Muslim, Algerian and Transsexual

There are few books in Arabic which openly discuss sexuality. Fewer still talk about homosexuality, and none have dared to mention transsexuals. None, that is, until Lebanese journalist Hazem Sageigh wrote a biography about a pioneer of the Arab underground transgender movement, telling her story of becoming a woman in Algeria. Published in 2010, ‘Muzakerat Randa Al-Trans’ (‘The Memoirs of Randa the Trans’) describes Randa’s struggle to forge her identity while battling family, society, country and religion. Both beautiful and brutally candid, the book traces Randa’s life from boyhood to her first sexual experience with a man, an episode which is described in this extract below, translated exclusively by the Arab-Israeli Book Review.

——

‘My name is Randa’

I constantly wished to change my name. I felt what colonised countries must have felt when, upon gaining independence, they hastened to choose a different name from that which the coloniser had given them. One’s existence, I felt, couldn’t become complete unless her name were identical with her personality; nor could she genuinely present herself to the world, or properly identify herself, if her name remained contrary to who she really is.

Once I thought of renaming myself Miriam. The revered statue of Miriam (Mary), and her symbolic representations in Christianity, didn’t put me off, even though I am a Muslim. A burning obsession overtook me to get rid of Fouad, my male name: Fouad must die; I must kill and bury him. I settled on Randa. It was the name my mother once told me she would have chosen had I been born a girl.

'Fouad must die; I must kill and bury him.' (Photo: AFP)

I had been deprived of my name the same way I was deprived of being the person I loved to be. When I was fourteen, I loved to sew clothes for my siblings and myself. I thought of myself as a good tailoress, but I was rebuked because sewing, I was told, was for girls. Even now my thwarted desire leads my memory back to our sewing machine, to the scissors, needle and thread.

I liked cooking too. I prepared delicious recipes which were loved by everyone who tasted them. But I was told that for a man to stand in the kitchen is shameful beyond description. I used to wait for my family to go out so I could go into the kitchen and prepare the recipes I’d dreamt about. I carried out all this as though it were some secret activity totally prohibited by common laws, and once finished I’d rush to conceal all traces, washing pots and dishes, and airing the whole house to get rid of the smell, so that my family wouldn’t come back and catch me red-handed. The more complicated the recipes were, the more I liked preparing them.

It was the same when I once fancied belly-dancing. I loved to dance, performing delicate movements, especially ones through which femininity and sensual signs are clearly revealed. The desire to practice belly-dancing lingered with me for a long time. I used to watch dancing programmes on the telly, wishing to learn, but of course this was not a wish I could contemplate fulfilling. This sort of thing was for women. And I, alas, was a man.

I also wanted to be a fashion designer. Again I was rebuked. This is not a bread-winning career, I was told. Most importantly, it’s not for men. But I persevered, though it felt as if I were climbing a mountain barefooted. It felt as if only with tears and blood could I forge my right identity and occupy the space which my imagination sought.

'When he penetrated me and I had an erection, I felt embarrassed; I was meant to be a woman.' (Photo: AFP)

It’s expected that women eat less than men to look slim, so I starved myself until I became anorexic. Like all those obsessed with being skinny, I felt dirty and guilty every time I ate, and rushed to throw up. Being full of food disgusted me and made me want to cleanse myself. If I couldn’t control the insides and depths of my body, I could at least take charge of it from the outside. I could make sure it didn’t look like that of a man.

These concerns over my appearance aside, existential questions persisted. I constantly asked myself: who was I? Who was the person whose name and gender and will seem to go against her? Who was deprived of possessing her own body, deprived of hobbies and sources of pleasure? And where do you expect me to start searching for meaning in a narrow-minded world, a world which is particularly ungenerous with meaning?

It’s impossible to exist among the people of Algeria, at work or in the street, being nothing but a ghostly figure, who cannot acknowledge her interior demands. Who might look at herself and suspect there is no self there. Worse still, who lives among such strictness and ignorance that she might be tempted to believe all this and give up.

My search for names and meaning met with little success in a world which kept persecuting and rejecting me; not allowing me the slightest acceptance.

