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Week 6- Aladdin
I did not attend this class but I have been told that we watched Aladdin in class. This classic Disney movie has brought me to think in a different way about what messages it transmits. The first times I saw this film I was very young and only amuzed by the characters without really realizing what was going on. As I got older I realized that it actually held many stereotypes about the characters and setting that was transmitted even through the music. Emerging as a classic Middle Eastern Folk tale, it originally had genies, hidden treasures, and magic. Disney took the oportunity to add to the magically mysterious setting that Aladdin is said to live in.
From the beginning of the movie we see a man riding on a camel through a desert terrain. People who do not know of the different regions of the Middle East quickly think of it as having solely desert arid conditions. There are deserts of course, but that is not solely the terrain. But of course through the media, the desert is linked to the Middle East. The opening song that was in the first soundtrack release of the film was changed due to critizism. The lyric "'Where they cut off your ear if they don't like your face/It's barbaric, but, hey, it's home," received protests from the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC). This caused the 1993 video release to change the lyric to "Where it's flat and immense and the heat is intense/It's barbaric, but, hey, it's home." This shows how cruel the Middle Eastern society is portrayed by others without thinking that the people its referring to clearly find it offensive and false. Another instance where such barbaric lyrics are present is during the second song One Jump Ahead. Right before the song the guard says "I'll have your hands for a trophy" and during the song the guard sing "rip him open and take it back". These seem quite barbaric for the intended audience, which are young children. During the song stereotypes of the people are also present. As Aladdin is running from the guards he encounters a man laying on a nail bed, a man walking on lit charcoal, a man swallowing a sword, a snake charmer, and three young girls wearing quite revealing belly dancing like outfits. All of these clearly are stereotypes of the Middle east as having exotic people who like defiying painful actions.
Princess Jasmine is portrayed as a person who does not know of the life outside the palace. I may not know much about Princesses back then but I think they would have known something about the society they live in.... right?? She actually has to be saved by Aladdin after she gives a hungry young child an apple without paying and is threatened to loose a hand for such action. In the beginning of the movie her father is trying to marry her off as she is coming to age. Despite her seemingly tough attitude, she is ruled by men all through the film. Which is another stereotype that is quite common when dealing with the Middle East: Inferiority of Women.
From the beginning of the movie we see a man riding on a camel through a desert terrain. People who do not know of the different regions of the Middle East quickly think of it as having solely desert arid conditions. There are deserts of course, but that is not solely the terrain. But of course through the media, the desert is linked to the Middle East. The opening song that was in the first soundtrack release of the film was changed due to critizism. The lyric "'Where they cut off your ear if they don't like your face/It's barbaric, but, hey, it's home," received protests from the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC). This caused the 1993 video release to change the lyric to "Where it's flat and immense and the heat is intense/It's barbaric, but, hey, it's home." This shows how cruel the Middle Eastern society is portrayed by others without thinking that the people its referring to clearly find it offensive and false. Another instance where such barbaric lyrics are present is during the second song One Jump Ahead. Right before the song the guard says "I'll have your hands for a trophy" and during the song the guard sing "rip him open and take it back". These seem quite barbaric for the intended audience, which are young children. During the song stereotypes of the people are also present. As Aladdin is running from the guards he encounters a man laying on a nail bed, a man walking on lit charcoal, a man swallowing a sword, a snake charmer, and three young girls wearing quite revealing belly dancing like outfits. All of these clearly are stereotypes of the Middle east as having exotic people who like defiying painful actions.
