| |
› Volume 15, 2010
 
›
Volume 5, December 2004
Archive:
›Volume 14, 2010
›Volume
13, 2009
›Volume 12, 2009
›Volume 11, 2008
›Volume 10, 2008
›Volume 9, 2007
›Volume 8, 2007
›Volume
7, 2006
›Volume
6, 2005
›Volume 5, 2004
›Volume 4, 2001
›Volume 3, 2000
›Volume 2, 1999
›Volume
1, 1999 |
| |
|
 |
| |
|
|
Anglo-American Identity and Romanticizing Arabia:
Wilfred Thesiger’s Arabian Sands and
Paul Bowles’ The Sheltering Sky
|
|
|
WASFI SHOQAIRAT
Al-Hussein University, Ma'an Jordan
DAVID SIMMONS
University of Northampton
|
Abstract
This paper analyses the mode of representing the Other that selected
writers of the twentieth century have employed in their depiction of
the area of Arabia and North Africa. It seeks to explore the related
yet divergent romanticizing tendencies in the work of two Anglophone
travel writers; specifically Wilfred Thesiger and Paul Bowles. Although
having a different geographical, social and economic background both of
these writers choose to depict the peoples and cultures of the Arabic
and North African area as a means of reflecting their own ideological
and spiritual desires. Bowles’ The Sheltering Sky (1949), (hereafter referred to as SS) and Thesiger’s Arabian Sands
(1959) (hereafter referred to as AS) portray an unmistakably
Orientalist interpretation of the Arab as ‘Other’, interrogating at the
same time Western civilization and the notion of the Oriental. This
interaction cannot simply be reduced to a gestural inflection. While
both authors’ texts espouse a set of ideologies that could in part be
considered Orientalist, it is somewhat reductive to suggest this is all
they offer. Indeed, this paper will attempt to argue that neither text
is entirely Orientalist in the very negative sense coined by Edward
Said. Rather both writers’ work can be considered to diverge from
Orientalist literature/discourse in significant ways, conveying a
commitment (be it positive or negative) to the indigenous cultural
values of the peoples they observe. As such this paper will re-examine
these two texts in the light of the double focus of representing the
Arabs as Others; oriented towards the object (Arabia and North Africa)
and towards the subject (the consciousness and literary style of the
authors). Both writers seem to represent a restricted encounter between
East and West, both writers ignore the standard conventions of
representing the Other cultures in order to accommodate their
narratives with the local people of Arabia and North Africa. Secondly,
both writers appear to represent what postmodern anthropologists and
literary critics have called ‘imperialist nostalgia’ (Rosaldo 68) as
cliché, which indicates an innocent yearning for a simple life within
those very colonial people who have modified or destroyed the Orient.
Finally, both writers seem to have a desire to depict Arabia and North
Africa as Oriental, mythical places of exoticism and perfect theatres
for romanticism; Thesiger goes there to prove his masculinity while
Bowles’ characters find that the Oriental fulfils their sexual hunger
and nihilism, while providing spiritual relief.
In “Grains of Utopia: The desert as Literary Oasis” Syrine Hout
explores the connections between Thesiger and Bowles. While Hout’s
thesis rests on a belief that the two writers are almost
interchangeable in their ideological outlook; “the similarities are
staggering” (Hout 112), this paper will attempt to argue that although
the two writers do share significant factors in common, there are
important differences in the manner in which they romanticise the
Arabian desert, its peoples and their way of life.
Keywords: Wilfred Thesiger, Paul Bowles, Orientalism, Arabia, The Sheltering Sky, Arabian Sands, Heroism, Masculinity, Imperialism
|
|
BACK
|
|
|