I was fourteen when I first heard the word gay. It was said in English, probably because homosexuals’ names, and homosexuality generally, are often mentioned abusively in Arabic. I thought then that every gay-bottom thought of himself a girl, and that his whole body language became feminine.

I was confused. My mind was suspended in a vacuum. The link between words and things remained unsettled, shaky. The freedom which was available for me didn’t really mean much; it was their freedom. As for my freedom to enjoy myself, the freedom I desperately sought but couldn’t possess, I had lost its meaning. I felt as if I had been kept in a freezer. My freedom had been frozen and postponed. My awareness of it came slow and late.

But something happened when I was sixteen. A crack in the life of secrecy appeared, and a new light shimmered through. I began watching porn films. In my room I’d lower the TV sound and watch the adult channels. I especially enjoyed seeing the male organ of the actor, erect and potent.

When the actor took the woman in public, I used to fantasize that he was taking me instead. Right there in public, in the sunlight, in front of all those people. He’s the man and I’m the woman. During such sessions of fantasy I’d gently touch up my body, avoiding my penis. This was for me alone, and not for it. I’d fantasize about the actor’s penis penetrating me, in whatever orifice he wished. I was willing to welcome him anywhere in my body.

Male domination became a source of excitement and joy for me. Male force and potency thrilled me, awakening what had been dormant. The man who could dominate me best would be a typical brown-skinned stud. I wanted him to be strong, to touch my backside and excite me, but not to hurt me. I’m not a masochist; I never fantasized about being raped. I wanted him to be strong, yet friendly, passionate and caring; someone who lusts and loves, but still respects his partner.

'I’d believed that Islam condemns homosexual relationships. But was I a man?' (Photo: AFP)

It seemed I had made up a man who is impossible to find in the real world. Someone who, on the one hand, represents our myth of the first man, the cave-man; but who, on the other hand, could restrain the first, tame him until he takes the shape of the second, another mythical and yet non-existent man. I don’t know whether I was trying to link the past to the future, tying up the man who I wished would invade me with the woman that wanted to defend herself against his invasion. The adult TV carried me into a world which stimulated all sorts of ideas, letting my imagination travel and grow.

In spite of all the ups and downs, I found myself getting into my first serious relationship. Malek seriously loved me, but he had a weird temper and a relentless propensity for self-destruction. Whenever I rejected one of his requests he’d punish me, or himself, lacerating his body with sharp objects. It was terrible and absurd, yet it engendered in both of us an extraordinary desire in which death was compounded with love and lust. It wasn’t easy for me. It was my first relationship and I was still reluctant. I always hesitated before surrendering my body to him. I’d believed that Islam condemns homosexual relationships. But was I a man? And why does Islam designate me as a male? Indeed, what does my religion say about this?

With Malek I knew my body better. I recognised its peculiarities as mine. When we slept together, Malek treated the whole thing as a simple homosexual relationship. I didn’t. When he penetrated me and I had an erection, I felt embarrassed; I was meant to be a woman. Malek didn’t understand my reaction, nor did my closest friends, who wouldn’t concede that a man’s source of pleasure is his penis, while for a woman it’s her whole body. It lasts longer for a woman; that’s what men fear and won’t admit. Reaching climax remained a costly process; either it was mixed with great pain or followed by it. And things only got worse.

One night I returned home from an evening with Malek and found my father sitting in the kitchen, smoking. I assumed that his staying up had nothing to do with me, that he was just suffering a slight insomnia or because he had some troubles relating to his work. But then without any forewarning he started telling me how one’s reputation is established from one’s childhood onwards, and how I, Fouad, didn’t come from an ordinary family but from a well-known clan. He went on, asking rhetorical questions: what will people say if you keep behaving this way? Do you want them to make fun of you? To treat you the way they treated the mayor?

The mayor of the town was homosexual, and people called him Pamela, after Pamela Anderson. I switched off. I stopped hearing his voice, or the voices in the street of people not yet asleep. I only saw his lips moving, appearing in different forms and shapes as if they were a rubber band, while I felt as if I were in a silent film. Mechanically and nervously I started eating, hoping he’d leave me alone. But when I raised my eyes and saw his lips still going on, I left him without asking his permission and rushed up to my room. I tore down posters and threw my books and ornaments across the floor.

