Nada Atta

(via https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3DN6ytqa40)

The Big Sick is a 2017 romantic comedy written by the stand-up-comedian and actor Kumail Nanjiani and his wife Emily Gordon.  The film that has the tagline “An Awkward True Story”, is based loosely on the beginning of the writers’ own relationship.

Kumail, who stars in the film under the same name, is an aspiring Muslim Pakistani comedian who finds himself falling in love with Emily when they met at one of his shows. Due to them becoming an interracial couple they both struggled as their cultures clash, and Kumail finds himself jiggling between two identities, one that follows his family’s traditions and hopes which acquires him to be obedient in order to avoid being disowned, and the other that he keeps to himself and only lets out when his family isn’t around.

At several scenes in the film when Kumail is seen interacting with his family, the effects of being raised in the USA and going through an identity crisis can be seen from the way he communicates and behaves. Although he does not approve most of the things that his parents make him go through he still presents those same things at his stand-up comedy sketches.

I believe this film allows you to feel the process of being a part of cultural hybridity. When Kumail feels that he is neither Pakistani at heart nor is he an American he becomes “in between cultures”. He is a mixture of cultures that is never fully understood by neither but he finds that he’s able to live in it.

This is an image taken by the French photographer Bruno Barbey during the Arab-Israeli War (Yom Kippur War) in 1973. It shows a vehicle owned by the Israeli army crossing occupied Sinai, and raising the image of President Gamal Abdel Nasser on its front tier.

Having a first look at this image, I was confused as to why does an Israeli vehicle have an image of Abdel Nasser on its front. The way the image is set on the head of the vehicle, well fixed, straight and not crooked, allows it to be the first thing you notice.

Since I lacked sufficient information about the events of this war, I interpreted what I see in this Image as an attempt made by the Israeli soldiers to create peace with the Egyptians. But after good research, I’ve come to discover that this image of Abdel Nasser was stolen by the Israeli soldiers from a governmental building where it used to hang, and later put on the front of this vehicle as a way to humiliate and break the morale of the Egyptian soldiers.  

In his book S/Z (1970), Roland Barthes introduces us to five codes that can help in decoding or understanding certain text, as he believes that any given text can have a plurality of meanings and different levels of comprehension. Therefore, an interpretation should not give a particular text meaning (more or less) but to appreciate the plurality of meanings it may contain. (S/Z p.5)

What is recognizable in Barthes’s codes that help while viewing or interpreting text, is that it does not necessarily only applies to text, but it is also applicable to other forms of tangible ideas or messages. Which means an image can also be interpreted using one or more of the five codes Barthes has introduced.

One of the codes that Barthes have come to identify is the Cultural Code. The Cultural Code refers to the exterior and prior knowledge the decoder (viewer/reader) has from outside the world of the message (text/image). Meaning, it’s the knowledge a person has before coming in contact with a certain message. Based on that, an encoder sometimes assumes something is understandable given that a certain culture has a base of shared knowledge.

While analyzing Barbey’s image, I have asked several friends and colleagues to try to explain what they see. and many had a difficulty understanding the existence and the positioning of Abdel Nasser’s image in that setting, just like I myself did.

The age, the historic gap, and the different backgrounds play a major role that is evident here. Because of the cultural code, an Image of war that supposedly shows enmity, was mistakenly interpreted as an act of peace due to the lack of the common understanding of war acts and shared history.

If the image of Abdel Nasser was broken, crooked, or distorted this would have given a stronger sense of enmity and would have sent a symbolic meaning or message to the Egyptians. But the relaxed soldiers and the image that is very well set, as if supporters and not enemies have carefully put it on the vehicle’s front, emphasizes the importance of cultural coding and why a certain amount of common understanding of the events that occurred during this war is required to avoid misinterpretation.

The context of Barbey’s image may be obvious and easy to establish by many, yet there are still many others who just as easily changed the whole context to give it a completely different meaning that may even change the course of history. And thus, appears the importance of the Cultural Code and the rest of the codes that Barthes’s have introduced to be used while interpreting and analyzing messages or in this case, images.

 1-    Bruno Barbey, (1973). Yom Kippur War, © Bruno Barbey/Magnum Photos (PAR287194)

2-    Barthes, R. (1970). S/Z. Paris: Éditions du Seuil.

HyperNormalisation is a 2016 documentary film by the British filmmaker Adam Curtis, that explores how a lot of the events that happened all over the world in the past four decades, were shaped and changed in ways that are damaging to the way society perceives current and past world events in our present time.