Princess Jasmine is portrayed as a person who does not know of the life outside the palace. I may not know much about Princesses back then but I think they would have known something about the society they live in.... right?? She actually has to be saved by Aladdin after she gives a hungry young child an apple without paying and is threatened to loose a hand for such action. In the beginning of the movie her father is trying to marry her off as she is coming to age. Despite her seemingly tough attitude, she is ruled by men all through the film. Which is another stereotype that is quite common when dealing with the Middle East: Inferiority of Women.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Week 5- Not without my daughter
This film created such a controversy against the Middle East and created stereotypes about the area as a whole. I am amazed that sue to this film, the story of Betty is still known today and most people sympathize with her due to the current fear in the US. Before I saw this movie a couple of years ago, my mother mentioned it anytime something about the Middle East came up. Her generation, I have noticed, based what they knew about the men and women of the Middle East through movies such as this one. For some time I have been asking my mother if I could visit countries such as Lebanon and Egypt but her response is always "NO". She fears the fact that I am American and I am a woman. My friend's mother would jokingly tell her that she can go to the Middle East as long as she keeps her passport safe away from any of "THEM". Clearly both got these ideas after they watched this movie.
This film is a woman's worst nightmare but how much of it is true? As we all know this is Betty's side of the story and she did not write the book. The author that took her perspective to write a story is known to have written one before degrading Turkish men. Also, after watching a documentary about the real Mahmoody a whole new side of the story is revealed. Even Betty's friend from Iran speaks about how she did not see anything of what Betty describes. She also mentions that during the month which Betty escaped, the climate was very cold and the terrain was dangerous especially when carrying a child. The documentary also shows that during the divorce, Mahmoody had no representation and was notified of the judgement some time later on when it was too late.
Both the movie and documentary give the viewer two completely different versions that leaves one questioning what is true. But one cannot deny that the film was full of the worst stereotypes of the Middle East such as the veil, the oppression of women, the violence of men, the constant war, bombs (which in the film occur right next to Betty- what luck), checkpoints, guns, poverty, religious obsession, and many more. True or not this film adds to the dislike and the portrayal of Arab men as villains.
This film is a woman's worst nightmare but how much of it is true? As we all know this is Betty's side of the story and she did not write the book. The author that took her perspective to write a story is known to have written one before degrading Turkish men. Also, after watching a documentary about the real Mahmoody a whole new side of the story is revealed. Even Betty's friend from Iran speaks about how she did not see anything of what Betty describes. She also mentions that during the month which Betty escaped, the climate was very cold and the terrain was dangerous especially when carrying a child. The documentary also shows that during the divorce, Mahmoody had no representation and was notified of the judgement some time later on when it was too late.
Both the movie and documentary give the viewer two completely different versions that leaves one questioning what is true. But one cannot deny that the film was full of the worst stereotypes of the Middle East such as the veil, the oppression of women, the violence of men, the constant war, bombs (which in the film occur right next to Betty- what luck), checkpoints, guns, poverty, religious obsession, and many more. True or not this film adds to the dislike and the portrayal of Arab men as villains.
Monday, February 23, 2009
Orientalism Paper 1
Karen Molina
Orientalism and Occidentalism
Professor Metcalf
Spring 2009
Through out history, as Europeans explored lands beyond their borders, labeling of these new areas occurred. Among these various labels, the Orient, developed in Western Asia to describe the region. Due to imperialist nations, this word has spread to describe the people of Eastern Asia and is currently used by the Western world to describe that area. Edward Said, the author of book Orientalism, discusses this topic and argues that the term divides the East from the West. The Orient was viewed as a mysterious region where people have certain way of life that is not common to the West.
As imperial powers conquered new lands and became exposed to the cultures of the East, the difference seen while in those lands began the separation between East and West. Imperial leaders, such as Napoleon of France, used scholarly writings of the Eastern world to understand about Egypt before conquering it. Having an understanding of the land prior entering it, served as an advantage to the military tactic while invading. The information he acquired, as most who wanted to learn about the East, was through a Western perspective. The question about whether or not the information was valid and a first hand account was skeptical. For example, Zachary Lockman states in his book that “the French saw themselves as bringing science and civilization to the benighted Orient, and so a team of scholars and scientists accompanied Napoleon’s forces to Egypt.” (Lockman 2004, 71) These scholars studied the land, the culture, and lifestyle of these foreign lands which was included in their writings. It was their perspective of the land and of the people which was then read by the people of the West. This spread of information added to the division of the cultures and reinforced the term Orient.