I was furious. If I were so bad, I thought, then it was only because of my parent’s education, or because of something they had done or that was done to them. My anger seemed like it would never end. I threw myself over the things I had broken and scattered across the room. I didn’t know whether I was punishing my parents or myself, whether I meant to attack my tendencies and moods, or just to exhaust my body throughout that long night. I slept.

The surprise happened the day after. I’d expected mother to tell me off for what I had done with my room. I’d been getting ready for an inescapable confrontation, rehearsing for the expected row: ‘If she says this I’ll say that, and if she accuses me of this I’ll reply with such and such. If she raises her voice, I’ll raise mine!’

But to my utter surprise I saw her laughing in an unusually cheeky way, as if nothing serious had actually happened. She seemed to be saying, ‘No problem now, it’s finished and gone!’ I suspected it was actually her, the stronger of my parents, who had put my father up to it. And perhaps because of that, she felt that she needn’t be angry for what I had done. The point that she wanted made had been made, and that was the end of the matter.

But who’s to say that’s the end, who’s to decide the end of a matter that concerns my life and body and desires? The inevitable question recurred: what felony was I being punished for? If I believed in reincarnation, I would have suspected that I had previously been a tyrant or murderer, and had to suffer for this in my present life.

The story needed an ending, and that ending must mean my own, I believed. So I borrowed my father’s car, pretending that I was going to do some shopping, and tried to run myself down a high hill. The car crashed but, ironically enough, because I didn’t put on the safety belt I got stuck between the two front seats and, unfortunately, survived.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Features

In Brief: Ms Soueif’s Revolution

Ahdaf Soueif’s book about the Egyptian uprising shows her merely posing as a revolutionary, writes Samir El-Youssef

Ahdaf Soueif in Tahrir Square. (Photo by Hossam el-Hamalawy)

In her recent review of Egyptian novelist Ahdaf Soueif’s new book Cairo: My City, Our Revolution, Louisa Young urges us to read the book and pass it on to our youth. Young is a generous reviewer, and a polite one too. Otherwise she might have asked: why didn’t Soueif write a book about Egypt, about the tyranny and corruption of its now-deposed president, earlier? Nor does she ask why Soueif had to publish her book now, when the revolution is not yet over and nobody knows its final outcome. Couldn’t she have waited until we have learned from the experience and know where we are going?

To the first question, here is a blunt answer: Soueif belongs to that league of hypocritical and opportunistic writers and intellectuals who only raise their voice against those who can not or could no longer hurt them. Thus our revolutionary writer waited until Mobarak became old and toothless and abandoned by his closest friends and allies to write a book against him, and indeed to pose as a revolutionary.

As for the second question, well, the books industry could not waste the opportunity to capitalise on the mass media surrounding the Arab Spring. There are already a huge stack of books on the subject, telling us all sorts of things and written by people some of whom don’t know a word of Arabic. So why shouldn’t Soueif, who had been seen manning the barricades at Tahrir Square, supply the market with its demands? And what’s wrong with making a bit of cash on the side of a revolution?

4 Comments

Filed under In Brief

Sayed Kashua, the lonely bridge builder

Samir El-Youssef on the Arab-Israeli author who escaped his destiny of “writing for the trees”, whatever the costs

Sayed Kashua (Credit: The New York Times)

Once upon a time, back in 2005, a group of Arab and Israeli writers met on the Israeli-Jordanian border with the intention of building a cultural bridge. It was a noble attempt and like most noble attempts it came to virtually nothing. Agreement was not totally absent though; a Jewish Israeli and an Arab Israeli agreed on one thing: attacking one of the participants.

The Jewish Israeli, who’s known for his comically dogmatic nationalism, claimed that people must only write in their own language. Arabs must write in Arabic; Israelis must write in Hebrew. The Arab Israeli complemented his fellow citizen by making the grand claim that language is a matter of ideology; the language one chooses to express oneself in is an ideological choice.