What’s interesting about this film is that it does not only depict how frequent the game of politics changes all over the world, but it also presents to us the power of financiers and technological utopians next to politicians.

Since many of the circumstances and reasons that are behind those major events that were shown in the documentary are unclear or hidden, the world has become a place of fake and overly simplified facts, that take the place of real and unjustified actions.

Over the course of history many world leaders created lies and have been very consistent with it that they themselves start believing that it’s the truth. Forgetting somewhere within the track of time, the true circumstantial reasons that lead them to take certain actions. Especially when those actions cause damage that is beyond repairing, and therefore it becomes too late for them to go back.  

While watching this documentary, I have realized that when certain tactics were used in the process that lead to the existence of a certain “world-changing” event, those tactics shouldn’t and cannot be used again in the same manner or else they may fire back.

So, for instance, if Social Media platforms were behind the success of the Arab spring revolution, then social media platforms will never be the cause of any similar events in the future that may actually result in visible change.

It may be because of the constantly updated algorithms, that the current world leaders are able to defend themselves and take cautionary measures that will stop previous mistakes from reoccurring. It’s almost as if the world is currently a body that after each disease (attack) it acquires antibodies that are now fully immune and prepared for the next attack.

Therefore in my opinion, to constantly own power, you have to constantly update your tactics. If you do not, then the world is no longer susceptible to your actions, and you may follow the fate of Gadhafi and Al Assad and many Arab leaders who have chosen to stick to their ways for too long even when the whole world was changing.

It was oddly interesting to look for traces of orientalism in Arabic films.

Starting with my research, I thought since orientalism is the western attempt to understand the east, particularly Arabs and Muslims, and is affected by many misperceptions and little fantasizing, then orientalism would not be evident in Egyptian movies as they were made by the Arabs themselves.

But I was wrong, the theory of orientalism cannot be taken away from the gaze of the others, and that is what I found to be there in almost every Egyptian movie or series in a way or another. The categorization and limitation of some of the main characters that make up our society and culture, and also the stereotyping of certain looks, traits, and gender-wise habits is extremely noticeable and perceptible.

The Filthy Rich

The Khaleegi character (a person that comes from the Gulf countries) has been a victim of the gaze in several Egyptian movies and series. Having a look at the movie Teer Enta, that is loosely based on the American film Bedazzled, the main character in the movie agrees with the genie that he’d like to win the heart of his beloved one by becoming extremely rich and so the genie of course turns him into a man that comes from the gulf and therefore is filthy rich, a bit fat (sign of wealth), pays crazy amounts of money on ridiculous things, and have no other interests than to spoil himself and his girl with money while showing it off.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIVadDJTTVw

In this scene, the main character refuses to get any discounts on his purchases thinking its offensive to his wealth. He also buys several pieces from the same shirt and perfume set and later in a restaurant orders everything on the menu just because he can. This is a perfect example of the gaze because the movie portrayed the “others” with exaggeration and limitation in order to make stereotyping stick to the audience. Additionally, this particular scene is widely known between Egyptians and have become a popular joke on the wealth of Khaleegies.

The wealth of the people of the gulf is undeniable, but how they act towards their money or what they choose to spend on is not as what’s shown in the Egyptian movies nor the western ones for this matter. Although, it’s true that they sometimes tend to overspend on luxurious items it’s still not a fair portrayal of them just like the unjust portrayal of the orient by the west, it is an outsider look on the lives of the people of the gulf.

 Can you see me? I’m Religious

Just like how almost every terrorist in the western media is a Muslim or an Arab, almost every religious character in any Egyptian movie is associated with actions that are frowned upon by the society.

The heavy beard, bushy eyebrows, the religious gowns or abayas, and the chaplet in the hands are all what portrays a corrupt -pretending to be-  religious man. Although they should only portray someone who knows god so well they won’t cause any harm to others, this is not the case in the Egyptian movies.

 In the Egyptian movie Kalemni Shokran or Call Me, Thank You a man with such description plays a role. His exterior looks very religious and even has a dark mark on his forehead that shows that he does not miss prayers, but still not well-groomed and on the contrary of his looks his actions go against his presumed beliefs. He enjoys looking at woman and their bodies, he’s also involved in a faulty business and even tells the main lead that his “religious looks” will make more people buy from him thinking that he as a man “who knows god” will not fool them.

 After the fall of the Muslim Brotherhood as a political party, this image has been used more and more in the media to send subliminal message to the audience that a man who looks religious cannot be trusted and is only deceiving you with his looks for you to be on his side and fool you. The example of movies or series that have such a character is enormous and is increasing.

