Orientalism revisited: Is this Sparta?

Geopolitics and Graphic Novels/ Multiforms and

“Micromyths”

What to get out of this lecture

• An understanding of the relationship of the story patterns discussed in this seminar to “myth,” more traditionally defined.

• An understanding of the relevance of these patterns to 300 and to other, explicitly political discussions of Persia/Iran

Micromyth and Multiform: Story Patterns and Instantiations

• If you did “protean multiforms” for your last paper assignment, you may recall that near the beginning of your essay, you had to outline the basic similarities between your stories that established them as multiforms

• That list of basic similarities is a kind of abstract story type which Wendy Doniger would call a “micromyth.”

Micromyths, myths, and subtexts

• Wendy Doniger’s definition: A micromyth is “a scholarly construct that contains the basic elements from which all possible variants could be created, a theoretical construct that will enable us to look at the variants at once and ask questions of them simultaneously.”-from The Implied Spider: Politics and Theology in Myth, p. 99

• Another familiar example of a micromyth: Propp’s 31 functions. (Enable us to ask who, functionally speaking, is the hero –and who is the villain.)

Eliza-myth: Establishing a micromyth on the basis of two visual multiformsMicromyth: Hera, Athena

and Aphrodite gather around a protagonist with a round object which they desire. From an elevated position, a powerful figure (which may or may not be the same as the protagonist) sternly supervised the gathering.

Questions prompted: Who is the protagonist? What is the round object? Who is the powerful figure? Do the goddesses get what they desire?•Elizabeth vs. Paris as protagonist•Elizabeth vs. Zeus as powerful figure•Sovereign’s Orb vs. Eris’ Apple•Elizabeth retains control of orb; goddesses get apple

Micromyths that we have examined• Redemptive self micromyth—see the plot outline in

McAdams’ Redemptive Self, p. xvii : P has an early advantage; P triumphs over adversity; P leaves a legacy promoting the well-being of future generations.– Questions prompted: “Who or what is the protagonist (self of society)? What kind of early advantage does (s)he have?

– Different answers to the question determine the language of redemption (p. 25). Traditional myths that can be viewed to follow the redemptive pattern in some ways often function as a supporting subtext that is alluded to– especially (but not only) when a religious language of redemption is in question.

– The Puritan Myth (p. 85) relies on Exodus (the Biblical story of the Israelites’ emancipation) as a supporting subtext.

– The Biblical story of the Israelites, seen through Puritan eyes, would be a traditional mythological multiform of the “redemptive” micromyth.

– Individuals who believe themselves to be chosen by God for a specific task may use mythology as a subtext supporting their redemptive narrative, even when the overall language is not explicitly religious.

Micromyths and subtexts that we have examined• Restorative/imperial micromyth—see the outline in

Lincoln’s Religion, Empire and Torture p. 95: P is Chosen, usually by a divinity, to restore a society and/or the world to its former, pristine state, and to

guard it against further assault. As he struggles to fulfill this mission, P, who is unambiguously good, is locked in an unending battle with the

forces of evil.– Differences include the actions and concepts that are associated with good and evil and which god, if any, is directly invoked

– Zoroastrian mythological texts give us perhaps two multiforms of this micromyth: depending on the version, Ahuramazda himself is both the god and the protagonist—or Ahuramazda is the god and Zarathustra is the protagonist. Ahuramazda is also the Good; Angra Mainyu is the Evil.

– In Persian imperial rhetoric, Darius is the protagonist; Ahuramazda is the god and the Good; the Lie is the primary Evil; Zoroastrian mythology is a supporting subtext.

Categories of Orientalism reviewSee “Revised Descriptions of Two Modes of

Orientalist Discourse” i.e. pp. 10-16 of Week 3’s Handout on Orientalism, the Myth of the Moor, and

Stories of “Others”• 1) Old World Orient+Sympathetic Scrutiny.

• 2)New World Orient + Coming to terms with danger/Opposites of Normal Values

Rephrasing these categories as micromyths

Recall Said’s comments about “typical encapsulations: the journey, the history, the fable, the stereotype, the polemical confrontation, and so on” (pp 58-60).

• Orientalist micromyth #1 (Sympathetic Scrutiny + Old World Orient): A “Western” protagonist (P) finds an Oriental culture or character (O) in a fallen state, and wants the opportunity to elevate/restore the Oriental. P has an appreciation for O’s achievements—especially past achievements. Nonetheless, the P acknowledges that O has limitations and deficiencies compared to P—all the more reason why P is needed. P finds O to be familiar in some way, perhaps representing a prior state of his or her personal or cultural past.– Questions raised/dimensions of variation: Who is the Protagonist? Who is

the “Oriental”? What deficiencies does the Oriental have? How can the Protagonist elevate/restore the “Oriental”? How is the “Oriental” familiar?