So what are you saying, some of the restless audience asked; that Conrad, Edward Said, Paul Celan, among many others, have actually failed to write well because they didn’t use the language of their original or national identity? And should we conclude that a writer such as Edward Said, in spite of all he has written, was actually an advocate of British and American imperialism? Or that Celan, whose family was annihilated in Nazi concentration camps, was actually a German nationalist?

No, of course not. The two goats were not trying to introduce a theoretical argument about language and literature. They just wanted to attack Sayed Kashua, an Arab Israeli who has decided to write in Hebrew. Worse still, or what made the attack so venomous, is the fact Kashua has actually succeeded in becoming popular in Israel and abroad. Envy is the motive-mother of all disputes, especially among writers!

Kashua replied that it’s pointless to write for the trees. Within the isolated Arab community of Israel there is no such thing as a book industry. Indeed reading has remained a relatively marginal practice among even the educated of that community.

A gifted satirist, Kashua probably didn’t want to spoil the punch-line by expanding on the pointlessness of writing for trees. Nor were the two grim zealots in a generous mode of interpretation. Otherwise they would have grasped that Kashua was talking not only about his personal ambition of going beyond the borders of a small and readerless community; but also about the very business at hand: building a cultural bridge.

Trees are very useful for many things, including building bridges, but believe it or not, there is no hope whatsoever that they could become readers. Unlike trees, people of the opposite side, the enemies, are readers and potential readers. If one aims to build a bridge, then obviously one needs to understand and speak the language of those on the opposite bank.

Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Features

Book Club competition: Write us a blog!

Our Arab-Israeli Book Club is currently reading Sayed Kashua’s novel ‘Dancing Arabs’. If you’d like to join us in London this evening to discuss the book, please visit our events page  for details. We’ll be posting a podcast of the event early next week.

We hope you’ve been enjoying Sayed Kashua’s novel Dancing Arabs. As the book club continues to expand, we’d like to introduce a new online element to the debate: you!

Our London events always generate vibrant discussions, and those who cannot attend in person are increasingly joining in online. We want to make more of this. So, do you think you could write a 500-word response to Dancing Arabs? You could tackle some of the questions we’ve posed about the novel, or address another element of the book entirely. It’s up to you. We’ll publish a selection of the best blogs, and the winning entry will receive a copy of our next book club selection, Eshkol Nevo’s World Cup Wishes.

So whether you can join us in London this evening, or will be listening to the podcast (published early next week) from somewhere else entirely, we look forward to hearing from you.

Please send your blogs to [email protected]. Deadline for entries: Monday 20th February.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Book club, News

Identity Apart, We Are Boringly Alike!

REVIEW
by Alexandra Senfft

Second Person Singular by Sayed Kashua (This review is based on the German translation, Zweite Person Singular, published by Bloomsbury Verlag, Berlin, 2011. An English translation will be published in the UK in 2013.)
———

The Arab-Israeli writer Sayed Kashua is what some American sociologists might call the ‘marginal man’. He doesn’t identify with the mainstream, but instead operates on the fringes of neighbouring social groups. He enjoys an intimate knowledge of the peculiarities, similarities and differences of opposite communities – a position which allows him to play a mediating role, particularly in times of conflict.

Though he has chosen to write in Hebrew, Kashua nevertheless shares the feelings and concerns of Arab-Israelis. Legally speaking, they are Israel citizens, yet they cannot help identifying with the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, and the refugees beyond. The Jewish majority eyes them suspiciously, calling them “the 5th column”, and considers them a demographic threat. Little wonder, then, that the dilemma of identity is a major theme in Kashua’s novels.

A marginal man he might be, but Kashua is at the centre of the Israeli literary scene. Praised by some as a leading author, he has written the very popular Israeli sitcom Avoda Aravit (Arab Labour), and writes columns for the Israeli newspapers Ha’aretz and Hai’r. His novels have been translated into 10 different languages.

Following Dancing Arabs and Let It Be Morning, now comes his third novel Second Person Singular, which in Hebrew also means “second body”. Yet again the question of identity is raised and toyed with. The protagonist, an Arab social worker called Amir, is nursing a Jewish teenager, Jonathan, who is in a coma after trying to hang himself. Amir’s story is told in the first person.