Playing on this idea is upsetting to many, as some see that such messages are ruining the image of Islam even between Muslims. It is always the hip looking man that follows the rightful guides of Islam more than the religious looking man. And now, because of such portrayals, religious people who look or dress the same way are not trusted by their colleagues or people they’re surrounded with and have to tweak their looks or prove themselves worthy of others’ trust.

Today some religious men that would like to become Islamic preachers have to dress in modern clothing and have a total different look than usual just to be heard. And that is how the gaze on the Islamists or extremists have affected many of the good Muslims who look and dress a certain way.  

 Let Me Free My Body

A wife that dances for her husband is a good wife, or so the movies are trying to tell us, through the male gaze. It doesn’t matter if a woman is successful in her career or studies, if she’s not going to please her husband sexually and fully take care of the house choirs and kids then she’s instantly unsuccessful in the eyes of her husband and the community she’s living in.

In the Egyptian series, Al Zoga Al Rabaa or The Fourth Wife, which again portrays a man “who knows god so well he will do no wrong” as a husband that is very in control of his household and his wives as they accept the polygamy with no say.

He in the series does not like his wives to get involved with any other activities, as that is not their place, they only need to take care of their husband and children and their looks, also the fourth wife in the series keeps on changing as part of him always seeking sexual pleasure from different types of women.

Surprisingly most of the time his wives do not mind his actions but rather fight on who will give him the most pleasure and who would he pick to sleep with tonight even when he has a schedule to be fair with all wives.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWRO6VpU6Ls&feature=youtu.be&app=desktop

The man that all women wants to please, the woman that has to always be eye pleasing and never say no to a man’s demands, this is the male gaze in its most obvious forms. Although towards the end of the series comes a woman who changes this man’s idea of women since she works and knows her full rights, still the series emphasized how the other women were more obedient and so they’re every man’s dream wife.

Another aspect of orientalism and the gaze can be seen when veiled women are portrayed in Egyptian movies or series. It’s not very common to have a veiled character but lately more movies and series try to involve veiled women in their plots.

Unfortunately, when a veiled woman plays a role, she is always portrayed as an oppressed, fussy, and backward woman with annoying traits. In a new series which is called Sabe’a Gar or the 7th neighbor that involves different families and neighbors living together in one building a veiled girl is the big sister in one family she is shown as a person who hates anything that is nice such as music and movies refuses any sort of modern thinking and thinks such behavior will make her go to hell.

Her character gives a hard time to her family and friends in good times, she is always arguing about something and hardly ever smiles. While other unveiled girls in the series are living the good life, are loved by everyone, and are portrayed to be more open to others than the veiled girl that chooses to believe that sin is everywhere and her life is dull and unsatisfying that no man would like to marry her. Of course seeing the veiled character with the same set of characteristics all the time serves the message that Muslim women are oppressed under their Hijab and have backward ways of thinking.

Orientalism in post colonialism still exists and still have underlying purposes of giving the upper hand to certain group of people over others. All these messages that are mentioned above are used in systematic wars that may not involve guns but involve brainwashing. The exaggeration of bad traits is all proof of not accepting others that come from different backgrounds and that are thought to be less or more backward than others from other countries for instance and same is for race, gender and religion.

 _________________________________________________________________

 -       Between Orientalists and Al Jazeera : Image of Arabs in the West

http://www.ijhssnet.com/journals/Vol._1_No._4;_April_2011/21.pdf

 -       Edward W. Said, Orientalism: Western Conceptions of the Orient. Penguin Books. Reprinted with a new afterword 1995, England.

 -       Orientalism in Hollywood: Rethinking Arab Stereotypes in Film. (n.d.). https://www.hercampus.com/school/utah/orientalism-hollywood-rethinking-arab-stereotypes-film

 -       Venugopal, S. N. (2012). The gaze of the West and framings of the East. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

 -        Quinn, R. (2017). An analysis of Edward Saids Orientalism. London: Routledge.

The word or the term Orientalism have been widely used over the years in different contexts and forms. This term might make you think of oriental food, odalisques, The East, foreign lifestyles, and even belly dancers. Therefore, to begin the talk on Orientalism we must first establish a definition.

Orientalism generally can be defined as a representation of the east in a stereotyped way that is expressed by a colonialist attitude. It is an exaggerated and a distorted image of Arabs and eastern societies that the west has created. Exotic, mysterious, uncivilized, and barbaric are the terms often used to describe this eastern lifestyle.

Edward Said, a literature professor and the founder of the academic field of postcolonial studies have described orientalism in his book of the same name in great depth that we cannot talk about orientalism and not bring up the contributions of Edward said in this field.

