arch/ive/ief (2000 - 2005)

I am not intending on becoming a film critic, and actually I am not even a fan of critical cinema. I like my films simple, commercial and Hollywood branded as the majority of the people of my generation. Going to the cinema for me has as goal: eating pop-corn and watching previews and being stunned by spectacular special effects or crazy absurd Tarantino like scenarios. Almost like everybody, I also was eagerly looking for the last episode of lord of the ring. For me the incredible descriptive talent of Tolkin could only be matched by the masterly piece of Art that its filming has proven to be. But now after having watched the trilogy and its last episode (return of the King), I can not avoid thinking, analyzing and I feel that it is my duty to comment.

It is clear that Tolkin masterly described human nature in all its facades and with its good and evil and their often intersected paths. The book (and the movie) is about a dilemma that the virtuous man is confronted with. Either succumbing to the desire of power and dominion driven by selfishness and greed (the ring), which is a path that will lead man to his doom and will be paved by insanity and obsession. Or choosing for solidarity, companionship, freedom and justice and renouncing to the seductions of the evil - but oh so desirable- ring of power. It is a simple metaphor that we all understand and it upholds wonderful values that we all adhere to.

The struggle that takes place between the evil empire of the Evil all seeing eye of Sauron and the species resisting it and fighting for survival and freedom is therefore a logical consequence. But if we look deeper to the distribution of roles we make some little discoveries that are worthy of studying. Sauron and his mighty land army of oarks and other monsters and his mighty Air force of Nasi Guls and his mighty secret services of wizards and infiltrators is the materialization of the powerful empire of Evil. All non-human races (dwarfs and Elfs and hobbits) despite their differences rivalries and jalousies seem to be at least agreeing on rejecting Sauron and resisting him. Only the race of Men is more divided, and clearly two major clans are to be distinguished, the men of the West and the men of the South. While the men of the west despite their internal divisions are clearly choosing for the righteous path of resisting the evil empire, the men of the south are not only refusing to resist evil, they are even fighting side by side with Sauron and his army of monsters. Let us go a bit further and try to check how these men of the south look like… well surprise surprise, they are rather dark with black hair mainly covering their faces wearing an Arab Imma and Arab clothes. All the features of being Arab are there, even the elephants of our great grandfather Hanibal the Carthagian are there, the only thing that they still actually needed to do is to let them speak Arabic. Interesting to note is that these Arab evil fighters do not exchange a word in the movie, they do not express emotions they just fight for evil and this is considered obvious. I thought that it would have been more logical if some kind of explanation was given why these people chose to fight with Sauron and his army of monsters against their fellow men. Even the Oarks get to speak and argue and fight in the movie, it is a movie where even trees could speak, but not the evil Arabs.

Now if we go and observe the features of the freedom fighters, the virtuous heroes, we can take the speech of Aragon the returning king when he addressed his army on the doors of Mordor, parading on his horse in William Wallace style asking for bravery and steadfastness of honorable warriors. One after one blond, white, Arian, even the dwarf is white, even the elfs are white and even the hobbits are white, not even one excuse black man or dwarf, not even one excuse Chinese hobbit, not even one alibi Arab elf. Everything that is colored and looking differently is evil, belongs to the enemy camp. And as if that needed to be geographically extra emphasized Aragon finished his speech with shouting: Men of the West!!!! Of course how can I forget, the men of the south are with the enemy.

And of course the western men are victorious, the monsters and the Arabs massacred and evil defeated.

