Mainstream media and "Nouveau Orientalism"

Twitter Facebook LinkedIn Email

April 23, 2008

 
 

I may be in a minority here, but I’m tired of reading “Nouveau Orientalist” articles beginning with sentiments like “I thought Syrians were evil people but they turned out to be welcoming and nice” and ending with deep statements like “things are much more complicated than they look on the surface.” You don’t say.

If this weren’t cause enough for complaint, what annoys me even more than the actual articles are the reactions by some Syrians, Syria lovers and ubiquitous regime apologists (the Neobaathists, who would credit their idols for any “positive” news from Syria), who go on quoting endlessly, excitedly what this American journalist said or what that foreign reporter wrote, often in the most superficial and generalist of manners.

I can only imagine the elation caused by yesterday’s Los Angeles Times piece on Al Madina FM and its English-speaking presenter. My husband and I had been in the car one day, and we both looked at each other, raising our eyebrows (see below for an explanation of what this means) and laughing (not in a good way) when we heard “Good Morning Syria” as we scanned the stations. Likewise, we had not understood why Al Madina FM was advertising on billboards in English. I’ve already got a project for an expat-targeted radio show (one in about 10 other such “projects” which languish on my to-do list, which should really be called “wishful thinking”), which would definitely advertise in English, but most expats don’t speak Arabic and would struggle to make sense of “Good Morning Syria”, so it can’t be for them - and Al Madina FM does not claim this on its website (which you can check if you can bear the “SANAesque” spelling and syntax).

Could it be that we were not impressed because we didn’t understand the potential target audience (?) for such shows? Thankfully for clueless people like my husband and I, the LA Times explains that “despite the political and military tensions, the rhythms and textures of daily life here are increasingly meshing with those of Western nations.”

Hence "Good Morning Syria," one assumes, which is described as the nation’s hottest radio show. In fact, the article continues: “On the streets of Damascus, people breezily draw in American sounds, sights and icons, making them part of their own cultural DNA.” Good thing all those Syrians are compensating for their other backward cultural habits; but even for someone who is quite partial to Americana and to many such sights and sounds, I find the premise rather simplistic. The author, however, argues that “transforming a nation’s culture can shift it toward the Western orbit” – a one-way “globalization” of which he clearly approves.

In addition to making sweeping generalizations about the Arab “state of mind” (a term which I am certainly not trying to borrow from Raphael Patai’s pathetic prejudiced discourse), Nouveau Orientalism also plants ideas which are skewed: the description of the Syrian government as being “the most hostile to the West in the Arab world” is a loaded statement, and it is false. In fact, this government would love nothing more than to be on good terms with “the West” and would rather invite “Westerners” (rather than qualified expats more knowledgeable about the country) to carry out consultancy on every aspect of “reform.” I can assure you that the love affair with Britain, to name but one country in “the West,” is being facilitated at the highest levels. Anti-American policies, certainly (especially as many of these are anti-Syrian themselves), but anti-West certainly not.

Other Nouveau Orientalism types of articles simply rehash Classic Orientalism, such as this recent article alluding that Syrian men – or at least the frustrated, obnoxious jerks who stalk the streets and harass women – are apparently only interested in foreign women, who are “having a hard time adjusting to the attention of Syrian men.” Too bad no Syrian women were asked about how they suffer the indignity of groping, touching, pushing and other physical assaults, without even mentioning the looks, the whispers and the obscenities imposed on them, especially in crowded places. This unfortunate fact of life eludes NPR reporter Peter Kenyon and his interviewees, who clearly believe that they are considered to be somewhat special, as explains a young student of Arabic; "Every time I tell a Syrian that I'm American, they just get really excited and happy." How lovely. And how strange. For my part, I don’t know when was the last time I was really excited and happy when introduced to an American, but that must be because I haven’t met George Clooney yet. And it won’t be because of his nationality, but I digress.

Other Nouveau Orientalists helpfully explain the quirks of this country with statements that made me raise my eyebrows (go figure, I must have been in denial): according to Haley Edwards of the Seattle Times, ”In Syria, raising your eyebrows does not connote "surprise." It means "no."

Apart from this anomaly, however, Edwards sets the reader’s mind to rest about Syrians' normalcy by describing that “in certain neighborhoods, you'll even see Syrian women wearing jeans, heeled boots and flipping the bright-blond highlights in their hair.” Wow. Now if that doesn’t impress you, I don’t know what will.

But since writers in mainstream media pride themselves on being balanced, this glorious account does not fail to acknowledge the fact that Islam and its oppressive laws are ever present; for example, she explains (with what she thinks is a lot of humour, surely unwarranted for the subject), that ”the punishment for, say, stoning your flirtatious wife to death in the cul-de-sac outside your uncle's house on a sunny afternoon is pretty light.”

Yes, indeed, the public stoning of women is a rather unfortunate practice in Syria around every street corner. As if women didn’t have enough real legal and social issues to deal with.

Edwards goes completely Orientalist with her description of Syrian generosity: ”You can't walk a block in Damascus, or in Palmyra or Homs, for that matter, without a stranger (a fig merchant, a goat herder, a hair stylist) inviting you into his home, thrusting an infant into your arms and offering you a spread of baba ghanouj and hummus and black tea so sweet it would make even the most ardent disciple of Southern hospitality flush with competition.” How many clichés did you count in that sentence?

The Telegraph’s Peter Hughes, while not as exaggerated, agrees about the hospitality in a country “he had expected to find difficult” and about which he clearly had very little information, given that he describes Syrian food as ”Lebanese-style mezes, salads and grills.” Some Syrians might protest on the thorny issue of what’s Lebanese and what’s Syrian; perhaps a perfectly neutral (and classically orientalist) word like “Levantine” would have been better in this case.

The above are mere examples of an increasing trend of Nouveau Orientalist reporting which too many Syrians, to my irritation, find positive. While it’s certainly better than the usual fare, it is still far from reasonable, especially when it merely encourages Neobaathists to wax poetic about the wonder that is New Syria.

Not that it matters much these days, because frankly, Syrians have other things on their mind lately, especially the cut in fuel subsidies and the realization that for a lot of people, life has suddenly gotten a lot tougher. But that will be the subject of another post.

Previous
Previous

O Golan, where art thou?

Next
Next

The capital of culture, and its lost cultured capital