In his book, Said argues that the term Orient(alism) was developed during the imperialism era and was used to describe what the invading foreigners encountered in the East. He used the term Orientalism to describe a tradition, which was developed both through scholarly writings and artistic creations. These means of representation developed hostile and inferior views of the East by the West that have shaped our views in the present day. (Said 1978, 42) Said, also argues that this prejudice comes from and was developed by the West. Due to the differences a sense of inferiority towards the East has progressed over the centuries and can be seen in the stereotypes that we have today of the people of the East. If the term Orient did not exist, then perhaps the link between the East and West would not be what it is today.
To understand the beginning of the term Orient, the time when knowledge of the region spread must be examined. The Oriental renaissance described by Lockman is said to have begun in the 19th century due to imperialistic expansion and secured political dominion of various regions of the Orient. Prior to the 19th century, only a few scholars had been familiar with the history, cultures, and religions of the Orient, but due to the contact with the east this changed. Many scholars began incorporating aspects of the Orient into their writings, paintings, and knowledge by learning the different languages. An example is the German poet, Wolfgang von Goethe, who produced work that dealt mostly on Muslim imagery and themes. (Lockman 2004, 68-70) Lockman describes this time frame as an obsession of scholars with the Orient. Due to the different lifestyles and the unique qualities not seen in the west made the Orient a mysterious subject. It is human nature, especially as a scholar, to want to know about something that is not common in the norms of the society they live in.
The incorporation of the Orient in scholarly works led to increased knowledge of the region but also reinforced the stereotypes of Islamic society that had developed in previous years. When thinking of the East, the most controversial region, especially in our time is the Middle East. Since the encounter with this region stereotypes flourished due to the different lifestyle and religion. Examples include the view of Muslim men as “violent, lusty and sexually perverse” and women as “oppressed, subjugated, little more than slaves, constantly available for the erotic gratification of oversexed men.” (Lockman 2004, 69-70) These are from a Western view, without taking into account that the people who live by these norms do not have the same opinion. The West compares cultures and gives none a chance at being a normal lifestyle.
When thinking of the Middle East, one has to mention the obsession with and determination to understand the harem system that occurred within upper class society. The harem, according to Lockman, was a common fascination to many artists who assembled offensive paintings without any first hand contact with one. The mystery, the polygamous action within, and the seclusion of the harem made it a topic that was portrayed through imagination. Paintings of harems include Odalisque with a Slave by J.A.D. Ingres 1839-1840 and The Hhareem by John Frederick Lewis 1849. (Beaulieu & Roberts 2002) Ingres, in his painting, develops scenery of a slave whom is part of a harem living with wives and concubines. It is a revealing painting much like others that were developed during that time of women without clothes. No woman of high standing, who are prominent in harems, would have taken part in such act hence most painting were developed through the imagination or with the use of lower class women. Once photography emerged, a new era of Oriental exposure occurred as people could perform at the photographers request. The use of models gave photograph the life and further credibility to the harem system as well as the veiled woman.
The Colonial Harem is a collection of photographs that were printed on postcards and circulated by the French from 1900 to 1930. These photographs of Algerian women were exploited by the French and show an effect that European presence had on the women of the society. It also proves the European fascination with the harem system. These models, both covered and uncovered, were used to display a glimpse of a conservative eastern society. I find it disturbing how photographers could uncover women from a society that is strongly conservative. It also disturbs me how people could use these postcards and write to loved ones or acquaintances on them. Through these postcards the life of an Algerian woman is not only uncovered in all aspects but it is wrongfully displayed to the satisfaction of the photographer. Through these photographs the people of France saw a glimpse of what they thought was the culture of Algerian people.
