Author: Emma Wright

Posted on

Final Blog Post :)

If I’m going to be completely honest, I was completely terrified coming into this semester. The topic was very intriguing (it’s spies who wouldn’t be intrigued) when I was looking at it on the course registrar but the whole small class, totally new topic was very intimidating. I also didn’t originally get it on my schedule, which means I didn’t come to the first class (I was extremely confused during second class to be honest). I also didn’t read the “THR” so I was shocked when I learned that there was an acting element. 

 

However, everything turned out to be okay, actually quite eye opening and perspective changing. Even though I lived in the Middle East for a majority of my childhood, I did not learn anything about the history of the Middle East. I really enjoyed being able to do this in the class. I also really like the set up of the class and how our discussions would go down rabbit holes on occasion. Not only were they interesting but also very funny (e.g. hating on the various spies). I loved our class blog. It was a really nice way to wrap up each spy. It allowed me to really sit down and think about all the stuff we discussed in class and finalize my thoughts. I often chose creative prompts like imagining a day with Gertrude Bell and doing a yelp review of Theeb because they are such an interesting way to think about the people we studied. I also think that the class and the creative assignments are a break from a lot of Princeton assignments. Labs and papers can be very serious and so being able to have these blog posts are very refreshing. I also enjoyed reading everyone else’s blog posts and seeing their creativity and opinions. Sometimes it’s hard to see what everyone else thinks in class (there’s only so much time) so being able to read it is very nice! 

 

I would say that my favorite part of the class was the play. The rehearsals were hilariously chaotic and unorganized and I enjoyed all of it. I loved being an Arab brother with Salma and jumping out of the “window” more and more aggressively every time. It also helped me connect to the material in a different way and connect to the class better. I think our in class conversations got better after the play. We were more comfortable with each other and I felt more comfortable speaking! I am so glad I took the leap and took the class because I’ve learned so much and met so many truly amazing people.

Posted on

My Yelp Review of Theeb

Hello my fellow yelpers! I recently watched the 2014 period drama thriller, “Theeb”. Written and directed by Naji Abu Nowar, the film premiered at the 71st Venice International Film Festival. This movie, unlike many shot in a similar area, picturing a similar time period, is completely in Arabic (with the exception of a few English words spoken by the British soldier (played by Jack Fox) sent to blow up the railway). Nowar also only used non-professional actors from the Bedouin community in Southern Jordan. This also differs from the norm in movies about this time period, namely in Lawrence of Arabia (1962) where Prince Feisal (an Arab character) is played by Alec Guinness (random white dude). 

The very interesting and very notable aspect of this movie is the absence of women. Originally I came to the conclusion that Nowar was simply a sexist. However, upon further research I discovered that Nowar was planning for there to be women in the movie but none of the Bedouin women in the community they were filming were willing to be in the movie. Nowar didn’t want to lose any authenticity by bringing in professional actors, which led to the whole no women thing. 

The plot line is very simple: Theeb and his older brother help guide Edward, a British soldier, through the desert, they are ambushed and Theeb is the only survivor, one of the attackers becomes friends with Theeb, they set off the two of them, and the movie ends with Theeb killing the attacker (“because he killed my brother” as Theeb says to Ottoman guards). The last scene of the movie watches Theeb riding off into the desert on a camel he has now learned how to corral (I always appreciated how Theeb was able to cling onto the back of a camel, FOR HOURS, the strength that he has is astou

nding). Honestly, my biggest issue with the film is that I was worried and am still worried about what happened to Theeb after the movie. How did he survive on his own in the desert? Where did he go? The unfinished ending left

me slightly frustrated. 

I would 100% recommend this movie to anyone, especially those who have watched Lawrence of Arabia. It provides a very different perspective to many of the movies that depict the time period. Not only does having the entire movie be spoken in Arabic change it, but using non-professional actors also adds nuance. It takes away the “oriental glow” that surrounds the whole Lawrence of Arabia type of story and allows viewers to actually see the Arab perspective during this time. Nowar alludes to the very real struggles that Arab guides had during the Ottoman Empire with the installation of the Hejaz Railroad. Also, Wadi Rum and Wadi Araba are beautiful and Nowar’s cinematography is excellent. I truly compel you all to watch this, it was a very interesting watch and one that changed the perspective on the time period. 

