 |
|
What
is it that each individual identifies himself with? Is it his
religion, caste, language, country of birth or origin, or
political leanings? To some it will be one of these, while for
others, it will be a mixture. In On Identity, Amin Maalouf
reflects on this pertinent issue.
Maalouf, a Lebanese Christian living in France and writing in
French, introduces us to his reflections by first examining his
own identity: “My identity is what prevents me from being
identical with anyone else.” One is inclined to agree with the
author as this can be applied to all of us when it comes to
personality, personal choices and individuality. But in religion,
nationality, and language, for example, we discover that one’s
identity is composed of different and numerous components that
connect us with each other and lead us to belong to particular
groups. For example, as a Christian, the writer shares the same
religion with more than half the human race. As a Lebanese, he
shares a nationality with millions. As an Arabic speaker, he
shares the same language with the whole of the Middle East, as
well as all the Muslims who use Arabic in their prayers. Living in
France and carrying a French nationality, he also shares with 60
million French citizens. However, in combining all these
identities, we find a unique identity that is shared by very few
in the world. In fact, even the sect of Christianity he belongs to
is a minority in Lebanon. Hence, the more ties he has, the more
particular his identity becomes. This labyrinth of characteristics
portrays the complexity of the issue of identity in today’s
world. In reflecting on this issue, the writer shows that for
every group of people conforming to one identity, there are layers
of other identities within each sub-group, continuing to fragment
groups of people and making the allegiance to merely one identity
more difficult.
In further examining identity, Maalouf shows how our identity is
often established faced with a rival. For example, an Irish person
will be an Irish Catholic and differentiate himself from an
English person on the basis of religion. The same person will be a
Republican vis-à-vis the monarchy. Identity can also change with
time and political circumstances. Twenty years ago, someone from
Yugoslavia would be proud to say that he is Yugoslavian. At the
height of the war, he would assert that he is Muslim and Bosnian.
Today he is Bosnian but at the same time he wants his country to
be affiliated to the E.U. and also wishes to be seen as European.
However, Maalouf does not merely offer his reflections, but
rather, he tries to postulate an ideal solution to this problem,
particularly for those in Europe who have the prospect of cultural
disintegration as most of it joins the European Union. Language,
he says, should be the meeting point of most peoples and should
form one’s cultural identity. He suggests that in the near
future it would be incumbent upon most people to know three
languages, including the mother tongue as it is a language that a
person should never be prevented from communicating in.
This view is plausible and certainly needed if Europe wishes to
continue fruitfully, but there are still many bilingual people
within Europe who face difficulties in finding one language within
which they can identify themselves. Second and third generations
of immigrant parents often lose their mother tongue completely, or
at least the language of their parents’ host country becomes the
prominent language. It is common in the U.K. to find people of
Indian, Pakistani, or Bangladeshi origins unable to read their own
languages in print. How many of them actually read newspapers,
novels, or even poetry in their mother tongue? The language of
their parents becomes used merely in the spoken form because of
their inability to read it. Yet, although they share English as a
language with a whole nation, one questions how their identity can
be the same as other Brits when their culture and religion are
intrinsically different. Therefore, although the author does
suggest language as a harmonious medium in expressing our
identity, one wonders how realistic this suggestion is.
Religion as an identity is discussed in detail, especially
considering that there is a growing trend in religious fervor
throughout the world. An impasse exists, he says, in ex-communist
countries, which people have tried to fill with religion. In
reference to this he mentions the rise of Islam worldwide as an
identity, which has seen both moderation and fanaticism within the
same voice. But it is disappointing to find that although he
discusses the increase in Islam as an ideal path, a religious
identity, or in the extreme factions, he does not even touch upon
the fanaticism and fascism of Zionism, particularly in the state
of Israel. His own country, Lebanon, is partly occupied by a
religious group that bases its laws of citizenship on
discrimination: and this is how Israelis assert their identity.
One feels that there is a void in this area, especially since it
is a living example of religious fanaticism and considering that
he refers to other countries and regimes: South Africa, the
Taliban, Algeria, Nazi Germany, the U.S., and the Balkans, to name
a few.
In this subject of religious identity, Maalouf asks the question:
why is it that the Christian West, which has a long history of
intolerance, has now produced democracies and respects others’
freedoms, whereas Islam, which has a long history of tolerance and
coexistence, now appears to be the “stronghold of fanaticism”?
The writer explores this question in detail, paying homage to
Islam in history, acknowledging that Islam was steps ahead of
Christianity and Judaism when it came to progress and tolerance.
