In Mecca and Main Street Geneive Abdo offers illuminating responses
to the questions posed to Muslim communities in America after 9/11. Her work,
however, is purely representative and may be indicated as belonging to the
stream of work known as Orientalism. As the Liaison for the United Nation’s
Alliance of Civilizations and a former journalist in the Middle East, Abdo
approaches the subject of her work from quite the authoritative position. As
her short biography on the back cover of Mecca
and Main Street states: Abdo “is a recognized authority on Islamic
political movements”.[1]
The fact that Abdo left Iran in 2001 under threat of arrest after a
particularly touchy interview with political dissident Akbar Ganji does not
bear on the material of this class, though it does provide some insightful
background information. Having provided this biographical information on Abdo,
I would now like to deal with some of the allegations directed her way by the
class. In this post I will admit that I am to an extent being a devil’s
advocate. Regardless, it should be realized that in Mecca and Main Street Abdo approaches the subject “As an Arab
American” with the book a “personal journey” for the author.[2]
While the allegation that Abdo sometimes conflates culture and religion may
ring true at some points, she never offers this book as a scholarly text (in
the sense that Mecca and Main Street
is not written by a learned academic connected with the formal study of a
subject), rather, she is detailing “the search by a diverse group of Muslims to
find a way to live with dignity in this country”.[3]
Admittedly, this alone may be considered scholarly were it not for the fact
that Abdo explains she has “tried to tell their stories through their eyes, but
with my voice”.[4] In
this effort then, Abdo has freely admitted her lack of objectivity towards the
subject.
Now, the fact that Mecca and Main Street is not a scholarly
text does not mean that it is not significant or unworthy of being read.
Rather, it should just be realized that Abdo is presenting the information
through her own filter; she makes no pretensions to the contrary. Another
accusation leveled at Abdo, that she is a bad writer, also proves baseless as
it can be argued that she is presenting in Mecca
and Main Street her own encounters. In this light, Abdo is probably
utilizing The Child-Bride of the Dix Mosque (Chapter 2) as a case study.[5]
Within this case study, Abdo’s journalist background does surface in the
sensational tone that was discussed in class. However, the fact of the matter
is that this is simply Abdo’s approach! Referring again to the back cover of Mecca and Main Street it is stated that
Abdo was “a correspondent in the Islamic world” with work published in “The New York Times, The Washington Post, The
Boston Globe, The Guardian, The Economist, and The International Herald Tribune”.[6]
Thus, the reader is told that Abdo has an (honestly, quite prolific) history of
reporting which is merely reflected in her book. There is no subversion, sleight
of hand, or ambiguity: throughout Mecca
and Main Street Abdo makes reference to the manner in which she undertakes
her research, the same way an investigative journalist would. Having said that,
the class’s criticism of sensationalism within Abdo’s book is hard to refute;
similar critiques of the media have been offered by countless other authors.[7]
With that in mind, look at your sources of world information: CNN, MSNBC, USA Today, The New York Times, even the BBC and Al Jazeera. Every single one
of them has the same sensationalist influences to varying degrees. If the
world, then, accepts these media outlets sensationalist headlines as news, why
then can we not accept Abdo’s Mecca and
Main Street (with far less sensationalism) as a serious book to be discussed
in the parameters of this course and general discussion regarding Islam in
America?
Reading through Mecca and Main Street, Abdo offers a
book which first and foremost highlights the dramatic distinction between
violent insurgents and American Muslims, in fact, in an effort to ease tensions
between Muslim-Americans and the rest of the population Abdo wrote “… nearly
every Islamic organization in America condemned the events of 9/11 and other
forms of violence…”.[8]
As far as matters of Islamic jurisprudence are concerned, Abdo offers the
perfect case in Chapter 2 when it comes to “Sherine’s” marriage with Hasan.
Specifically, the fact that “Sherine” fulfilled all of her promises to her
husband while he could not satisfy his own part of the commitment. The straw
that rightfully broke the camel’s back was when Hasan planned to “marry a wife
even more conservative than the women of the Southend”.[9]
Since he could not even provide for “Sherine”, according to the evidence
provided, a man should not then marry another woman according to the Fourth
Sura of the Qur’an:
“O people! Be
careful of (your duty to) your Lord, Who created you from a single being and
created its mate of the same (kind) and spread from these two, many men and
women; and be careful of (your duty to) Allah, by Whom you demand one of
another (your rights), and (to) the ties of relationship; surely Allah ever
watches over you … marry such women as
seem good to you, two and three
and four (mathna wa thulatha
wa rubaAAa); but if you fear that you will not do justice (between them), then
(marry) only one or what your right hands possess; this is more proper,
that you may not deviate from the right course. And give women their dowries as
a free gift, but if they of themselves be pleased to give up to you a portion
of it, then eat it with enjoyment and with wholesome result.”
In this
way, Abdo actually illustrates why she may appear to conflate culture and
religion: the ability of the imam in the case study of The Child-Bride of the
Dix Mosque to rule for divorce would appear to be a given granted the above (admittedly,
I have not been educated in Islamic law). With that in mind, the fact that
there appears to be concern over the imam’s doing so illustrates the cultural
influences of conservatism that also must be contended with. Abdo navigates
these perilous waters quite well under the circumstances. Thus, while truly a
literary work and a representation of Muslim life in America, Mecca and Main Street is unfairly
analyzed as a work of scholarly authority. Abdo makes no pretensions about
being involved in the scientific study of religion, thus she is generally
defended by the allegations addressed here.
[1]
Geneive Abdo, Mecca and Main Street
(Oxford University Press, 2006).
[2]
Abdo, Mecca and Main Street, 10.
[3]
Abdo, Mecca and Main Street, 3.
[4]
Ibid.
[5]
Abdo, Mecca and Main Street, 37-60.
[6]
Geneive Abdo, Mecca and Main Street
(Oxford University Press, 2006).
[7]
For a discussion on the subject see Daniel Cohen, Yellow Journalism: Scandal, Sensationalism and Gossip in the Media
(21st century, 2000).
[8]
Abdo, Mecca and Main Street, 6.
[9] Abdo,
Mecca and Main Street, 41.
No comments:
Post a Comment