The term Orientalism has developed through a vast time of history and no matter how against people may be, it has left its mark on the Western world. When describing the Eastern lands, we do not say “the East” but define it as the Orient. Created by the West and used by the West, this term left the East with no choice but to be known by it. Edward Said’s book discusses this term and how it has divided the areas of the world which makes the reader think whether or not it is appropriate. Every area in the world is labeled and through its constant use, they are hard to remove.
Orientalism and Occidentalism
Professor Metcalf
Spring 2009
Through out history, as Europeans explored lands beyond their borders, labeling of these new areas occurred. Among these various labels, the Orient, developed in Western Asia to describe the region. Due to imperialist nations, this word has spread to describe the people of Eastern Asia and is currently used by the Western world to describe that area. Edward Said, the author of book Orientalism, discusses this topic and argues that the term divides the East from the West. The Orient was viewed as a mysterious region where people have certain way of life that is not common to the West.
As imperial powers conquered new lands and became exposed to the cultures of the East, the difference seen while in those lands began the separation between East and West. Imperial leaders, such as Napoleon of France, used scholarly writings of the Eastern world to understand about Egypt before conquering it. Having an understanding of the land prior entering it, served as an advantage to the military tactic while invading. The information he acquired, as most who wanted to learn about the East, was through a Western perspective. The question about whether or not the information was valid and a first hand account was skeptical. For example, Zachary Lockman states in his book that “the French saw themselves as bringing science and civilization to the benighted Orient, and so a team of scholars and scientists accompanied Napoleon’s forces to Egypt.” (Lockman 2004, 71) These scholars studied the land, the culture, and lifestyle of these foreign lands which was included in their writings. It was their perspective of the land and of the people which was then read by the people of the West. This spread of information added to the division of the cultures and reinforced the term Orient.
In his book, Said argues that the term Orient(alism) was developed during the imperialism era and was used to describe what the invading foreigners encountered in the East. He used the term Orientalism to describe a tradition, which was developed both through scholarly writings and artistic creations. These means of representation developed hostile and inferior views of the East by the West that have shaped our views in the present day. (Said 1978, 42) Said, also argues that this prejudice comes from and was developed by the West. Due to the differences a sense of inferiority towards the East has progressed over the centuries and can be seen in the stereotypes that we have today of the people of the East. If the term Orient did not exist, then perhaps the link between the East and West would not be what it is today.
To understand the beginning of the term Orient, the time when knowledge of the region spread must be examined. The Oriental renaissance described by Lockman is said to have begun in the 19th century due to imperialistic expansion and secured political dominion of various regions of the Orient. Prior to the 19th century, only a few scholars had been familiar with the history, cultures, and religions of the Orient, but due to the contact with the east this changed. Many scholars began incorporating aspects of the Orient into their writings, paintings, and knowledge by learning the different languages. An example is the German poet, Wolfgang von Goethe, who produced work that dealt mostly on Muslim imagery and themes. (Lockman 2004, 68-70) Lockman describes this time frame as an obsession of scholars with the Orient. Due to the different lifestyles and the unique qualities not seen in the west made the Orient a mysterious subject. It is human nature, especially as a scholar, to want to know about something that is not common in the norms of the society they live in.
The incorporation of the Orient in scholarly works led to increased knowledge of the region but also reinforced the stereotypes of Islamic society that had developed in previous years. When thinking of the East, the most controversial region, especially in our time is the Middle East. Since the encounter with this region stereotypes flourished due to the different lifestyle and religion. Examples include the view of Muslim men as “violent, lusty and sexually perverse” and women as “oppressed, subjugated, little more than slaves, constantly available for the erotic gratification of oversexed men.” (Lockman 2004, 69-70) These are from a Western view, without taking into account that the people who live by these norms do not have the same opinion. The West compares cultures and gives none a chance at being a normal lifestyle.
