Rapt Reveries: November 2009

Sunday 15 November 2009

UAE'S SLICE OF THE PIE CHART

The new generation of the UAE nationals has to not only know but be proud of who they are or else they will be lost among the crowds.

Last week His Highness Sheikh Mohammad Bin Rashid Al Maktoum, Vice-President and Prime Minister of the UAE and Ruler of Dubai, approved a resolution for establishing the Federal Demographic Council of the United Arab Emirates.

The council strives to develop national demographic strategies all the while gathering information, conducting studies and establishing an official demographic database.

This is indeed a great step forward towards tackling and reducing the ever-growing difference in numbers between the UAE nationals and expatriates residing in the Emirates. The UAE nationals make up less than 20 per cent of the total demographic pie chart, while the remaining 80 per cent or so is made up of expatriates from all over the world, many of whom have never interacted with a UAE national. Although the figures are not completely accurate still they are staggering and when put on paper beckon for action.

With nationals being a minority in their own homeland a call must be made to address national identity. The new generation of the UAE nationals has to not only know but be proud of who they are or else they will be lost among the crowds. But what is our national identity?

Our national identity spurs first and foremost from our religion. Islam is the UAE’s religion and the law governing this land. Without solid knowledge of what it means to be a true Muslim the country loses its soul. The Arabic language is our mother tongue and our core identifier yet most of us rarely use it.

In France, Germany and Switzerland you can barely get by using the English language. These countries refuse to use it not out of arrogance but out of fear of losing their identities and yet in the UAE, English has virtually become our first language.

Our history as a country is one of great accomplishments. Ones that we should be proud of and never forget. Unfortunately many of our kids today do not know how the UAE came into being.

All schools must teach the history of the UAE, public as well as private, for if we are happily inviting foreigners to make the UAE their home it is only fair that they know how their chosen home was envisioned and resurrected.

The future generations of the Emiratis should know that the UAE is not just a flag. They must understand that this flag is one born out of seven separate flags. Emirati children should know that what has become easily accessible to them today would not have been possible without the struggles of their founding fathers.

It is true, our country is of a tender age but its years are undoubtedly filled with accomplishments that overwhelm us with pride. It is true, our numbers are small but our love for this land defies any demographical imbalance and tips the scales in our favour every time. The United Arab Emirates is a living and thriving proof that true Arab unity is alive, and well may it forever live united under this flag, the flag born out of seven separate flags.
This article was published in The Gulf Today newspaper on 15th November, 2009.

Monday 9 November 2009

OPRAH AIRED, PITCHFORKS SHARPENED

"The Emirates prides itself on being a country, which advocates freedom of expression and speech, and that is exactly what Dr. Lamees displayed."

On Saturday night, and as per its daily schedule, the Oprah Winfrey Show aired on the locally broadcast television channel MBC4. This episode in particular was enthusiastically awaited by the UAE nationals since it was to feature our beloved city Dubai. Dubai was presented as one of the happiest cities in the world along with the likes of Copenhagen, Rio de Janeiro and Istanbul.

Copenhagen was visited by the Queen of talk shows herself where she met two ladies at their homes highlighting the differences in their minimalistic, yet happy lifestyles as opposed to the United States in true Oprah fashion.

Next in line was our pride and joy, Dubai. After a brief, and what seemed to me a pretty weak introduction when compared to the feats that Dubai has achieved, Oprah connected via webcam with a Dubai national and a general practitioner Dr. Lamees Hamdan. Dr. Lamees came across as well-versed and confident, speaking freely about her life, family and her home, Dubai.

Dr. Lamees invited Oprah’s cameras into her home and candidly introduced her family to the world. She seemed very proud of her heritage and closeness to her extended family. Oprah then proceeded to ask her questions, while Dr. Lamees spoke of free healthcare in the UAE and pointed out that ironically it is the United States which is facing challenges. She added that no taxes are paid in the UAE, which understandably thrilled Oprah.

Oprah then asked the doctor about her outfit. Dr. Lamees explained that she was wearing a Jalabiya, a traditional dress, and that she chooses not to wear the Sheila, the national headdress and Abaya, while her sisters choose to do so. She explained that the Sheila and Abaya are an extension of the UAE culture yet it is left as a choice for women to sport them or not.

All in all a smooth and candid interview. Yet no sooner had the show ended than our mobile phones began receiving a barrage of messages attacking Dr. Lamees Hamdan claiming that she had misrepresented both, Dubai and Islam. They are, of course, referring to the comment made about the Abaya.