Let us leave the movie and try to see how it could match our modern reality. The value definition is not very altered, the struggle is still between powers seeking world domination, on basis of greed and selfishness and peoples trying to defend their existence, to survive. But what about the roles? Is there an empire today in the world that is seeking world domination? Oh yes there is, and it is not making any secret of its intentions. That empire is the United States of America . Power and dominion are the two main motivations of its policy. Ok lets see further, does it also have the same drifts as the empire of Sauron, selfishness and greed? Yes it does, it is a system called capitalism and that is build upon enslaving and exploiting parts of the Human race for the prosperity of another part. Does it have an impressive land army that no other power can match? Yes it does it is called the US army. Does it have a control of the Air with impressive flying monsters that can crush every resistance and give its land army an extra edge in battle making it even more invincible? Yes it does it has flying monsters called the US air force. Does it have wizards working for it spying on people, sending assassination teams behind some others and corrupting or intimidating the rest? Yes it has evil wizards like that, they are called the CIA and NSA and the DIA and many other agencies. So we have clearly identified the evil mighty Empire of Sauron in our modern Time as being the USA and we have a complete match. The all seeing eye is the circle of powers formed by the convergence of American multinationals, Weapon industry lobby, neo-conservatives, Zionists and Christian-zionists. Bush is nothing but the captain of the Oarks he leads the battle but can not run the whole endeavor, Oarks come and go but the project of dominion is constant as long as the eye of evil is standing on its two towers.

But where are the brave men? Where are the hobbits and the Elfs and that only dwarf. Where are the Ents and the warrior trees? Where is Aragon ? Let us look further.

The Hobbits are the honest people all over the world who are trying to reject the system, to change the system to destroy the system by rejecting its essence by emphasizing the alternatives and upholding the values and the principals of solidarity and justice above social recognition criteria that are set by the oppressors and above status and prestige. The hobbits are the poor oppressed people that are rich in their dignity and in their pride, the zapatistas are hobbits, the oppressed minorities in the West are hobbits the poor people resisting the CIA gangs and supporting Chavez in Venezuela are hobbits there are more hobbits in this world especially in its southern part than there is anything else.

Now where are the brave warriors, the people resisting by the sword, the people cherishing the dream that the empire can be and will be defeated. The people hiding in valleys and mountains and being hunt by the Nasi guls of the all seeing eye but still managing to escape it and still managing to hit it and to put fear in the heart of the all mighty Sauron and his lackeys and to make the empire shake and to make the empire doubt? They are in the streets of Baghdad and Faloudja and karballa and Moussel. In the refugee camps of Palestine and the concentration camp of Gaza , they are there, hiding, seeking, watching, hitting the mighty enemy then escaping and hiding to fight another day. Where are the people who do not fear death? Who chant for death before the battle, who wish death before the battle. The people who do not care if they will win the battle but who care about the stand they will make against the oppressor, about the dignity the honor and the hope that resistance generates like Aragon said in the movie? Do you find them in the west? Among the men of the west? No, those people are our martyrs, our commandos, in Palestine , Lebanon , Iraq , Chechnya and many other places… they are the people who fought against the empire till the death in Nassiriya and stopped its army for days with all its Oarks, Nasi Guls and other monstrous war machines. The people who fought against the mighty Zionist war machine till the death in Jenine and in Beirut and in Rafah last week. You find those men in the south, men of the south. And who will destroy the two towers of evil? Who will hit the empire in such a manner that the empire can not predict, believe, stop? No comment.

And now, the last and most important feature of all these features. Where is the returning king? Where is Aragon the righteous and honest leader, the legitimate leader who will unite the divided, will strengthen the weak and will oust the corrupted? The leader who will turn the resistance into an Army, will turn the divided people into a mighty nation will break the dominion of the empire and reduce it into shades of disgrace and defeat. Where is that leader? These are the questions that are still to be answered one day. But once he will appear millions who are sitting will stand up, millions who are sleeping will wake up. We will walk and swear on our blood allegiance to his reign, the reign of justice, freedom and solidarity. We will defeat the Oarks, defeat the Men who fight with the Oarks, defeat the unjust kings and corrupted leaders and give the chance to the hobbits to destroy the ring and bring down the empire. We will be the brave warriors of that day, We men of the south!!!!!