When thinking of the Middle East, one has to mention the obsession with and determination to understand the harem system that occurred within upper class society. The harem, according to Lockman, was a common fascination to many artists who assembled offensive paintings without any first hand contact with one. The mystery, the polygamous action within, and the seclusion of the harem made it a topic that was portrayed through imagination. Paintings of harems include Odalisque with a Slave by J.A.D. Ingres 1839-1840 and The Hhareem by John Frederick Lewis 1849. (Beaulieu & Roberts 2002) Ingres, in his painting, develops scenery of a slave whom is part of a harem living with wives and concubines. It is a revealing painting much like others that were developed during that time of women without clothes. No woman of high standing, who are prominent in harems, would have taken part in such act hence most painting were developed through the imagination or with the use of lower class women. Once photography emerged, a new era of Oriental exposure occurred as people could perform at the photographers request. The use of models gave photograph the life and further credibility to the harem system as well as the veiled woman.
The Colonial Harem is a collection of photographs that were printed on postcards and circulated by the French from 1900 to 1930. These photographs of Algerian women were exploited by the French and show an effect that European presence had on the women of the society. It also proves the European fascination with the harem system. These models, both covered and uncovered, were used to display a glimpse of a conservative eastern society. I find it disturbing how photographers could uncover women from a society that is strongly conservative. It also disturbs me how people could use these postcards and write to loved ones or acquaintances on them. Through these postcards the life of an Algerian woman is not only uncovered in all aspects but it is wrongfully displayed to the satisfaction of the photographer. Through these photographs the people of France saw a glimpse of what they thought was the culture of Algerian people.
The term Orientalism has developed through a vast time of history and no matter how against people may be, it has left its mark on the Western world. When describing the Eastern lands, we do not say “the East” but define it as the Orient. Created by the West and used by the West, this term left the East with no choice but to be known by it. Edward Said’s book discusses this term and how it has divided the areas of the world which makes the reader think whether or not it is appropriate. Every area in the world is labeled and through its constant use, they are hard to remove.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Week 4- Colonialism, the Exotic, representation of the Other
The Oriental renaissance described by Lockman is said to have begun in the 19th century due to imperialistic expansion and secured political dominion of various regions of the Orient. Prior to the 19th century, only a few scholars had been familiar with the history, cultures, and religions of the Orient, but due to the contact with the east this changed. Many scholars began incorporating aspects of the Orient into their writings, paintings, and knowledge by learning the different languages. An example is the German poet, Wolfgang von Goethe, who produced work that dealt mostly on Muslim imagery and themes. Lockman describes this time frame as an obsession of scholars with the Orient. Due to the different lifestyles and the unique qualities not seen in the west made the Orient a mysterious subject. It is human nature, especially as a scholar, to want to know about something that is not common in the norms of the society they live in. The incorporation of the Orient in scholarly works led to increased knowledge of the region but also reinforced the stereotypes of Islamic society that had developed in previous years. Examples include the view of Muslim men as “violent, lusty and sexually perverse” and women as “oppressed, subjugated, little more than slaves, constantly available for the erotic gratification of oversexed men.” (Lockman 69-70)
The harem, according to Lockman, was a common fascination to many artists who assembled offensive paintings without any first hand contact with one. The mystery, the polygamous action within, and the seclusion of the harem made it a topic that was portrayed through imagination. Paintings of harems include Odalisque with a Slave by J.A.D. Ingres 1839-1840 and The Hhareem by John Frederick Lewis 1849. Ingres, in his painting, develops scenery of a slave whom is part of a harem living with wives and concubines. It is a revealing painting much like others that were developed during that time of women without clothes. No woman of high standing, who are prominent in harems, would have taken part in such act hence most painting were developed through the imagination or with the use of lower class women. Once photography emerged, a new era of Oriental exposure occurred as people could perform at the photographers request. The use of models gave photograph the life and further credibility to the harem system as well as the veiled woman. The Colonial Harem is a collection of photographs that were printed on postcards and circulated by the French from 1900 to 1930. These photographs of Algerian women were exploited by the French and show an effect that European presence had on the women of the society. It also proves the European fascination with the harem system. These models, both covered and uncovered, were used to display a glimpse of a conservative eastern society. I find it disturbing how photographers could uncover women from a society that is strongly conservative. It also disturbs me how people could use these postcards and write to loved ones or acquaintances on them. Through these postcards the life of an Algerian woman is not only uncovered in all aspects but it is wrongfully displayed to the satisfaction of the photographer.
