So Many Identities, So Little Time
In the first minutes of “Palestine,” her one-woman show at the Fourth Street Theater, Najla Said announces, “I grew up as a Jew in New York City.” Except that she didn’t. Ms. Said is a hyphenated-hyphenate, a Palestinian-Lebanese-American Christian. And, oh yes, she’s the daughter of Edward W. Said.
“Palestine”: Najla Said, exploring her roots, at the Fourth Street Theater.
Identity is what’s on Ms. Said’s mind, and in the engaging if flawed “Palestine,” this self-described Upper West Side princess tries on a few of them. Perhaps comedian suits her best: humor is both her weapon and shield in a world that she can’t control and sometimes doesn’t understand.
In “Palestine” Ms. Said gives a loose tour of her family history and life, which has been an interesting one, even when she didn’t want it to be. That’s what happens when your dad, a Columbia professor and activist, is “the most famous Palestinian-American that ever was.” Though, she quickly adds, she’s not quite sure what that means. “I don’t think there are a lot of famous Palestinian-Americans.” (Mr. Said died in 2003.)
The scene that most vividly shows the complexities to which Ms. Said is so attuned involves an anorexic 18-year-old Najla being dragged on a family trip to the place her Jewish friends call Israel. To her, though, it is “completely different” because, she says, “I went to Palestine.” On a day trip to Gaza she wears an Agnès b. skirt and suede pumps from Madison Avenue. It’s what she has that seems most modest.
Gaza, with its barbed wire and heat and anger, leaves an impression: it “is nothing to me but a horrifically frightening place.” Najla had wanted to go to Paris.
Ms. Said, who juxtaposes her adolescent self-pity with the sadness she sees, understands she is a creature of privilege. Those suede pumps, her American passport and comfortable life back home set her apart from the Palestinian children she feels kinship with.
And when she leaves, she seems to want to forget them. Politics don’t interest her; they’re for her father and brother. The Middle East she embraces is Beirut, with its beaches and nightclubs (and also bombs), not her father’s cause.
Ms. Said is a warm, appealing performer and a good mimic, but she doesn’t have a lot of range. That might be fine in a shorter piece, but “Palestine,” directed by Sturgis Warner, feels long and repetitive at just under two hours. It begins to spin its wheels as Ms. Said tries to resolve a narrative full of unresolved feelings.
It’s a long time before we get to 9/11, the moment Ms. Said says changes her life forever, even if how it changes it isn’t entirely clear. And the final anecdote, meant to show how important being Palestinian is to her, is a muddle. Still, there’s something heroic about her broader stance: to a topic that generates fury and recrimination, she brings a lightness and a steadfast refusal to hate.
“Palestine” continues through March 21 at the Fourth Street Theater, 83 East Fourth Street, East Village; (212) 868-4444, smarttix.com.
Twenty-five year old Sunita George is a Pakistani Christian. She is a successful model. But then a recent incident has jolted her career and she is forced to rethink about her profession. One day, two bearded men entered the boutique on Zamzama Boulevard where Sunita was browsing with her friendsand threatened her to dump the western outfits and follow strict Talibanic diktat — cover your head and stay indoors. If they disobey the orders, chances are that they end up facing a harsher punishment.
Sunita never expected such things to happen in a cosmopolitan city like Karachi which is dotted with a swanky airport, flyovers, and multi-storied shopping malls. Unlike most of rural Pakistan, which is relatively conservative, in Karachi, women wearing jeans, saris and trendy shalwar suits are common. The city also has the highest percentage of middle-class women in the work force. Is this behind targeting this city in the “cleansing drive”?
It’s not only about wearing decent outfits. The radical groups are also against women’s education. Women — many of them married and having approval of their husbands to work — were prevented from going to their work places, badly affecting the social and economic condition of women in the province. The government chose to be a mute spectator.
After Afghanistan, Pakistan probably is the other nation where we find civilisation takes a step back to the pre-historic era. Religious extremism works like plague seizing the mind, body and soul. It is an established fact that whenever and wherever in the world, there have been religious movements, the freedom of women becomes the first casualty. For militants, controlling women’s independence as well as their sexuality becomes the easiest way of showcasing their authority. But in case of Pakistan, it only gives fodder to the pre-existing patriarchal traditions. It seems to suit all and sundry except for those women who have long enjoyed the liberal environments of progressive cities.
The swelling threats in Karachi are forcing young women to dress up more conservatively just to keep a low profile and avoid public gaze. But this is not just about wearing one type of clothes or the other; it is also a question of who should be dictating the Pakistani citizens aboutwhat they wear, eatand how they live. Or should anybody be dictating at all? More than mere women’s freedom and cosmopolitanism of a city, the bigger threat is on the authority of a government of a sovereign country. Women’s security and independence directly connects to the law and order situation; one of the basic institutions of an independent terrain.