See you next week with the next movie, yelper fam!

Posted on

Shaping Perception

Freya Stark is the only one of the spies that we’ve studied that has had the ability to truly tell her own story. This is mainly because of the fact she didn’t die a tragic, untimely death like Bell, Eberhardt, and Lawrence. For both Eberhardt and Bell, their collections of letters were compiled by loved ones or family members (Florence Bell for Bell, and Victor Barrucand for Eberhardt). Since both of the women were dead, they did not have control over the choice or parts of letters that were selected for their books. Therefore, they were unable to control their own narratives. The same can not be said for Stark. In Beyond Euphrates, a story told through selected diary entries and letters, Stark picks and chooses what she wants to be read and seen by her audience. Furthermore, she comments on each of these excerpts, leading her audience towards a certain thought or belief. She is allowed to write her own story, to control her own narrative (though I’m sure others have many critiques of her (I know we have…)).

This follows the concept of “history is written by the victors”. While Stark is not necessarily a victor, she conquered not dying too young like her peers. It gave her the power to shape her public persona. Stark isn’t the only person or group of people to do it. After the Civil War, the Daughter of the Confederacy rewrote the textbooks to favor the Southern perspective (or rid them of any wrongdoing) that are still used today. Even though the women were unable to vote or had any “power”, they shaped the education systems in the south for hundreds of years. They changed the perception of the decisions made about slavery and other controversies during the Civil War by those in power in the South to be more favorable.

This power to shape your history or perception continues to influence the political scene today. As the government bans books, censors topics in higher ed, and defunds important research it is attempting to rewrite our history. We are allowing those in power to change our perception of reality and their view on history is becoming the accepted view. Trump forcing the Smithsonian to remove any exhibit or piece that would put the United States in a bad light is a prime example of reshaping the perception of the US. In allowing this, we are actively seeing our history be changed.

Freya Stark may have been one woman, but her continued legacy is a result of her ability to maintain control over how others perceive her. This idea is applicable to a wide range of situations, from the Civil War to current politics and we need to be aware of its power.

 

Posted on

My Day with Gertrude in Petra

*I am going to do a different take on this prompt and imagine my vacation to Petra in Jordan with Gertrude Bell in the modern day. It imagines a portion of our day as we walk through the ruins. Italicized text was taken out of readings we did in class.

 

It’s a hot and windy day in Jordan. Gertrude and I are on the third day of our week-long vacation through the ruins of Jordan. We are currently in Petra. Gertrude refuses to wear modern-day dress, instead choosing to wear the same muslin gowns that her mother, Florence, had sent her throughout her time in Baghdad. Crowds of people surround us, tourists with their families. Men and women are dressed in over-the-top Oriental outfits, selling trinkets and camel rides to the tourists. It is safe to say that it was a typical day in Petra (at least in the modern day Petra). I am unfazed by the bustle, but when I look over to Gertrude her face tells a completely different story. 

 

“This place used to be a fairy tale city, I camped amid a row of ornate tombs, three stories high, what has happened to this place?” she asked me with a disgusted look on her face. I laugh, telling her that this is normal. As we make our way through the crowd, Gertrude walks with her nose in the air, ignoring everyone around her. We are approached by a man dressed in bedouin attire. When he begins to speak to us in English Gertrude looks offended. Scoffing, she exclaims, “This is not the real East, I wish I was in Iraq. I like Iraq. It’s the real East”. The man, confused, walks away. I tell her that she shouldn’t talk to people like this. Her response was to glare and bustle away. 

 

As I trail behind her, I hear her muttering, “Oh how degraded this place has become. All these people, the children, the women. The Arabs have ruined it with their greed. Their need for money and tourism. If the British were in charge this would never have happened. We would have kept it preserved. Only the best could visit, the bravest, certainly no women or children. Only the true explorers.” Once I catch up to her, she suddenly stops, clearly she did not want me to hear what she was saying. Those thoughts were only for herself. Instead, she comments on the weather “it’s breathlessly, damned hot”. I chuckle, telling her that if she didn’t refuse the modern fashion of shorts or light linen pants and a t-shirt she wouldn’t feel so hot. Brushing my comment off she walks away. 

