RIP Naguib Mahfouz

[Desperado]

The Egyptian novelist, Naguib Mahfouz, wrote more than 30 novels, and in 1988 became the first Arab to win the Nobel prize for literature. He died on in hospital on 30 August after injuring himself in a fall in July.

Rest in peace Naguib Mahfouz!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5297592.stm

[Iqbol]

Giybat bo'lmasinu, faqat media ko'p gapirgani uchun, quyidagi post. Badjahl arab dilimdagi gaplarni aytipti:

http://angryarab.blogspot.com/2006/08/naguib-mahfouz-this-is_30.html

Naguib Mahfouz (this is the mistransliteration of Western media) died. What can I say. As an avid admirer of classical and modern (up to 1960 with few exceptions) Arabic literature, I was never a huge fan of his works. I certainly will argue that his prominence in Western eyes rose in the Sadat era—when Sadat’s trip to Israel made Egypt an acceptable model of Arab countries, when things Egyptian became less controversial than things Arab or Muslim in general. The respect for Mahfouz was a reward for Sadat. This explains why Chirac, who took time from his busy schedule of meeting daily with rich Arab royals, hailed Mahfouz today as a "man of peace." And do you think that the Nobel Committee or Western literary critics are qualified judges about Arabic literature? And why was Mahfouz not discovered back say in the 1960s? Or during Suez? This also was possible because Mahfouz was never offensive—in Western eyes. He knew what to say, and he certainly does not deserve awards for courage—he was not courageous under King Faruq, or under Nasser, or under Sadat, and certainly not under Mubarak. His criticisms of regimes were most general and least offensive—as in Miramar. Mahfouz would never be considered the best choice to represent Arabic literature in the 20th century. If you look at the 20th century, you can think of so many other more qualified candidates: Mikha’il Nu`aymah for Sab`un (his autobiography), Taha Husayn for several of his works, including Al-Ayyam; Jubran possibly for Al-Mawakib or for his Al-Arwah Al-Mutamarridah; Tawfiq Al-Hakim for his plays or for his work especially `Awdat Ar-Ruh; Tawfiq Yusuf `Awwad for Ar-Raghif; or Jurji Zaydan for his historical novels; and obviously`Abdur-Rahman Munif for many works; even `Abbas Mahmud `Aqqad; or even Yusuf Idriss. I never thought of Mahfouz as an adib (a man of belle lettres); I always viewed him as a successful writer and novelist, only a step ahead of Yusuf Sib`i and Ihsan `Abdul-Quddus. As Faysal Darraj, or was it Edward Kharat, said: he was a traditionalist adherent of the extreme realism school. I enjoyed reading the trilogy and his other works, but still did not think of his books as "literature." And if you want to give awards for Arabic literature: you think of the poets too: Adonis, Mahmud Darwish, Nazik Al-Mala’ikah, Badr Shakir As-Sayyab, Khalil Hawi, `Abdul-Wahab Al-Bayyati, and others. So o Nobel Committee: please, don’t tell me what is and what is not Arabic literature, ok? Stick to your awards for Sadat and Kissinger and others like that.

[Iqbol]

Another comment on another "reknowned arab novelist"

And now ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Tahar Ben Jelloun (who can't even properly transliterate his own name into French). OK, Mr. Ben Jelloun: now jump for the White Man. OK. Good jump, Mr. Ben Jelloun. Now, show the White Man that you can sit. Good job; good job. OK, Mr. Jelloun: now mimic the Orientalism of the White Man: "In fact, until the beginning of the 20th century, Arabs didn’t write novels, in large measure because Arab society didn’t recognize the individual (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/03/opinion/03jelloun.html?_r=1&oref=slogin)." (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/03/opinion/03jelloun.html?_r=1&oref=slogin) Good job, Mr. Ben Jelloun. Please don't hesitate to share similar wild stereotypes about Arabs with the White Man. He will really love it. (First of all: what does that mean, that Arab society didn't recognize the "indidvidual?" What did Arab society recognize instead? The falafil? And was the West recognizing the "indidividual"? Was that during the slave times and holocaust years and the world wars and Clinton and Bush years? Please enlighten me, oh Mr. Ben Jelloun. And I don't understand why somebody who writes in French is seen, just because of his ethnic background, as an expert on Arabic literature especially when he can't even write in Arabic. Are African-Americans, for example, just by virtue of ethnic background experts on African literature? Also, Ben Jelloun clearly does not know what he is talking about. The Maqamat tradition in classical Arabic literature for example was all about the individual, as was classical Arabic poetry, as in Mutanabbi's: "I am the one at whose literature the blind looked; and my words have reached those who are deaf.")

http://angryarab.blogspot.com/2006/09/and-now-ladies-and-gentlemen-mr.html


Indeed, Ben Jelloun said this commenting on Mahfouz:

Before Mr. Mahfouz, the novel as literature — literature as map to understanding — was not part of Arab culture. In fact, until the beginning of the 20th century, Arabs didn’t write novels, in large measure because Arab society didn’t recognize the individual. Only in 1914, with “Zainab,” by Hussein Haykal, published as a serial, did what is considered the first real Arabic novel appear.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/03/opinion/03jelloun.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=login