As I said, I am not trying to become a film critic, and make no mistake about it, I loved the movie but only I know that I and millions of Arabs will understand it this way and only this way.

source: http://www.arabeuropean.org

At first this article caught my interest, but in what way is the alternative Dyab and 'the Arabs' think about, better than the original. Of course the fight of oppressed people for liberation is legitimate, but I thought they live everywhere and have no specific colour. I'm disappointed.

I have not read the book,and after seeing the movie have no desire to.
Clearly it is a story of good and evil written by a religious westerner and the movie reflects that.
What is so amazing about that? Tolkien is reflecting his beliefs in the book......simplistically.
The book and movie are for children..that is all.

Sure...Lord of the Rings is entertainment.
So is Uncle Tom. So are our Santaclaus and his BLACK servants. So are SnowWHITE and her PRINCE. So is Simba the noble KING.

Are you not underestimating the corruptive impact this kind of entertainment may have on kids (and grown-ups), Martin?

Culture has often been serving the interests of those in power. See e.g. Edward S. Said, Culture and Imperialism.

Dyab Abou Jahjah does have a point.
Just one thing though, Dyab...Biko was African, Ho Chi Minh was Asian, Arafat is an Arab and the old bolsjewik Stalingrad veteran down my street is pretty white and European.

Het is begrijpelijk dat de auteur van het artikel zich herkent in de strijd van de onderdrukten tegen de onderdrukkers. Maar dit wil niet zeggen dat Tolkien ook de bedoeling had de strijd uit te beelden die Abdou voor ogen heeft : de Amerikaanse imperialisten tegen de onderdrukte arabieren. Die tegenstelling is pas de laatste jaren door de media opgedrongen en kan dus geen onderwerp zijn van een boek dat gepubliceerd is in 1956.

Bovendien kan elk verhaal dat handelt over onderdrukkers tegen onderdrukten (en zo zijn er wel een paar miljoen) op die manier geïnterpreteerd worden.

De mensen uit het zuiden is een begrip dat nogal ruim geïnterpreteerd kan worden. Zuidelijk gelegen van wat ? Tolkien woonde in die periode in Engeland. De shire van de Hobbits staat model voor Engeland. Dus mensen uit het zuiden kan evengoed betrekking hebben op Afrika. In Afrika wonen heel wat Arabieren, maar nog veel meer niet-Arabieren.

Dat de mensen uit het zuiden een Arabische look hebben kan zelfs een heel bewuste keuze zijn. Engeland was in de periode van de tweede wereldoorlog militair behoorlijk actief in die streek. Vandaar misschien het Arabisch vijandbeeld ?

Bovendien is het aandeel van de mensen uit het zuiden gezien over de 3 delen nogal beperkt en ze worden zeker niet voorgesteld als de ultieme bedreiging. Uiteindelijk is de grootste bedreiging voor voortbestaan van het kwade Frodo zelf.

Enfin, het is veel te makkelijk om interpretaties van andermans verhalen als uw waarheid te verkopen...

Metaphors, thats what we are talking of when we take a movie and analyse it. Metaphors of good and evel, metaphors of a struggle. What Abou jahjah (and not abdou - get out of your etnocentrism please) meant to say is to analyse the metaphors used, and mainly see how good and evil is represented.

The point of departure for the analyse of the used metaphor was the difference north/south, and the personification of Arabs as the 'evils' of today. That tolkien fell into the westocentric trap of seeing the 'arabs' as the evil ones - though, may i recall upon to your memory, it werent arabs that colonised Great britain, but the other way around - doesnt make him less ethno and westerncentric.

And about the Arabs being the warriors... well, i think i understand the point being made. The interntational media and the spears of the eye of the US is today clearly oriented against the middle east. Twenty years ago things were different, and i dont think the author meant it another way than this. The warriors of today are the arab people, whether we like it or not. Maybe in ten years it wille be the chinese people, or the south american people, but today - the ones really facing Sauron's eye, and being prepared to give their own life for it, are people of Gaza and of Bagdad.