This is a positive aspect of the book for anyone ignorant of the
dictates of Islam with respect to freedom of expression and
advancement - aspects misunderstood by Western readers. He
concludes on this point that Christianity has modernized itself
whereas Islam has not, discussing at length how there is a
rigorous debate on how religion affects people but little on how
people affect religion. However, what the writer does not seem to
acknowledge is that Muslims have not “modernized” their
religion because they believe that Islam was revealed for all
peoples, for all times, as opposed to Christians who know that
Christianity was revealed for the Jews of Palestine two millennia
ago.
Maalouf explains that Christianity has adapted to suit the
“needs” of the public, allowing sexual freedom and democracy.
But one wonders at what price, with the number of teenage
pregnancies, sexually transmitted diseases, and a democracy
whereby its fairness can be easily contested. One observes that
churches open for only a few hours a week and the clergy become
increasingly insignificant members of the community. The
Christianity we know today remains conveniently on the periphery
of most people’s lives. Maalouf, however, perceives this
distancing of Christianity as “modernization”.
The writer sites the veil or the Muslim woman’s dress code as
one aspect of Muslim lifestyle that has grown in recent years and
which he attributes to “backwardness” and lack of modernity.
This example is not discussed thoroughly; therefore he does not
explain to his reader why he considers it backward and why it
fails to conform to modernity. Maybe he uses this example because
it is symbolic of an Islamic identity. When a woman wears the veil
she is obviously identified as a Muslim. But is the veil all about
identity? Is it not something more than “I am a Muslim woman”?
Is it not some form of ammunition to prevent society from
exploiting her body and reducing her worth to mere physical
attraction? Is it impossible for her to be veiled and still assert
herself with the linguistic identity that the writer suggests? She
will obviously look different or even stand out, but so will
people of different races and religions who speak the same
language.
Another Islamic doctrine or tradition that may possibly cause
offence to those who have completely different views would have
been a more appropriate example. The writer considers the veil as
backwardness by mere symbolic association to the real
discrimination of women that has existed in the Muslim world for
centuries. It is obvious that the writer has chosen an example of
“lack of modernity” that appeals to his personal views on what
modernity is. One expected a better analogy.
Maalouf envisages a world where we do not desire to live beside or
exclusively fraternize with co-religionists. He considers that our
identity should not be according to religion although there is
still space for religion in a wholly spiritual aspect. Religious
doctrines, he says, should not be imposed upon anyone who does not
believe in those doctrines, even if the majority of the society
upholds this religion. Again this is a plausible remark from
someone whose religion has left both politics and economics to
Caesar. But one may ask why there is a refusal to accept laws
according to a particular religion when so many of the rules and
laws of secular governments stem from religion. There are numerous
laws in secular governments, based on Christian principles that
have blended into the Western law systems with no thought given to
their origins, yet accepted by many societies. Why should anyone,
the author included, be inclined to accept a social law based on
the ideas of John Stuart Mill, whose philosophy is taught in
universities worldwide with fierce criticism, and disinclined to
accept laws based upon Islam, which has centuries of scholarly
studies and one billion Muslims to vouch for it? As the author
makes constant reference to Islam, he seems to miss the fact that
Islam is the first religion/ideological system that is based on
the principle “No compulsion in religion,” where minorities
are given their rights to exist under their own laws.
When it comes to the current concepts of identity, one cannot
ignore the effect of globalization. Maalouf discusses
globalization (which he terms the “Trojan Horse”) in detail.
He observes the dangers that affect the less developed countries
and how globalization will ultimately draw the world into two
contrasting, yet insidiously similar results, such as universality
and uniformity.
This subject of identity could not be better timed as
globalization reinforces our need for identity. Maalouf has, as he
says, merely “scratched the surface” of the issue by
reflecting on a matter in which he is well qualified due to his
own multi-faceted identity. He suggests a happy medium in which
identity becomes the sum of affiliations: our identity is
expressed in honoring our origins, while not being ashamed of them
and not obliged to hide them, and also being receptive to our
adopted country.
Despite the few issues with which this review disagreed, On
Identity is an interesting anthology of observations and
reflections from a writer who is well versed in Muslim history.
If there is any strong point in this book, it is the call for
understanding and reciprocation between people of all religions,
nations, races and cultures. As much as racists are to blame (and
they must be the first to change) for their discriminatory actions
against minorities, the discriminated should not fall into the
trap of bitterness and revenge where a stalemate in integration
and common understanding and reactionary identities are formed as
a result. All individuals and groups have to find a common ground
in seeking identity that does not clash with others. This needs
objectivity, which is unfortunately lacking in most communities,
Muslim or otherwise. By the same standards, benefiting from this
book requires an open mind.
|