 

We make our way up the hike to the Monastery. I don’t blame her, it is hot. As we climb our way up the steps she remarks that when she had been in Petra last she made this hike on camelback, “Why do these people insist on walking? Camels are much more efficient!”. Laughing, I continue on without comment. 

 

She can be a little bit stuck up. I think she would prefer I wasn’t here at all, that she was all alone in this place. Maybe with her servant Fattuh. She definitely doesn’t want any other tourists here. She would much rather cosplay a lone adventurer than be one of the many. Be the first European women to see these places. She is clearly knowledgeable and interested in our surroundings but would rather explore solitarily. 

“Let’s go back to our hotel, maybe there we will be treated with the respect we deserve” she says, interrupting my thoughts. Knowing that I can’t change her mind, I agree to be done for the day. Hopefully some of the other places we visit will be more authentic for her.

Posted on

Isabelle Eberhardt vs. Dendrology

In my First-Year Seminar ‘The Memory of Trees: Analyzing Climate History Through Dendrology’ we often discuss authors’ motivations when writing their work. For the past couple weeks, motivation for both Isabelle Eberhardt and those writing about her has also been a topic of discussion. Even though the content of the two classes differs, one about trees and the other about a woman in the early 1900s, motivation drives the readings that we use in both. Why authors wrote what they wrote, what their internal motivations were, and what they hoped to portray to their audience are questions asked in both classes. 

For a lot of the texts we read in my First-Year seminar, the motivation is very obvious, the author wants to share their findings for their study and explain why they are important for society as a whole. They are consistently trying to convince their audiences that they are bringing new important knowledge to scientific conversations. When looking at the introductions written in both The Passionate Nomad by Rana Kabbani and Writings in the Sand, Vol. 1 by Marie-Odile Delacour and Jean-René Huleu their portrayals of Eberhardt differ quite dramatically. In Writings in the Sand, the authors characterize her as this tragically romantic figure who was the “first” person to give a true depiction of the “East” (when in reality people had been writing about the region for a long time). They use repetitive exaggerated language to describe her life’s journey, calling her upbringing ‘turbulent’, ‘tragic’, and ‘tormented’. They clearly paint her as a victim and therefore excuse many of her choices she makes once she reaches Northern Africa. It is clear that both authors are in awe of Isabelle Eberhardt and want their readers to be in awe as well. Rana Kabbani takes a different approach in her introduction to The Passionate Nomad. She portrays Eberhardt in a much more realistic light without the hyperbolic language. Kabbani is very clearly not in awe of Eberhardt, writing that she was “painfully thin, flat-chested, with decayed teeth, an abundance of bodily hair, and no periods”. She also doesn’t excuse Eberhardt’s actions, saying that she had “lost all sense of reality and self respect”. Kabbani is not trying to depict Eberhardt as a tragic, romantic figure. She doesn’t even try to put her in a positive light. She realistically portrays Eberhardt as the drunken, high, vagabond she was. 

Eberhardt’s motivations behind her writings, journey, and relationships are much more unclear. What were her intentions when she was passing information to Lyautey? Was she trying to protect the Algerian Arabs or did she want to feel like she belonged to the French? The struggle with Eberhardt is that deep down, she wanted to belong somewhere. She grew up in a household with a father who didn’t claim her as his daughter and an exiled mother. She moved to North Africa to find solace in the Sufi male society. Yet, she claimed to want to be completely alone and did not settle roots down with any specific group. She hated the French but she married her husband to become a French citizen (though those motivations were more centered around wanting to get back to Algeria). She wanted to be a nomad while purposely trying to destroy the nomad populations in Algeria by relaying information to the French. Part of what makes Isabelle Eberhardt the mysterious figure that draws many to obsession is the fact that no one truly knows what drove her to make the decisions she did. The ambiguity in her motivations fascinates her audience, it is what draws people to her a century after her death. 

Motivation is important in both scientific and biographical writing. In both of these classes, we need to analyze the reasons why writers write what they write (whether the topic is analyzing tree rings or a woman exploring Algeria in her 20s). It allows the reader to gain a deeper understanding of the author’s intentions and of the texts themselves.