The harem, according to Lockman, was a common fascination to many artists who assembled offensive paintings without any first hand contact with one. The mystery, the polygamous action within, and the seclusion of the harem made it a topic that was portrayed through imagination. Paintings of harems include Odalisque with a Slave by J.A.D. Ingres 1839-1840 and The Hhareem by John Frederick Lewis 1849. Ingres, in his painting, develops scenery of a slave whom is part of a harem living with wives and concubines. It is a revealing painting much like others that were developed during that time of women without clothes. No woman of high standing, who are prominent in harems, would have taken part in such act hence most painting were developed through the imagination or with the use of lower class women. Once photography emerged, a new era of Oriental exposure occurred as people could perform at the photographers request. The use of models gave photograph the life and further credibility to the harem system as well as the veiled woman. The Colonial Harem is a collection of photographs that were printed on postcards and circulated by the French from 1900 to 1930. These photographs of Algerian women were exploited by the French and show an effect that European presence had on the women of the society. It also proves the European fascination with the harem system. These models, both covered and uncovered, were used to display a glimpse of a conservative eastern society. I find it disturbing how photographers could uncover women from a society that is strongly conservative. It also disturbs me how people could use these postcards and write to loved ones or acquaintances on them. Through these postcards the life of an Algerian woman is not only uncovered in all aspects but it is wrongfully displayed to the satisfaction of the photographer.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Week 3- Clash of Civilizations or Conflict of Interest
It is striking to realize how society influences innocent people to do the unimaginable due to the lack of hope. In the film, to Die in Jerusalem the mothers of both an Israeli and Palestinian girl speak to the world. Ayat, a young Palestinian, decided to end her life through a suicide bombing. Her actions led to the death of two people including a young Israeli named Rachel and herself. Suicide bombings have become increasingly in number as the oppression of the Palestinian people by Israel continues. Children are exposed to this way of life and witness first hand acts of cruelty against their people.
The film was very touching as both girls were victims of a conflict that began many generations before. People argue that what Ayat did was wrong but it must be understood that such actions have become so common. I personally thought that Rachel’s mother was too bound up in what happened and was only looking for Ayat’s mother to say that what her daughter did was wrong. I felt that she was not open to what the other mother had to say and since the beginning never really gave Ayat’s mother a chance. She was skeptical of Ayat’s family without even knowing them.
Also her visit to the women’s prison was very disturbing to me as she tried to question and analyze women who were caught trying to accomplish a suicide bombing. I did not know what she was doing there and her preaching to the women was unbelievable.
As for the idea of clash of civilizations, Ayat and Rachel’s story does not encompass this idea. Religion is the difference that is mostly recognized. This conflict is not a clash of civilizations but rather a political derived problem. The people of both sides are very similar and live in practically the same region. Politics are the reason that one is oppressed and one is the oppressor. This oppression changes the way people go on with their lives other wise both would have similar lifestyles. All the people have a family that they care for, look after their property, and have hopes for the future.
The film was very touching as both girls were victims of a conflict that began many generations before. People argue that what Ayat did was wrong but it must be understood that such actions have become so common. I personally thought that Rachel’s mother was too bound up in what happened and was only looking for Ayat’s mother to say that what her daughter did was wrong. I felt that she was not open to what the other mother had to say and since the beginning never really gave Ayat’s mother a chance. She was skeptical of Ayat’s family without even knowing them.
Also her visit to the women’s prison was very disturbing to me as she tried to question and analyze women who were caught trying to accomplish a suicide bombing. I did not know what she was doing there and her preaching to the women was unbelievable.