The young man begins to read Jonathan’s books, listen to his CDs and use his camera. He gradually identifies with the immobile adolescent, eventually becoming the other (the ‘second person’). Jonathan’s mother, a leftist Israeli, treats Amir like her own son, allowing him to move in with her and Jonathan. “Kindly do me the favour of not speaking to me in that submissive tone like you were a white woman’s slave,” she pleads with him.

Amir eventually uses Jonathan’s identity card to enrol at a prestigious academy in Jerusalem to study photography. He is accepted because he pretends to be Jewish, yet his fellow students rail about the “quota-Arab” who usually enjoys better chances of getting a college place than a Jew: “A Kibbutznik from Galilee said he’d heard that an academic year without an Arab student was a friggin’ year which would not produce any success in the Israeli world of arts… Too bad I wasn’t born Arab, said the Kibbutznik, and everyone around the table roared with laughter.”

While Amir is about to become a fashionable photographer, albeit with a different name, an Arab lawyer in a parallel story is about to destroy his career, putting his fake Jewish identity at stake. The nameless lawyer, told in the third person, is a typical Uncle Tom who has worked his way up by aligning himself with the Jewish majority. “He had to do everything in order to be perceived as the top Arab lawyer in town. Owning a fancy black Mercedes was simply part of that.” Struggling against his Arab complex, he has tried to melt into mainstream society. He eats sushi at the priciest Japanese restaurant in town, drinks whiskey, and reads European literature in order to make up for alleged gaps in his early education.

Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Reviews

Book club: 10 questions about ‘Dancing Arabs’

Our Arab-Israeli Book Club is currently reading Sayed Kashua’s novel ‘Dancing Arabs’. If you’d like to join us in London on 2nd February to discuss the book, please visit our events page  for details. We’ll be posting a podcast of the event shortly afterwards. We welcome comments and arguments here on the blog, which we’ll respond to as soon as possible.

1. The novel’s first line reads: ‘I was always looking for the keys to the cupboard.’ What symbolic relationship does this line have to the novel as a whole?

2. Would you say the novel’s narrator is more Israeli or Arab?

3. In the first section, the two Arab school boys are tormented by their Jewish peers. What impressions does this give you about the two communities living together in Israel?

4. How do the children’s war games in chapter 5 (‘Cap Guns’) reflect their cultural confusion?

5. In the same chapter, how effective do you find the unreliable narrator technique as a way of depicting the indirect influence of the massacres at Sabra and Shatila on the young Sayed and his brother?

6. Some people would view the relationship between Naomi and the Arab narrator as a symbol of coexistence. Others may see it as evidence that both characters have assimilated. How do you see it?

7. Chapter 6 is called ‘Land’. What is the symbolism of the family struggle for land in this chapter? What does it suggest about the family, and what resonances does it have for the wider Arab-Israeli conflict in terms of “absentees’” land?

8. Do you agree with Naomi’s angry reaction at the narrator for not standing during the memorial siren?

9. The author plants a universalist message in Naomi’s ideals: “she talked a lot about human beings as human beings. About how there was no difference between national groups, how individuals should be judged on their own merits, and how you shouldn’t look at a whole group as if everyone were the same. She said that in every nation there are good people and bad people.” In what ways is this a positive message?

10. How can a universalist message sit comfortably within Zionism? And in what ways does the novel challenge or support your views on this question?

 
[Editors' note: Okay, so there's a few more than 10 there...]

Leave a Comment

Filed under Book club

Exclusive: Etgar Keret – ‘Mystique’

FICTION

Etgar Keret coverThis story is excerpted exclusively from Etgar Keret’s forthcoming collection Suddenly, a Knock on the Door, published by Chatto and Windus on 23 February 2012. Published here with permission from Chatto and Windus. Etgar Keret will be appearing at Jewish Book Week on 23rd February.

Read a review of the Suddenly, a Knock on the Door.

The man who knew what I was about to say sat next to me on the plane, a stupid smile plastered across his face. That’s what was so nerve-racking about him, the fact that he wasn’t clever or even sensitive, and yet he knew the lines and managed to say them- all the lines I meant to say- three seconds before me.

