Tuesday, September 27, 2011

Reading Response 6

I very much enjoyed Tamari's Lepers, Lunatics and Saints. I was particularly interested with the account of Tawfiq Canaan; as Tamari stated, he is quite an overlooked figure. I found Canaan's brand of nativism to be revealing and enlightening; however, it is also a bit contradictory. Canaan represents his subjects as hailing from a "primitive" stock, much in the same way Enlightenment intellectuals discussed the African continent (Tamari 6). Canaan laments the disappearance of these "primitive features" (Tamari 14). The nativist discussion implicitly acts as a counter to Zionism; it is a subtle game of one-upping. In a movement to establish the longstanding "pure" primitivism, Canaan is essentially doing is "subjects" a disservice. To this end, I agree with Zakariyya Muhammed's rebuke of Canaanism, his positions on Zionism notwithstanding.

The contradiction arises from Canaan's acknowledgement of the peasantry's complexity, specifically with regards to religious syncretism. Canaan acknowledges that the peasantry's contemporary iteration of Islam pulls from ancient "ancestor-worship" traditions. Furthermore, Canaan notes certain root similarities in Abrahamic traditions, as well as common tradition divergent from Abrahamic custom. Thus, Canaan notes that contemporary culture is the summation of evolution and adaptation drawing from numerous sources. Canaan decries "modern" cultural influence (Ottoman period onward), while simultaneously establishing that contemporary culture is the product of "other" cultural influence. Essentially, Canaan is a reactionary against the same forces that formed the peasantry, in an attempt to urge the freeze of the peasantry's cultural development (not in the sense of advancement, but change due to influence/factors, etc). Interaction between cultures/narratives is not a recent phenomena. Canaan is correct in his assertion that his research subjects' culture is the product of thousands of years of history. However, he is unreasonable in believing that this process represents a dangerous anomaly.

1 comment:

  1. "The nativist discussion implicitly acts as a counter to Zionism; it is a subtle game of one-upping. In a movement to establish the longstanding "pure" primitivism, Canaan is essentially doing is "subjects" a disservice."

    I COMPLETELY agree with this statement. I do believe Canaan's movement was a reaction to Zionism, and a counter-justification for the Palestinian claim to the disputed territory.

    ReplyDelete