previous sub-section
Religion in a Global Era
next sub-section


135

BEYOND WESTERNIZATION

We refuse to see authenticity [asala] through a backward look that glorifies [tuqadis] the past and rejects renewal [tajdid]. Not every thing in the past is glorious for it has some elements of backwardness [takhaluf]. On the other hand, we refuse to distort our national character in the name of material or behavioral imitation of other societies.

Anwar el-Sadat, The October Paper


Abu Hosni and his neighbors are especially critical of the modernity of upper-class Egyptians and their imitation of the Western lifestyle. It is important to remember that Sadat's definition of modernity was closely linked to the West. He was fascinated by Western technology, production, administration, and lifestyle (Ibrahim 1992: 116). He wanted Egypt to “catch up with” the West and if possible “to become part of it” (116). As argued in Chapter 1, Sadat tried to rebuild Cairo according to Western plans, using Los Angeles and Houston as models. This imitation of Western modernity and the close links with the United States, which continued after Sadat's death, are criticized by many and have been used by Islamic activists to mobilize the people against the Egyptian government. Nuha, the twenty-three-year-old woman factory worker mentioned earlier, explained the conflict between the government and religious groups:

The problem is that the government has strong relationships with the United States which hates Islam and Muslims and is trying to spread its ideas and practices, especially wearing short clothes, the domination of science, and the destruction of religion. My cousin, who is a Sunni, explained to me that Americans have many methods to achieve their purposes, especially through schools. They try to prove that science is better than religion by using the comparative method. They bring, for example, a candle and a lightbulb and ask which is better. The first represents religion and the second represents science. Of course, one will choose the second. They also compare two pictures, one of a man wearing a gallabiyya[a long loose gown that the Prophet used to wear] with a beard and a rotten look [mi‘affin)] while the second picture is of a handsome man who is shaved and looks very clean and tidy. Of course, anyone will choose the second. The whole idea is for science to replace religion and dominate the universe. Islam is compatible with science because one can find all answers in it if examined closely. Science should serve religion.

Abu Hosni and his neighbors are critical of a vision of modernity that completely accepts the Western model. They look at the West, especially the United States, in expressing their critique. Young men marvel at the


136
technological advancement that they see in movies (such as Terminator and True Lies). They also point to the order of cities, the beauty of buildings, and the efficiency of the system in protecting the rights of individuals (for example, laws that prohibit intrusion on citizens without a search warrant, a sharp contrast to what they experience in their daily life, where young men can be arrested in streets and coffee shops). Americans are also credited for being honest and direct in their interaction. But people in al-Zawiya criticize the American society for “lack of solidarity and communal feelings.” Each person in the United States, I was often told, “minds his or her own business and does not help or care for any one else.” People often asked me with astonishment whether it is true that people in the United States do not know their next-door neighbors. They also asked about the willingness of Americans to help those in need. Is it true that Americans do not help when there is an accident? And that they do not bother when there is a fire next door? To avoid this individualism and lack of solidarity, Abu Hosni argues that unlike Americans, Egyptians should “hold onto” (nitmasek) their religion and should “not depart from it as foreigners do.” Men and women use the same logic when critiquing the state's strong identification with Western modernity in general and the relocation project in particular.

Interestingly enough, both Sadat in his attempts to modernize Cairo and create a modern nation and the people in their attempts to live with this modernity resorted to Islam to legitimize their projects. When his open-door policy and relationships with the Israelis faced resistance, Sadat resorted to Islam to legitimize his efforts.[26] He emphasized that his rule was based on the “twin pillars of Imine (faith) and ’Ilm (science)” (Ahmed 1992: 217), and he presented himself as the modernizer, the Hero of Construction, and as the Believing Leader. He was often shown on TV praying, attending Friday khutba, and using his rosary to emphasize his religiosity. However, while Sadat's appeal to religion was a strategic choice to implement his policies, many people in al-Zawiya see religion as crucial to counter the disruption and negative changes that accompany the appropriation of modern technologies and discourses. Religion promises to provide the moral and spiritual resources that will enable people in al-Zawiya to reconcile their desire “to be rooted in a stable and coherent personal and social past” and the “growth that destroys both the physical and social landscapes” of their past (Berman 1988: 35).

The attraction of Nuha and her neighbors to a religious identity is part of making themselves subjects as well as objects of modernity. This


137
emphasis on religion makes modernity in al-Zawiya different from the modernity that is depicted in Western social sciences, especially its emphasis on secularization (Habermas 1983; Harvey 1990; Turner 1990). This, however, does not make it an “inauthentic” or a “distorted” version of Western modernity (Sharabi 1988: 22). Modernity can no longer be viewed as a totality or a master narrative that entails similar changes in different societies, as modernization theory has argued.[27] Nor can it be seen as a whole that is either taken or rejected. As active social agents, people are able to selectively appropriate certain aspects of what they see as modern. Modernity stimulates desires. It motivates dreams. It causes joy. It causes disruption. It causes pain and suffering. It is struggled over and is reworked and selectively appropriated from specific locations in the social space.


previous sub-section
Religion in a Global Era
next sub-section