Said claims that the Orient is not a real place but a western idea. He argues that scholars and politicians from the west could not understand the culture of the east as it was noticeably different from theirs that they “latently” or “manifestly” created an unreal image of the east that stresses on the superiority of the west.

This might seem like a natural human error, but this was the beginning of many colonizing strategies made by the west. To colonize a country, the west made it seem as if colonizing was a noble move from their side and its motives were to free those eastern countries from backward thinking and barbaric ways of living, thus saving them from collapsing. The people of the west were set to believe by those scholars and academics that the eastern countries were not capable to govern themselves. And as you might have established by now this was far from the truth.

According to Said, Orientalism was created to get advantage of the economic and other sources of the east while legitimizing it with academic backing. The west played or projected their own fantasies in the middle east through art and literature to reaffirm their supremacy and decency and later use it to serve their political strategies.

Edward Said was the best person to describe and explain colonialism as he led an extremely paradoxical life.  He is of a Palestinian origin but in a country with a Muslim majority, he held Christian beliefs. And as an American citizen, he was always faced with identity crisis even in his career. Ironically, even as a Christian man he at many times have tackled the misperception of Islam in the western media either through his books or public appearances.  The Arab-Israeli conflict was the breaking point of which he decided to get into the study of colonialism and post-colonialism as he - as a Palestinian- have been faced with many untrue, naïve, and ignorant perceptions on his country and culture that were used to get the acceptance of the public opinion at war times. Said says that “My own experiences of these matters are in part what made me write this book … the life of an Arab Palestinian in the West, particularly in America, is disheartening. The web of racism, cultural stereotypes, political imperialism, [and] dehumanizing ideology holding in the Arab or the Muslim is very strong indeed.”

Today the effects of orientalism and colonialism are still evident in what we see and hear through different media outlets and political games. Many recent movies till this moment still play on orientalism and the barbaric stereotyping of the east in their main plot. Always giving the west the superiority and limiting the east to evil and restricted thinking with mostly violent roles.

To understand orientalism is to limit the effects of colonialism and cultural domination on our current lives.

 Used Sources:

 -       Quinn, R. (2017). An analysis of Edward Saids Orientalism. London: Routledge.

-       Said, E. W. (2004). Orientalism. New York: Vintage Books.

-       Ashcroft, B., & Ahluwalia, D. P. (2009). Edward Said. London: Routledge.

-       What is Orientalism? (n.d.). Retrieved March 9, 2018, from http://www.arabstereotypes.org/why-stereotypes/what-orientalism

-       Why Arabs And Muslims Aren't Exotic | AJ. (2017, December 10).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddCJPtcxEwo

-       A. (2012, October 28). Edward Said On Orientalism. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVC8EYd_Z_g

-       An Introduction to Edward Said's Orientalism- A Macat Sociology Analysis. (2015, June 16).

“We Live in Public” is an astonishing documentary film by Ondi Timoner that I got the chance to watch last week. The film documents the ideas of the visionary Josh Harris who is - as the film suggests -  the greatest web pioneer you have never heard of.

 The least I can say about this film that it goes beyond reason. There is no room for sane thoughts in this documentary, it shows you how the internet is affecting our lives in the most naked, honest way there is. Many of the thoughts or rather experiments that Josh Harris presented us with were unbelievable. although they happened in real life and resemble in a way or another our current reality, I’m still in a denial phase where I’d prefer to believe that what I’ve seen isn’t real nor did real people participate in such experiments. And most importantly of all, I’d like to believe that hopefully, this isn’t where our future is headed or if so it would be in a much more decent form than this.

One thought that haunted me after watching this film is, does living around cameras or living in public change the characteristics of people? Surely their behavior or attitude might change. but does the main characteristics that make up a person change once they start living in public?

 I imagine that people always have two personas or even more living within them, one they actually are and the other they’d like to become or only comes out when no one is watching or when society cannot judge and limit them through looks or stereotypes. But what if “when no one is watching” becomes the same as “everyone is watching” in the sense of there is nothing that can be hidden anymore, and everything is out. Does your character then change? Do you stay the same person but only overly exposed? Do you become the person you always secretly wanted to be? Or do you completely change to someone you cannot even recognize at times?  

 I’m guilty of tweaking my characteristics at times, to fit with the people around me. I realize how my ways are changing but I’m still am the same person I am, and you’d probably describe me the same way all the time with maybe an extra adjective or two. But I’ve heard stories of people who claim they’ve completely changed to a different person after being affected by shocking incidents or going through things they never thought they’d go through.