‘D’you sell Guerlian Mystique?’ he asked the stewards a minute before I could, and she gave him an orthodontic smile and said there was just one last bottle left.

‘My wife’s obsessed with that perfume. It’s like an addiction with her. If I come back from a trip and don’t get a bottle of Mystique from duty-free, she tells me I don’t love her any more. If I dare walk in the door without at least one bottle, I’m in trouble.’

That was supposed to be my line, but the man who knew what I was about to say stole it from me. He didn’t miss a beat. As soon as the wheels touched down, he switched on his phone, a second before I did, and called his wife.

‘I just landed,’ he told her. ‘I’m sorry. I know it was supposed to be yesterday. They cancelled the flight. You don’t believe me? Check it yourself. Call Eric. I know you don’t. I can give you his number right now.’

I also have a travel agent called Eric. He’d lie for me too.

When the plane reached the gate he was still on the phone, giving all the answers I would have given. Without a trace of emotion, like a parrot in a world where time flows backwards, repeating whatever’s about to be said instead what’s been said already. His answers were the best possible, under the circumstances. His circumstances weren’t so hot at all. Mine were not all that great either. My wife hadn’t taken my call yet, but just listening to the man who knew what I was about to say made me want to hang up. Just listening to him I could tell that the hole I was in was so deep that if I ever managed to dig myself out, it would be to a different reality. She’d never forgive me. Ever. From now on, every trip would be hell on earth, and the time in between would be even worse.

He went on and on and on, delivering all those sentences that I’d thought up and hadn’t said yet. They just kept flowing out of him. Now he stepped it up, raising his voice, like a drowning man desperate to stay afloat.

People started filing out of the plane. He got up, still talking, scooped up his laptop in his other hand and headed for the exit. I could see him leaving it behind, the bag he’d stashed in the overhead compartment. I could see him forgetting it, and I didn’t say anything. I just stayed put. Gradually, the plane emptied, till the only ones left were an overweight religious woman with a million children, and me. I got up, opened the overhead compartment, like it was the most natural thing in the world to do. I took out the duty-free bag, like it had always been mine. Inside were the receipt and the bottle of Guerlain Mystique.

My wife’s obsessed with that perfume. It’s an addiction with her. If I come back from a trip and didn’t get a bottle of Mystique form duty-free, she tells me I don’t love her any more. If I dare walk in the door without at least one bottle, I’m in trouble.

 

Leave a Comment

Filed under Fiction

Meeting Etgar

ESSAY

Sharing stages and publishing a book with Etgar Keret has been a way of championing ordinary human life amid a conflict that won’t be resolved any time soon, writes Samir El-Youssef

Keret and El-Youssef in 2005.

"There was the mildly Zionist, the non-Zionist, the anti-Zionist – and there was Etgar Keret." Keret and El-Youssef in 2005. (Credit: Lisa Goldman)

It was eleven years ago, and I’d love to say that it feels as if it were only yesterday. But a whole history of terrible events has passed since then and many wishes and dreams have been destroyed.

It was in Zurich, and it was the first time that I had ever shared a platform with Israeli writers; nor had I ever been in one room with so many of our cousins before. But they were all good guys, all on the left; there was the mildly Zionist, the non-Zionist, the anti-Zionist – and there was Etgar Keret.

At first I didn’t know what to make of him. I’d just finished my masters dissertation on Hobbes’ theory of sovereignty and my brain was still saturated with the ideas of Hannah Arndt and Karl Schmidt. Etgar kept telling anecdotes and jokes under which I could only read innocence and political naivety.

At end of the conference Etgar read a story about a bus driver who, once he shuts his door at a stop, never reopens it, refusing any late passenger, no matter what their circumstances: no crying schoolboy or begging old lady could make him relent. The bus driver is not a mean man. He is only a staunch utilitarian whose main concern is being fair to society as a whole. He calculates that thirty seconds wasted on letting a late passenger in would mean a half-minute delay for each of the other passengers, which is a collective half an hour.