Possibly, Sinterklaas,I am underestimating.
However,entertainment is nowhere near as corrupting or influential as intelligent men imposing their rigid beliefs on other people.From religion to enviromentalism to socialism.....they are the people with blood on their hands.

I do agree with Dyab on his analysis of the propaganda, in fact that part of the column is brilliant, but I don't like his alternative. Of course every decent human being will identify with the good guys, so I can understand Dyab was anoyed by the fact that Arabs are portrayed as evil. I'm not pleased with that either. But turning things around and making the people of the West the bad guys is not making him better than the makers of the films. It is true that today the battlefield of the war against humanity is in the Middle East. That does not make the rest of the world automatically bad. Dyabs hostility towards the world he is living in, is not encouraging Hope. I don't think the eye for an eye mentality will be fertile.

Didnt you read the entire text? Dyab clearly talks about hobbits as the 'rest' of the world - fighting all over the world against injustice through different means. The hobbits as being the ones trying to construct alternative systems, seeking for an alter-globalisation, trying not to be subjected to the powers of the ring.

I didnt see arab/west in this. I saw the eye of Sauron not as the west (exept in contradicting the metaphor north/south - africans too are people of the south, not only arabs, south americans too...), but i saw it as the international policy of the US. And i think its very clear in what Dyab describes.

That is what he writes in the eight paragraph. I liked the article at first, but that changes in the nineth paragraph. There he writes you do not find brave people in the West. Once again, it is a fact that the battlefield of this war against humanity is in the Middle East because of oil and of racism (zionism) and I do respect and support the resistance of that people and their struggle for freedom and justice, but that does not mean there are no brave people in the West and furthermore it is not at all sure that committing suicide attacks is the intelligent kind of bravery.

Dyab does not make the people of the Middle East look very healthy by telling the 'chant' for death. And why are they most of the time killing their own people in Iraq ? They kill very little American military.

I dont think all Arabs are Warriors. I dont think there arent Warriors - or possible warriors in the West. But i dont see many people in the West prepared to give up the position of dominance, fight against the power concentration - and i dont mean by this the ESF gatherings, but a real fight, no matter what.
Conflict is not the ambition, change is. But if this means one will never attain the change - through which 3/4 of the world will get out of its misery and domination, of its minorisation and daily insults - without a conflict, then i am prepared to take that conflict; whether it is through giving up how i live now, or evenly giving up my life. That is what it is about. What is true resistance? What is true quest for freedom? I dont believe in a quest that goes through negociations - negociations can only follow when you are recognised. But as lon 3/4 of not recognised, as long as the Eye of Sauron keep observing the world only through its own gaze, then struggle is the only answer. Be it arab, chinese, brazilian warriors, i will be solidar.

Dear Snow White,

A few facts first...
1. Most of the people standing up against capitalism/imperialism today DO live in the South.
2. Most of the people taking up arms against imperialism today DO happen to be Arabs.
Tomorrow it might be the Congolese again, or the Zimbabweans, or the Cubans, or the Koreans...

Why?
1. Well...they haven't much to loose, do they?
2. And if someone starts putting a gun in your face telling you what to do and what not, well...


Bombs and suicide attacks, not intelligent, too few US casualties, too many innocent victims?
* Not all the Iraki victims are "innocent", are they? Many happen to be targeted deliberately by the Iraki resistance because of their collaboration with the Yankee regime.
Sure, they do make innocent victims as well (though they'll have a long way to go if they wanna catch up with Bush and his Oarks). Too many innocent lives? Yes, I tend to agree. But all said..who should be the judge of this? You? Me? Or the Iraki people?
* About 500 US soldiers have been taken home in body bags so far. Not enough? Well...definitely more than in the first two years of US military involvement in Vietnam.
I wonder how many US braves are shitting their pants at this very moment.
* Not intelligent, not effective? Well definitely effective enough to make more and more American mothers and fathers go out in the streets and demand "bring our boys back home".

This begins to look more and more as "Vietnam revisited", and Bush knows it.