Today I had a class on cultural studies, to tell you the truth, I was very hesitant to take this module, seen that I'm already writing my MA dissertation which is completely theoretical, on political representation... But for some reasons, I found my self enrolled in this class, and frankly I'm so happy with it... it tries to add some cultural, anthropological, and ethnographic aspects to my narrow political knowledge, ... sometimes it's important to get outside the box not to be suffocated ;)) ..
I thought that I can do a theoretical study, in terms of being impartial, objective, neutral, ...etc... (include all the non-defined words associated with political 'science'), but found it as an illusion, even if I claim that I do reflect all these 'ethical' ideals, I still do reflect my cultural background...
Unconsciously, following the Freudian Slip, I found myself defending the subaltern, the colonised, the other, .... I found myself a Saidian protesting against 'bad' orientalism... refuting the non-existence of authenticity, arguing that this claim is actually the product of a power structure that want to destroy the 'other'... moreover, and more dangerously, I was actually refuting the possibility of an outsider to ever represent an 'other'...
Then, I remembered Middle Eastern Studies, I remembered BRISMES, I remembered the papers that I was praising in the last graduate conference... I retreated in my attack, allowing other students to humiliate me, that was hard guys ;))) ... I returned home thinking and thinking, provoking my ideas in class and my ideas on the Middle Eastern studies... I had tones of questions in mind:
what makes these studies different?? why they are not part of the 'bad' orientalism?? why an 'outsider', in this case Phd student or researcher, can talk about 'other' insider culture??? Can they be more 'objective' than other studies?! Can these papers really represent 'people' in the Middle East??!! who is to judge this anyway??!! who is to draw the line in the first place between an insider and an outsider??!!... I still cannot have any answers to these questions, and is not seeking absolute ones, ... But I think these questions are in your minds as well, would be great to know your opinions, consider it as self-critique whose value lies in the act of questioning itself and the effort in reaching an answer...
Then, I remembered Middle Eastern Studies, I remembered BRISMES, I remembered the papers that I was praising in the last graduate conference... I retreated in my attack, allowing other students to humiliate me, that was hard guys ;))) ... I returned home thinking and thinking, provoking my ideas in class and my ideas on the Middle Eastern studies... I had tones of questions in mind:
what makes these studies different?? why they are not part of the 'bad' orientalism?? why an 'outsider', in this case Phd student or researcher, can talk about 'other' insider culture??? Can they be more 'objective' than other studies?! Can these papers really represent 'people' in the Middle East??!! who is to judge this anyway??!! who is to draw the line in the first place between an insider and an outsider??!!... I still cannot have any answers to these questions, and is not seeking absolute ones, ... But I think these questions are in your minds as well, would be great to know your opinions, consider it as self-critique whose value lies in the act of questioning itself and the effort in reaching an answer...
The image: The Scribe, Ludwig Deutsch (1855 - 1935) from Ahram Weekly website: weekly.ahram.org.eg/2002/573/bo5.htm
Originally Posted by Mona El-Kouedi at 11:20 PM in BRISMES Graduate Section Blog:
http://brismesgrad.blogspot.com/
Originally Posted by Mona El-Kouedi at 11:20 PM in BRISMES Graduate Section Blog:
http://brismesgrad.blogspot.com/