The story was this driver’s encounter with Eddie, a guy so relaxed that punctuality is totally alien to him. Eddie is a waiter in a restaurant where he feels that he must apologise for the quality of the food. Predictably, he’s never on time. But one day, against all expectations, he tries to be punctual because at the end of his bus journey lies the possibility of true love. Laziness, however, can become the way of the body as much as the will, and no matter how determined, the habits of the body can take time to adjust. Eddie, in spite of sincere efforts, finds himself late again. He’s late to catch the bus, and not any bus, but the one driven by our infamously punctual transport operator. Eddie runs down the street, determined to catch the bus although it has already pulled out and is moving away. Eddie keeps running, and luckily the bus comes to a halt at a traffic light. Exhausted and breathless, Eddie immediately falls on his knees in front of the shut door. He doesn’t even bang on the doors he’s so exhausted. The driver sees Eddie kneeling there, and then something extraordinary happens. Right in the middle of the street, the driver opens the door and lets Eddie in. How? Why? Here we learn an amazing secret (Etgar’s stories are full of these amazing secrets). Before he became a bus driver, he wanted to be God. Bus-driving was only his second choice of career. So, when he sees Eddie kneeling down in front of his door, he remembers his first wish to be God, and that he, as God, would have been merciful and kind, especially to helpless worshipers like Eddie.

This is a story from a city where buses have been a frequent target of suicide-bombing. I am not sure many Israelis, or at least many passengers, would have overlooked this terrifying fact in favour of the humour. But nor could a writer like Etgar Keret overlook the dark humour of such a dark reality.

Writers cannot forget texts that teach them something about their own writing. This story, published in Keret’s collection The Bus Driver who Wanted to Be God, taught me how to understand my own writing. I had just finished my novella The Day the Beast Got Thirsty, and wasn’t sure that it should sound as rebellious as it did when I first read it for myself.

Challenging what other Palestinian writers have been doing, or defying the national discourse, hasn’t been an infrequent intention of mine, but with The Day the Beast Got Thirsty, I wished to write something out of fun, out of love for certain characters, out of being influenced by several writers who move me such as Borges, Ibrahim Aslan, Victoria Tokariva, Raymond Carver, Emil Habiby, Mohammad Al-Abdullah and others.

Listening to Etgar reading a story about a bus driver who wanted to be God, in a country where many crowded buses have been blown up, taught me that there is a rich area of interest which writers shouldn’t miss, without necessarily having to be deliberately rebellious.

The national and political reality of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict monopolises all coverage and representation, but within this reality there is another reality, say a sub-reality, with practically no representation at all. This sub-reality includes not only the lives of the socially and culturally marginalised, but also the everyday reality of the whole society; the daily challenge of the recondite and constant struggle to fulfil various individual wishes.

Nations whose collective survival and national dignity are generally believed to be under constant threat demote daily reality to a source of shame. For who would be shameless enough to talk about his trouble with his partner, or boss at work, or the shopkeeper (let alone the desire to be God), when the life and honour of the whole nation is at stake? Daily reality shies away and becomes a mere sub-reality. But then such reality is far too visible and too present to be ignored, to be kept hidden, especially when the national issue of survival becomes rather tediously and absurdly protracted. One can’t always overlook one’s daily life in favour of national security, not for so many decades anyway. Gradually people’s attention becomes more focused on individual, everyday needs. Writers who love humour cannot be oblivious to such an obvious irony.

Continue reading

1 Comment

Filed under Features

‘Use your imagination, man…’

REVIEW

by Hasan Ommary

Suddenly, a Knock on the Door by Etgar Keret (translated by Sondra Silverston, Miriam Shlesinger and Nathan Englander), Chatto & Windus, 304 pages, February 2012

Read ‘Mystique’, a short story published exclusively from the collection.

Etgar Keret cover Imagine three men barging into your home demanding with menace to hear a story! Imagine a land where fictional characters and events become real – where a grown man is captured, treated like a school truant and taken back to his parents! Put differently: imagine Woody Allen and J. L. Borges had met and decided to write stories together. How do you think those stories would sound? Well, you don’t have to think too hard; actually you don’t have to think at all, just read Etgar Keret’s new collection, Suddenly, a Knock on the Door.