I frankly do not think that Dr. Lamees misrepresented Dubai in any way by stating that the Abaya is a cultural aspect and a ‘national dress,’ one that the UAE women have a choice with. The Emirates prides itself on being a country, which advocates freedom of expression and speech, and that is exactly what Dr. Lamees displayed. I also think that the misrepresentation of Islam accusation is highly dramatised since she did not speak of the Hijab, which is the Islamic headdress for women. All throughout the Islamic world women are seen wearing the Hijab yet the Abaya is reserved mostly for people of the Gulf region, and particularly the UAE.

What strikes me as unreasonable is the fact that people thoughtlessly let loose a barrage of criticisim, instead of understanding that Dr. Lamees spoke of her own life and did not generalize her representation. We as nationals in general, and as local women in particular, should do away with the sharpened pitchforks and appreciate that overall Dr. Lamees carried herself well with her representation of the educated working mothers of the UAE.

Therefore, after reading the many unnecessarily misleading messages that seemed to have spurred from no more than shallow jealousy. Do permit me to call upon the people of the UAE to be as understanding and accepting as the country that we represent. Instead of attacking one of our own, we should take example and draw heart from our liberal governments who have always been there to support us and help us forward.
This article was published in The Gulf Today newspaper on November 9, 2009.

Sunday 1 November 2009

WORDS FOR THE FIRE

" Where would The Aeneid be if Virgil’s heirs respected his wishes to destroy it and how much would we have known of Kafka had his friend Max Brod burned The Trial and The Castle as instructed?"

The creative process that spurs from a moment’s inspiration is ever so demanding. Once its call is answered the response to it must be one of sheer commitment. Perfection is its one request. Like a lover it demands endless hours of your time and your complete devotion. Only after pouring his entire being into the craft will it be satisfied, never settling for anything less. And only then will the creator and seeker of perfection feel whole again.

Writers, the creators of fiction, masters of the perfectly tailored sentence and rulers of their conjured up worlds relish this creative process. No matter how gruelling and sadistic it may be. No matter how much time and how many people it asks them to give up, they remain faithful to it until the very end.

Vladimir Nabokov was a writer and a slave to this creative process. An author whose imagination saw no boundaries and whose pen gave us novels like Ada, Pale Fire and the bestselling violator of social acceptability, Lolita. Thirty years ago from his deathbed Nabokov worked on his 18^th and what was to be his last novel named The Opposite of Laura.

Amidst his delirium and fleeting consciousness he managed to organise his plot, create his characters, and arrange his words on what totalled to 138 index cards. Nabokov died in 1977, his last wish was for his wife Vera to destroy The Opposite of Laura. His wish was partially granted for his transcripts entered a vault in a Swiss bank, where they lay untouched and unseen for thirty years, until now.

Dimitri, Nabokov’s only son recently decided to put together his father’s last novel and gift it to the world. He confessed that it was a great struggle for him whether or not to honour his father’s dying wish. Ultimately he found that it would be an immense loss for the literary world to keep The Opposite of Laura from seeing the light of day.

Dimitri’s dilemma is understandable for what should one do when he is requested by one of the most influential writers of the 20^th century to destroy a piece of his work? At the onset one would be inclined to object, to speak on behalf of the art form and fight for its survival. For where would The Aeneid be if Virgil’s heirs respected his wishes to destroy it and how much would we have known of Kafka had his friend Max Brod burned The Trial and The Castle as instructed? Yet one issue remains, and as a writer I must say that I bend ever so slightly towards it. Honouring an artist’s wishes seems to me the right thing to do. For after his death the writer is painfully denied of his inherent right to discuss his work. If the creator was able to utter the words “destroy it,” referring to his own creation, then he fully believes that his creative process has not been completed and without perfection. Without full satisfaction the work is just not quite there yet, and probably never will be.

Nabokov could have understood that or maybe in his hallucinatory state uttered these words unaware of their consequences. Nevertheless his request posed the question and pushed the doors of debate wide open.

Does a writer have more of an obligation to the literary world than to his work? Does the fact that he was generous enough to share his gift with the masses mean he should be robbed of his final wishes? And why is it that the more you offer yourself the more people expect from you? A writer, at the very core, is a person and a person should always have the right to choose.
This article was published in The Gulf Today newspaper on Nov. 1st, 2009.

Rapt Reveries