Recently Luke, KZ, and I attended an Islamic Law conference at the American University College of Law. One of the speakers was Anouar Majid, a Professor of English at New England University in Maine. His talk was quite subversive and entertaining but left us perplexed. We could not figure out his methodological approach towards the Islamic “tradition” and the “West”. With that in mind, I checked out a copy of his Unveiling Traditions: Postcolonial Islam in a Polycentric World.
The book itself addressed the issue of cultural identity caught in the matrix of a callous global economy. Drawing from writers as diverse as Karl Marx to Leila Ahmed, he argues that there is a dialectical interplay between the past and present, the result of which will determine the future. And as such, he pulls no punches in criticizing Western imperialism, liberal hypocrisy, nativistic reactions, and the tug and pull of a fetish consumerism mired in a capitalism which can not but create “Others” while appropriating their cultural symbols at the same time. As he writes, concerning the breakdown of traditional societies and the supposed “clash-of-civilizations” thesis, “The future map of the world, then, far from being static and determined by millennial tribal or cultural quarrels, ‘will be an ever-mutating representation of chaos.’” Ultimately, what is needed, and the book is primarily focused on the culture Majid is most familiar with, is the Muslim world to confront the challenges of post-modernity (?) in a dynamic way, thus breaking down false Eurocentric dichotomies and anachronistic interpretations of the faith itself. This combined with a humane outlook and sensitivity towards other people will allow for invigorating cross-cultural dialogue or as the author puts it, “Fault lines can be reimagined as innovative border zones where syncretic arrangements and cultural borrowings flourish outside states’ regulatory policies.”
In this regard his chapter “Can the Post-Colonial Critic Speak” is most welcome. His analysis of the “exiled”, “post-modern”, intellectual is very illuminating. No doubt much can be learned from the West, and a healthy sense of cosmopolitanism has given rise to such notable academians/public intellectuals as Edward Said and Gayatri Spivak. Yet there is also a profound crisis where one’s “identity” seems to be suspended under a framework of an economic system which gives such intellectuals a place but never the less “otherizes” their people as well, thus being very much a legacy of colonial dependence. In the case of Salman Rushdie he comments, “There is no doubt that Rushdie’s naïve defiance of Islam is merely the heartbreaking scream of another casualty of colonialism and the confused elite it created in the aftermath.” And it is precisely that dependency that must be broken.
The Muslim feminist also finds herself in a predicament, caught between Western secular hubris and a stifling patriarchy. For Majid, however, this is a movement with much potential (here KZ, Luke, and I can easily recall the enthusiasm in which he spoke about the feminists at the conference!) and he criticizes both approaches, one which tends to demonize Islam all together and the other which freezes itself in time worn traditions. His discussion of Fatima Mernissi, the Moroccan feminist, for example, is fascinating. He admires her commitment to civil rights and in challenging the patriarchy but sees her falling into the trap of liberal bourgeoisie notions of human rights which can not adequately address the world’s problems. The political critic in him feels that the nation-state and the failures of pan-Arabism, to him an attempt to re-constitute the fractured ummah, must be questioned and the concomitant global inequalities unearthed. Again, only a lack of socio-economic dependency and a progressive Islam will allow for a renewal of Arab culture to flourish where people will be able to retain their cultural symbols and a sense of transcendence. His treatment of Islamic feminism synthesizes these points as, “…a careful articulation of an Islamically progressive agenda-democratic, antipatriarchal, and anti-imperialist-might provide the impetus for a new revolutionary paradigm.” Furthermore, to him this must be understood in a fluid way and not as a systematic elaboration of rote theological points. For Majid religion is not something to be “proven” but it is an experience that helps gives meaning to people’s lives; issues of the existence of God, and other explications of scholasticism ultimately can not be demonstrated in any conclusive sense and he makes it quite clear that, “…I have no interest whatsoever in theological disputes that seek to prove the truth of one religion over another. Because my primary interest in Islam is almost exclusively cultural (a historical consciousness combined with literary critical methodologies is bound to complicate the most sacred of foundational narratives)…”
All in all, I enjoyed his book and have brought out in my view the most salient points in it as relating to the blog. I have not discussed his analysis of Arab authors and their attempt to maneuver precariously through the complexities of the current day and age. I also wish that perhaps he himself had discussed more in depth the pit-falls and fluctuations of the current global economic structures. He seemed to have held capitalist post-modernity as a constant. In addition, I feel he was too harsh towards secularism and Arab nationalism as he seemed to neglect the entire totality (focusing mainly on the ideological and cultural), or just did not go into enough historical detail, from which the two were born. While I certainly believed that much of the project has ended up in failure, there were legitimate needs underlying the nationalist impulse. And while I can not go into the details here (the complex issue of nationalism must be postponed for other entries), I feel that some of the original goals of the nationalist project where noteworthy and that because of globalization one is “forced” into a myriad of relationships. Take the case of one of the speakers at the conference: Muslim, Canadian, human rights activist, feminist, teacher, etc. In other words, to overcome ones past is not to forget it. In the final sense, then, and this is where is emphasis is most strong and persuasive, it is about re-construction and not repudiation and that is exactly what is implied by Anouar Majid’s promotion of cultural dynamism.

Note: Anouar Majid has also written Freedom and Orthodoxy: Islam and Difference in the Post-Andalusian Age, Si Yussef, and his coming out with another book in 2007 titled A Call for Heresy: Why Dissent is Vital to Islam.

Note: I have not read his other books so I am unaware about the possible changes in his thought and or further elaborations of past themes.

Note: This post may seem like its not related to the “hard” sciences per se, but it is def. related to “social science” and the notion of “progress” and I am assuming (rightfully so I think) that this blog is inclusive in that regard. I think posts on the general notion of progress is also important because such ideas like “evolution”, “objectivity”, have permeated all disciplines and caused quite a controversy in the last 40-50 years as those very notions were then challenged.