Posted by Lelyn R. Masters on January 18th, 2009 - Add a comment
Mahmoud Darwish was born in Galilee in 1941. The specific conditions we are born into is a crapshoot, and Darwish just lost. In 1948 his family fled to Lebanon. He became the poet laureate of Palestine, an expression of a dispossessed people. Like many in his generation his influences included Ginsburg and Rimbaud. In 1971 he moved to Cairo and worked in Al-Ahram. In 1973 he joined the PLO, and was hence banned from entering Palestine.
Published in 1987, his landmark Memory for Forgetfulness expresses the plight of the refugee under siege. This book is an eyewitness account of the peak of shelling in Lebanon during the civil war, called Hiroshima Day. Comparable to Slaughterhouse 5 or Murakami’s The White Sky of Hiroshima, Memories for Forgetfulness is a coherent exploration of a life that is already forfeit, a life of isolation, injustice and alienation.
When he died in 2008, discussions were held with Israel to bury him in his home town. He was buried in exile from that home village so that he could be where all Palestinians can visit. His remains rest in Ramallah at the heart of the disputed West Bank.
What follows is a short excerpt where Darwish recalls going out into the city streets under bombardment.
Read the full post and add your comments »
Posted by Lelyn R. Masters on July 13th, 2008 - Add a comment
Ninety-seven percent of women in Egypt have had some sort of genital mutilation. The majority of these cases are Type 1, clitoridectomy, involving the removal of the prepuce (clitoral hood). A smaller percentage involve complete removal of the clitoris, and an even smaller minority involve the removal of part or whole of the labia. According to polls, this practice is embraced by men and women of all races and religions in Egypt.
Five years ago almost no women in Egypt wore the headscarf (hijab). Now they nearly all wear it. A man cannot address a woman in public. Marriages are arranged, and the couple usually meet under parental supervision. Women are subordinate to men, and a woman whose honor is in question, through infidelity, rape or pre-marital promiscuity, may be killed by her family so that they save face. Without honor, a man cannot find work, and his entire family will bear the shame.
In 1979 a law passed to protect women’s rights made it more difficult to marry several women, and more difficult to divorce. In 1985 another law reversed the earlier 1979 law. But I ask you, is a law that protects a woman’s right to an inherently one-sided relationship really a protection of her rights? It still remained nearly impossible for a woman to ask for a divorce.
Read the full post and add your comments »