 But is this change the same as the change that happens when you live in public?  Do you have more control over yourself or do you completely get lost while striving for attention and any type of admiration?  

 The line between sane and insane is very fine. Therefore, it scares me to think where living in public would lead us. We can never be extremely sure of our actions or where they’ll take us, and even if the outcome is expected the room for the unexpected is still very big.

According to the dictionary, a gaze is to look steadily and intently, as with great curiosity, interest, pleasure, or wonder. In our media studies, a gaze would describe how a visual material is viewed by the spectators. So, what’s the male gaze and the female gaze?

Male gaze is when a film or any other type of visual content empowers the male by giving him the role of the protagonist that is the source of any real action within the film, and objectifying the woman by turning her into just a source of pleasure that the male has the “privilege” of looking at, and limiting the woman to only passive actions and roles.

The male gaze is the most dominant form of gaze in our film culture, most of the movies that are directed by a male, has a male protagonist, and is intended for mostly male viewers, fall under the male gaze. The male gaze has been the cause of many political and feminist movements in the last couple of years due to its ignorance to woman’s power by almost disregarding any sort of actions a woman can do that is not sexual. Which many women find to be disrespectful and offensive.

On the other hand, the Female gaze would be the opposite of a male gaze. It represents women in their real form and capabilities. With almost no “under-dressed” clothing or unrealistic sexualized activities and passive actions.

Some women describe watching movies with a female gaze as “putting on glasses for the first time”. The male gaze has been embedded deeply into our culture that it's becoming the norm, even female spectators subconsciously accept the messages received from a male gaze movie, that she herself (the female viewer) starts acting as if that being a sexualized object is what’s intended for her to do as a woman.

The male gaze can be very toxic. For years, it played a major role in how our culture perceives females and where a female would stand in her relationship, her job, or in society in general. That even among women themselves they started limiting their discussions to age, beauty, and fashion, believing that their importance depends on it. But thankfully today we have more movements and trends than ever that are trying to reform society and give women the power and respect they deserve.

I stumbled upon a quote by the actor and the filmmaker April Mullen that says: "Women have this vulnerability and connection to a depth of emotions that I can see and feel in certain moments of truth in the films we create. To me, the female gaze is transparency – the veil between audience and filmmaker is thin, and that allows people in more." Which I find perfectly summarizes what you could expect from a female gaze.

This also got me thinking of a recent Egyptian movie called “Hatoly Ragel” or “Get Me a Man” that is based on the idea of what if females had all the roles that are always given to men especially in our Arab conservative culture, so for instance, the walk of shame is reserved for men and they’re expected to not to stay out late at night or go drinking and clubbing and also have a weak sex drive just like what’s expected from a conservative Arab woman.

Most men, as expected, did not like the thought of the movie which suggestively limited their freedom and capabilities, and made them realize the mold they’ve been putting the females in their whole life, the mold that is diminishing to the importance of women and their power in so many different levels.

I am currently taking an elective class called "Beyond the Frame".  At first what really grabbed my attention was the name... “Beyond the Frame”. I mean, I love looking beyond things, taking a second to really think of what they mean and what lead to the making of them. I’m a very curious person, so all you had to do was mention something that’s a bit – if I may say – philosophical or vague and you sir would have my utmost attention.

Beyond the Frame, is a class about analyzing images and thinking of its effects and purposes whether they’re very obvious or the extreme opposite. After taking my first class a couple of my friends and members of my family asked me to explain what I would be studying, and to my amusement, the more I’ve tried to explain it or the more I think I understand it the more I believe that I know nothing at all about.

It’s one of those things that the more you dig into it the more you’ll feel like you’re drowning into a sea of information that has no end. Almost as if you can never know enough about it. You think you understand, but do you really?

Our Professor mentioned that when we look at an image of something, let it be a bottle of water, we can’t say we’ve seen the bottle but rather a representation of it. Something that I feel is very simple and true but yet is widely overlooked.

Many people including myself wouldn’t give it much of a thought. I was thinking this information doesn’t really make a difference until I realized it means that reality could be manipulated even if in the slightest ways in any given image. Purposely or not, there is always going to be some missing details or information in an image of something. And just by this small thought, many questions started going through my head. How could I ever know what’s the missing thing if I haven’t been there to see it myself and not through an image? And here I realized comes the role of looking Beyond the frame.

In the class, we’ve also got to discuss generally a couple of terms that we’ll be studying through the course. Some I’ve heard of, some I didn’t, and some I didn’t even think had a term to describe them. We also watched a couple of videos that make you realize how easily you can be manipulated by an image or a video of something, just by making the target focus on a certain thing and discard the other.