As for the idea of clash of civilizations, Ayat and Rachel’s story does not encompass this idea. Religion is the difference that is mostly recognized. This conflict is not a clash of civilizations but rather a political derived problem. The people of both sides are very similar and live in practically the same region. Politics are the reason that one is oppressed and one is the oppressor. This oppression changes the way people go on with their lives other wise both would have similar lifestyles. All the people have a family that they care for, look after their property, and have hopes for the future.
Week 2- Orientalism
Orientalism is defined as the imitation of Eastern cultures by the West through art, writing, and in current times, film. Edward Said introduced a new idea of the word Orientalism and how it has affected the region it represents to the West. His book and the new ideas it encompasses had created controversy. Although the notion that the East was affected by the imperialism of Europe existed, no author had dedicated a book to the idea. On page 42 Said states that “if the essence of Orientalism is the ineradicable distinction between Western superiority and Oriental inferiority, then we must be prepared to note how in its development and subsequent history Orientalism deepened and even hardened the distinction.” In this book he argues that the development of the study of the orient distinctly the Middle East has created a gap between East and West. He also views Orientalism as a political doctrine that was imposed on the East due to the belief that it is inferior to the West. It is known that the term Orientalism was created by the West to categorize the people of the East. The different culture many encountered in the East was seen so different and not the level at which the European society functioned. The idea that other cultures are inferior due to their ways was seen everywhere the Europeans explored and conquered.
Said also mentions Napoleon’s invasion of Egypt in 1798 and how it helped to obtain “effective Western knowledge about the orient.” Egypt was a theater to model the Orient for the West. The developments of regions served the imperial European countries differentiate what they encounter. Labeling has to begin by someone and in most of the orient the conquering Europeans had the pleasure to do so.
Said also mentions Napoleon’s invasion of Egypt in 1798 and how it helped to obtain “effective Western knowledge about the orient.” Egypt was a theater to model the Orient for the West. The developments of regions served the imperial European countries differentiate what they encounter. Labeling has to begin by someone and in most of the orient the conquering Europeans had the pleasure to do so.
Sunday, February 8, 2009
Week 1 Introduction
In viewing the topics that will be covered in this class, I hope I will obtain a better understanding about the historical and current issues that are occurring in the orient. The first class was very enlightening as we got to watch two films about an important part of the orient, the Middle East. Viewing the film Peace, Propaganda, and the Promised Land was, in my opinion, at a perfect time since the problems between Palestine and Israel were still occurring as we watched the film. Most people heard about the problems that were occurring in the area due to the Gaza trespass by Israel, but the historical background was vague to many. The media did not help the public as it was clear that Israel was the preferred side. Having the truth revealed through this film gives students an insight of the life of the oppressed people of Palestine. Peace is something that will not be obtained at any proximate time, there are just too many factors that will serve as impediments. Compromise in dividing Israel was the original plan but it was not followed.
The other film, Reel Bad Arabs, showed us the stereotypes of Arab people that have been displayed in various films. Most of the films that were shown I had seen many years ago but I never noticed the racism towards the people of the Middle East. They are seen as the bad guys, the ones with guns, with bombs, and who are simply looking to do harm to others. What surprised me the most was that the Disney film Aladdin, which is viewed by young children, also had such horrifying stereotypes of the Middle East. Personally, I have viewed this film many times over the years but I had never noticed the song in the beginning. I am glad that it has been changed since it is a children's film that should not contain such descriptions about the area. I think these films gave the class a good informing and thoughtful beginning.
The other film, Reel Bad Arabs, showed us the stereotypes of Arab people that have been displayed in various films. Most of the films that were shown I had seen many years ago but I never noticed the racism towards the people of the Middle East. They are seen as the bad guys, the ones with guns, with bombs, and who are simply looking to do harm to others. What surprised me the most was that the Disney film Aladdin, which is viewed by young children, also had such horrifying stereotypes of the Middle East. Personally, I have viewed this film many times over the years but I had never noticed the song in the beginning. I am glad that it has been changed since it is a children's film that should not contain such descriptions about the area. I think these films gave the class a good informing and thoughtful beginning.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