At one glance, Karachi looks like any other international city. But soon one will witness the other side of this glossy picture when the local residents warn you not to wander alone as you may be subjected to the risk of being looted, pestered or murdered. Just in a week’s time several cases have been registered against educated young men stealing cars from posh colonies, snatching jewellery from women and even murdering anyone for the sake of a few thousands. Is it still intricate to comprehend that more than terrorism, it is lawlessness, unemployment and high inflation which are bigger threats to Pakistan. One concludes that in some way these Talibani dictates are also interrelated to the inadequacies in the law and order system.
The brighter portrait of Pakistan is also shown by its women; undeterred by threats they are fighting for the cause of fellow women, taking part in political processions, demonstrating to the judiciary, speaking their minds on television (a good number of women journalists are entering Pakistani electronic media while some of them have already become household names).
The threshold of tolerance may well and truly be crossed, if the current regime in Pakistan doesn’t come forward and solve the crisis.
— Arfa Khanum Sherwani is a Delhi-based television journalist
Favorable views of Russia, Palestinian Authority up slightly; views of Iraq down
February 19, 2010
PRINCETON, NJ -- Americans' perceptions of 20 nations that figure prominently in the news or U.S. foreign policy held quite steady in the first year of the Obama administration. Canada retained its top position in Gallup's annual country ratings, with 90% of Americans viewing it favorably, unchanged from 2009. Iran continues to rank last, with 10% this year.
Eight of the countries rated in this year's World Affairs survey are viewed favorably by a majority of Americans. Great Britain nearly matches Canada in favorability, while smaller majorities hold positive views of Germany, Japan, Israel, India, France, and Egypt. Mexico and Russia are both about as likely to be viewed unfavorably as favorably, while 10 countries are generally viewed unfavorably.
"Although the two-percentage-point decline in Mexico's overall favorable rating between 2009 and today is not significant, the result is that, for the first time since 1993, fewer than half of Americans have a favorable view of the United States' southern neighbor."
Yemen was included on the list for the first time this year, amid news that the Christmas Day underwear bomber had ties to a Yemen-based al Qaeda terrorist group. Its 21% favorable rating is among the lowest in the Feb. 1-3 poll, although about one in four Americans have no opinion of that country.
Only Iraq saw a statistically significant, albeit small, drop in favorability over the past year on the basis of the combined percentages viewing each "very favorably" or "mostly favorably." Most countries' ratings are essentially unchanged, while favorability toward Russia and the Palestinian Authority is up slightly.
Partial Rebound in Views of Russia
After dipping to 40% in 2009 -- most likely in response to Russia's 2008 military crackdown on Georgian separatists -- favorability toward Russia has recovered somewhat to 47%; however, this remains lower than where it stood for much of the past decade.
The historical high point for positive U.S. feelings toward Russia was 66%, first reached in 1991 and repeated in 2002. However, favorability toward Russia plummeted to 41% in March 2003, after that country sharply opposed the United States' launching of the Iraq war. (U.S. public opinion of France and Germany, two other countries opposed to the war, also turned more negative in 2003.) By February 2004, Russia's favorability score was back to 59%, and it remained above 50% until 2008.
Palestinian Authority Sees Slight Improvement
Americans' views of the official governing body of the Palestinian people -- the Palestinian Authority -- have been decidedly negative over the years. However, there was a slight improvement in views over the past year, from 15% viewing the Palestinian Authority favorably in 2009 (and just 11% after the Hamas group won the Palestinian elections in 2006) to 20% today.
Favorability toward the Palestinian Authority was quite low for most of the Bush administration, except for February 2005, when the two sides had just announced an informal truce during Mideast peace talks.
Favorability Toward Mexico Still Dampened
Although the two-percentage-point decline in Mexico's overall favorable rating between 2009 and today is not significant, the result is that, for the first time since 1993, fewer than half of Americans have a favorable view of the United States' southern neighbor. Mexico's image in the U.S. has generally been in decline since 2005.
Heightened U.S. attention to illegal immigration from Mexico, as well as to intensifying violence in the Mexican drug war, could explain the deterioration of Mexico's U.S. image in recent years.
Notable Differences
Most of the countries rated this year are viewed more favorably by young adults (aged 18 to 34) than by those 55 and older. Additionally, some are viewed differently by Republicans and Democrats.
- As a result of the generational differences, Egypt, China, Russia, and Mexico are all viewed favorably by at least 6 in 10 young adults, but by fewer than half of adults 55 and older.
- Significant age gaps exist in favorability toward Cuba, Yemen, Pakistan, North Korea, the Palestinian Authority, and Iran, although most members of all age groups still view these countries negatively.
- France, Russia, Cuba, North Korea, the Palestinian Authority, and Yemen are all viewed more favorably by Democrats than by Republicans. Israel is the only country rated this year that is viewed more favorably by Republicans.
A handful of countries -- Canada, Great Britain, Germany, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Afghanistan -- receive similar ratings from the broad age and partisan groups.
Survey Methods
Results are based on telephone interviews with a random sample of 1,025 national adults, aged 18 and older, conducted Feb. 1-3, 2010. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points.
Interviews are conducted with respondents on land-line telephones (for respondents with a land-line telephone) and cellular phones (for respondents who are cell-phone only).
In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.
No comments:
Post a Comment