Keret’s stories have always combined the surreally farcical with the thoughtfully fantastic; the anecdotal and oral form of storytelling with the written narrative. But in this new book, his style seems to have matured. He is more self-assured and lets his imagination go further than ever.

In the title story, a writer called Keret hears a knock on the door. The visitor is a Swede who has just immigrated to Israel and is firmly convinced that, in the Middle East, one only gets what one wants by using force. Thus he brandishes a gun, demanding to hear a story. Soon two other listeners arrive: a hot blooded poll-conductor of Moroccan origin, and a pizza delivery boy. The three of them make it clear: either a story, or the author becomes a tale for the obituary pages.

So this is the Woody Allen part; the Borges part starts when Keret actually tries to tell a story. He doesn’t have a ready one; he hasn’t written anything new for a long time, so he concocts one on the spot. And what better story to tell than this very one which he is living right now? The eagerly awaiting, and threatening, audience, soon discovers what he’s up to. One of them protests: “That’s not a story. That’s an eyewitness report. It’s exactly what’s happening here right now. Exactly what we’re trying to run away from. Don’t go and dump reality on us like a rubbish truck. Use your imagination, man, create, invent, take it all the way.”

The imagination, however, has very little hope in a reality where the author’s fans invade his privacy demanding to hear story. Indeed, the double performance of the imagination, telling a story within a story, is its only hope for competing with reality.

This first story introduces a delightfully hilarious collection. Throughout, we see the imagination vying with itself. The reality it depicts is so surreal, so farcical and absurd. In a manner that sounds as if Keret is parodying Borges himself, assistance is derived from literary fantasyland.

Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Reviews

Poetry for a time gone mad

An anthology of modern Hebrew poetry presents vibrant new verse with ancient echoes, writes Rachel S. Harris

'Indespensible': the Israeli poet Ronny Someck

Poets on the Edge: An Anthology of Contemporary Hebrew Poetry

Selected and translated by Tsipi Keller
State University of New York Press, 339 pages, $24.95.

The second half of the 20th century saw a boom in Hebrew poetry unlike anything since the Golden Age of Spain 1,000 years earlier. Using their evolving vernacular, Israeli poets synthesized the literary traditions of the past with rich new waves of English and American poetry. In doing so, they created a poetic world that sings out louder and more poignantly than a news broadcast ever could. At a time of yet more violence and political turmoil in Israel, poetry offers a perspective on the human condition.

“Poets on the Edge” deserves to be in every poetry lover’s library, and should be on every Jewish bookshelf. Not since Carmi’s 1981 “The Penguin Book of Hebrew Verse” has a volume of such significance been published. This long-awaited anthology of contemporary Hebrew poetry, edited and translated by Tsipi Keller, is a significant contribution to the scant collections available in translation. Replete with annotations, Keller’s work hints at the rich tradition of Hebrew poetry throughout the ages, revealing the multitude of inter-textual references that draw from the Jewish past’s biblical, rabbinic and historical passages that Israelis have employed in creating a new language of imagery.

Yet, this tantalizing glimpse at the literary layers of the poetry also lies at the heart of the collection’s shortcomings. For a reader even vaguely aware of biblical texts, it becomes immediately noticeable that Keller often skips over many of even the most common biblical or cultural references. It is not clear why some are noted and others are not. Hebrew readers will be frustrated at the lack of original texts, and Keller’s layout is somewhat hard to navigate, with the associations among poets often obscured.

The book’s arrangement impedes any true understanding of the connections between periods and styles. By laying out the authors according to birth dates, the inter-generational influences of literary journal editors who cultivated subsequent generations are difficult to fathom — and the arrangement gives no account of movements, or of literary trends such as the avant-garde poetry of Wallach and Wieseltier, which challenged the establishment’s devotion to lyrical depictions of the landscape. A more thematic framework would have provided a sense of the relationship between poets and poetic schools. But these few flaws are perhaps merely the price for the sheer volume of material that this collection provides.

Continue reading

2 Comments

Filed under Reviews