On Mona Lisa’s Celebrityhood

If I learned anything from Art History 242 it was that the mystique behind the Mona Lisa was in her smile and her eyes.

I personally think that’s all pretentious bull.

I remember sitting in my Italian Renaissance art history class when the discussion over the mysterious charm of the Mona Lisa was brought up. Being 18 years and not so easily susceptible to pretentiousness and bullshit quite yet – it was still early on in my undergraduate academic career – I brought up the point that maybe our constant poking at the full-bodied painting was the source of her charm. The allure of Mona Lisa is completely created. It is a beautiful painting, without a doubt – the colours, their hue and her striking gaze (which is the subject of perpetual discussion as is her barely-there smile) make for a great work of art.

But our constant questioning of her smile, her gaze, her identity (wait, so is she actually a he? Is she ..da Vinci himself?) has made her into a personality far greater than deserved. The allure and charm of the Mona Lisa – as a painting and as a person – is in the persona which has been assigned to her through our own creation.

I guess what I mean to say is that Mona Lisa was the first Paris Hilton.

So, You Want to Draw Muhammad?

I love South Park; it’s one of the most brilliant shows of our time, providing excellent and necessary commentary on American society and politics in the form of well-written satire presented under the guise of the suspicious innocence of children.

Talking turds included.

So, one can only imagine what went through my head upon hearing about the newest controversy in a series I’d like to call, in the spirit of  the institutionalization of my knowledge via thesis proposal submission, “Pending Provocation: Depicting Holy Figures in the Cartoon Form and Subsequent Violence-Inducing Reactions by People of the Islamic Persuasion.”

South Park decides that for it’s 200th episode it was going to depict the Prophet Muhammad, in another installment of the League of Super Best Friends (a divine group, really). And some fringe extremist group Revolution Muslim, based in New York City, chats online about how Matt Stone and Trey Parker are gonna get Theo Van Gogh’d.

Slightly unsettling to say the least.

Comedy Central has a huge panic attack and censored the follow up episode, number 201, blocking any and all references to the Prophet in the cartoon, whose super power is the ability to not be criticized by anyone. Catch ends up being that the Prophet, disguised throughout the cartoon in a bear costume, is actually revealed to be Santa Claus.

Okay, cool.

But it doesn’t end there. What’s spawned from this little controversy has been a huge mess and mixture of ignorance, Islamophobia, intolerance and further and completely unnecessary provocation.

Sigh.

Aside from the inciting comments made by Revolution Muslim, there have been – at least to my own knowledge – no protests against the cartoons in the broader Muslim community. No threats. No real and inciting condemnations. Perhaps people, like me, expressing their discomfort in watching such an episode (See also: Aasif Maandvi on the Daily Show). But that’s about it.

But the backlash from those who claim to be the supreme bearers of free speech and all that is “Western” and beautiful? Holy crap.

The media coverage of this incident has been thunderous, equivalent to the Danish cartoon controversy which had far more of an actual violent backlash, which was indicative of political dissatisfaction and in response to some rather distastefully done and (some) poorly satirical cartoons, printed by a well-established right-wing, anti-immigrant newspaper.

Why is the same level of attention being given to this South Park  issue?

All of sudden a cartoon made by a Seattle cartoonist, Molly Norris, which asked for ‘the real likeness of Muhammad [to] please stand-up’ was used in a campaign proclaiming May 20th “Everybody Draw Mohammad Day!”. Facebook, along with comments sections everywhere, implode with endless “yeah! This’ll show them! First amendment!” chatter in response to …to …

…to a fringe group?

This is where I get offended. I’m not offended by South Park’s depiction of the Prophet. I’m uncomfortable with it, but I’m not necessarily offended. I’m not losing any sleep over it. I worked things out with young myself back during the good ol’ days of the Danish cartoon controversy, which, again, were far more resonant of a real antagonism towards the growing (and visible) Muslim minority in Denmark. But South Park? No. Not really. Not really a cause for concern. I remember watching the first episode which introduced the League of Super Best Friends – originally aired in 2001, prior to the murder of Theo Van Gogh – and seeing the Prophet depicted, in a positive light. I remember feeling incredibly uncomfortable but never offended.

What offends me is that a fringe group like Revolution Muslim is being listened to by my fellow citizens who are not Muslim. That my fellow citizens are falling into exactly what fringe groups hope to achieve, if even on some subconscious freudian level – wreak frenzy, divides and controversy. Their fulfillment is never in anything good, pure and pious (i.e. their own betterment as human beings). Their fulfillment is in driving the divide that has been created and is increasingly becoming deeper. And how do my non-Muslim fellow citizens and, presumably, South Park enthusiasts, react?

By …claiming May 20th as Everybody Draw Mohammad Day?

Are people for real anymore?

I support freedom of expression, but I have a problem when freedom of expression becomes almost synonymous with deliberate provocation.  And let’s not fool ourselves – this reaction to a fringe group’s online subpar-but-still-a-gruesome-reference-made threat to Stone and Parker is not in celebration of the freedom of expression and speech. Please. If you’re going to serve me the turds of bulls, I’d like them on a silver plated platter.

At the very least.

What this recent controversy shows us is not the overreaction of Muslims, but the overreaction of people who are starting to see a real problem in the general presence of Muslims. By people who think every little group speaks on behalf of all Muslims. By people who have their mind made up about a religion they’ve most likely only have ever read about online. By people just generally misinformed and terrified of an unuttered, non-existent threat.

What good is provoking the vast majority of Muslims, who could care less about the South Park man-made fiasco, going to do? When you tell me – a Muslim who is more interested in the recent Krygyz revolution and Goldman Sachs brouhaha than South Park depicting the Prophet of my faith in a non-offensive light – that you’re going to, in the spirit of freedom of expression, draw to your own liking a depiction of the Prophet Muhammad ..what exactly is being said here?

Are you actually showing me, telling me that freedom of expression is a beautiful and powerful thing which creates real momentum for progress if and when used rightfully? Or are you just showing me spite?

Let’s get over this. It’s stupid, it’s lame, and if you’re planning in attending Everybody Draw Mohammad Day! then good job on being bought into the hype.

And to my fellow Muslims, all I have to say is – remember the Sunnah. With all this emphasis on the Prophet, remember him as who is was not who we have made him seem. The Prophet, may peace and blessing be upon him, had the most foul of words and rocks thrown at him, he was endlessly ridiculed for his message and for what he brought – change – to pre-Islamic Arabian society. And how did he respond? With patience. He was a soft man, polite, respectful and never harsh. And remember that the Prophet has always been treated with malice – from his own lifetime to Dante’s famous depiction of him in his Divine Comedy.

Rather than react, as Muslims we should reflect. We should consider what we have turned our religion into which seems to almost justify, in the eyes of too many, the sort of reaction propelled by the South Park controversy.

Additionally, we all must reflect on how we continue for the growing visibility of Muslims in the West to allow for fear-drenched, racist and generally backwards words, policies and ideas to be thrown about and accepted. Muslims are certainly not alone in this and they certainly are not the most pained receivers of such a brunt, but they are the ones who easily are sensationalized. They make for better news.

And angrier, albeit horrifically laughable, comments’ sections.

“And not equal are the good deed and the bad. Repel [evil] by that [deed] which is better; and thereupon the one whom between you and him is enmity [will become] as though he was a devoted friend. But none is granted it except those who are patient, and none is granted it except one having a great portion [of good].” Qur’an 41:34- 35

On Your Thick Black-Framed Acrylic Glasses and Other such Novelties

I think the phenomena of fake black-rimmed acrylic glasses is a representation of our generation’s constant need to appropriate oppression, rebrand it as some sort of liberating statement, as often exhibited by fashion, and reclaim the oppressive nature of what is commonly referred to as “nerdiness.” We’ve seen generations of the past do this in various ways. We’ve seen the appropriation of the word “nigger” which was rebranded as “nigga” and presented as a tool of liberation from a history of slavery which encapsulated sexual, physical, mental violence and complete dehumanization. Truly, taking off two letters and adding another vowel was the best way to achieve justice on that front.

Che Guevara and that whole commie-socialist-pinko-obamacare revolution is another example of the novelization of something representative of oppression – either as a tool of oppression or a tool against oppression. Nothing brings social justice, egalitarianism and deconstruction of powerful and corrupt capitalistic and fascist regimes quite like a t-shirt.

The recent normalization of the Palestinian solidarity scarf referred to as the keffiyeh – or scarf of the desert by my local fashion stores – is another. And an ironic one given the vast amount of young McGill Jewish girls from Toronto who seem to love throwing it on their lululemon outfits, topped off with some Michael Kors shoes.

Pretty hella meta.

There’s something sincerely endearing and truly revolutionary about the ability to take some of the strongest indicators of social problems and oppressions and to make them our own without ever even lifting a finger aside from punching in your pin number when you’re making the purchases. And of course, you have to wear everything with style. As though you’re not reallllly into uncompromising equality and straight up equal distribution of wealth; as though you’re not reallllly a nerd because you get all the girls and suck at uttering any word containing more than 2 syllables; as though you’ve never even met a Pakistinian let alone care about their land dispute with whatever and as though you don’t have that history of slavery in your family and even if you do you are SO over that. Forgive and forget!

All of that being said, I think I’m doing a pretty good job rebranding the word oppression and re-engaging with it in that whole Derrida textuality crap sense: thick black-framed acrylic glasses? Check. Che Guevara shirt/patch/pin? Check. Keffiyeh? Check. Hijab? Check. Apple-bottom hightops? Check.

eff yeah.

The Painful Truth

Heartbreak and hair: a woman’s two greatest pains.

For as long as I can remember these two things have been a source of constant mental and physical torment, sharing many characteristics in their inducement of pain. Both involve the tearing away of something deeply rooted within you and both require lifetime maintenance. You always prepare yourself for the pain; you have no other choice. And while you keep yourself in denial for sometimes months on end, you know that the greatest moment of pain is not only inevitable but fast approaching. Nothing, however, can ever really properly prepare you for that quick and brief – yet excruciating – moment during which you once again become a clean slate.

Your eyes tightly shut themselves close, you press your lips until all circulation stops and they become white and quickly chapped, and your throat clenches in order to keep any possibility of sound escaping completely suppressed.

You take a breath but it’s stuttered; your chest falls back down slowly, with brief pauses of hesitation. You breath out, heavily. You swallow as your throat becomes increasingly dry. And you begin the painful task.

It’s quick, it’s sudden, and it’s always unexpected even at the exact moment that you are separating yourself from something which has been a part of you for so long. Sometimes you will allow a cry to escape, or a stinging gasp. Sometimes you will scream and other times you’ll remain silent, with the sobs remaining within your mouth.

And all that remains is a sticky dewey remnant you wash away when it’s all over.

There is some redness, but it, too, eventually wears off with some simple care.

And then, within a few weeks – you feel prickly all over again. Your eyes pop in disbelief  as you ask yourself how it’s possible for the return of this feeling to be so quick? But it’s a cycle you’ve become accustomed to and begin, once again, to prepare yourself for the imminent pain you’ll be experiencing soon enough.

Just use the blade next time. Quick and painless, even if hella bloody.