• Orientalist micromyth #2 (Coming to terms with danger + New World Orient): A Western protagonist (P) finds that an Oriental culture or character (O) represents a danger that (s)he must come to terms with. O presents perverse versions of recognized ideas, values and or/customs. O embodies the opposites of normal values. Either these convoluted values, or O in entirety, is presented as mysteriously attractive. O is new/alien to the P, and alarmingly powerful.• Questions raised/dimensions of variation: Who is the Protagonist? Who is

the “Oriental”? What perversions/opposites of “Western” values does the “Oriental” represent? How does this alien force exert its power?

War on Terror multiforms of Orientalist micromyths (as

seen in Time Magazine)• My claim restated: in the War on Terror sources we describe, we have a version of both types of Orientalist micromyths. Here is how the micromyths play out in “About Face,” “The Women of Islam,” and Laura Bush’s speech.

• America and the “West” are the protagonists in every case.• In Micromyth 1, Afghan women are the “Oriental”; once, they enjoyed the benefits of

a relatively “feminist” society; now, they are in a state of oppression. Their past accomplishments and potential—as well as their limitations—involve the decrees of the Prophet Muhammad, who was a “feminist” “for his time”—but not for ours. America hopes that through military and political intervention, and particularly by encouraging Western secularism, it can restore/elevate their formerly enviable status. They remind America of America at a prior moment in history, before first-wave feminism (the America of Abigail Adams) or before second-wave feminism (the Betty Friedan reference)—though they may not go as far as America has (“freer, but nor Friedan”).

• In Micromyth 2, Afghan men (Taliban, Northern Alliance, and civilians) and other Muslim males are the “Oriental.” They are a formidable, oppressive power: if the Time Magazine article exaggerates the extent of American military success, it also quotes generals’ warnings that the war won’t be over soon. They exert their power by physical abuse and other forms of physical attacks or intimidation—visited upon “their” women, and American women (e.g. Jessica Lynch, as Khalid points out), and American troops. Under their reign, the burka, a “body bag for the living,” exerts a mysterious pull even when it is not required by law—and violence is valued even by its victims. These “Orientals” pervert recognizable masculine roles (as husbands, they are said to lie to their wives and intimidate them when they try to speak—or, they are philandering opium addicts). The Taliban in particular are portrayed as something new on the world stage: little is said about their existence before 1996.

Summary, review of claims

• I would suggest (but not go so far as to claim) that the ubiquity of phrases like “America and the civilized world” in Bush’s restorative rhetoric (especially in parts outlining his dualistic ethics) implies an Orientalist subtext for his restorative rhetoric—that his binary oppositions are not so much informed by a religious tradition as by assumptions of a “clash of civilizations.”

• On the other hand, I do claim that Orientalist micromyths are relevant to the Time Magazine pieces: the broad generalizations that, at least in the case of “The Women of Islam,” can’t withstand even the most cursory of examinations invite a Saidian analysis—and the discourses stick quite closely to the Orientalist micromyths we have discussed (especially where the “sympathetic scrutiny” of women is concerned).

How do traditional mythological texts relate to the story patterns we have been examining?• Story patterns are micromyths.

• Mythological stories can be subtexts, alluded to in political multiforms of these micromyths.

• Mythological stories may also constitute/be viewed as multiforms of these micromyths (note that according to Said, this is true of Aeschylus’ Persians and Euripides’ Bacchae).

• Finally, different story patterns may serve as subtexts for one another.

Iranian conflict and Orientalism

What to retain from this part of the lecture:

• Problems with overtly political discourses that invite a Saidian analysis

• The extent to which these discourses match up with our Orientalist micromyths

Ben Affleck expertly comes to term with a dangerous Oriental power

Political discourse: problems with Laingen and Hoveyda’s discourse that invite a Saidian analysis• In his US Embassy Cables (available here and here),

Laingen provides little to no evidence for his claims—just little rants here and there about Yazdi (Deputy Prime Minister in the post-1979 interim government).

• Hoveyda’s “Rostam Syndrome” doesn’t hold up under scrutiny (review from Week 9 of last quarter): – What of the myths of Cronus and his children, Zeus and

Athena, Tantalus and Pelops, Agamemnon and Iphigenia? – What of Rostam’s dismay on learning the identity of his

son; surely he would not have killed him had he known…– Who is King Kavus in all of this? After all, Kavus has

the supreme political authority, and it was Kavus who sent Rostam into a collision path with Sohrab.

– Most importantly, where is Tahmina? She is nothing if not a dissenter, and she survives her outcry.

Orientalist treatments of Iran (post-1979)• Micromyth 1: “Sometimes sympathetic, but always dominating

scrutiny”– US Embassy Cables written by Laingen: Protagonist is the US. The

Oriental is either “the Persian” or Iran in general. The fallen state is that “moderate Iranian political parties…have been pushed into the background by those individuals and groups who follow a narrow and authoritarian version of Islam.” Deficiencies include “egoism,” “pervasive unease,” “incomprehension of causality,” tendency to “resist the very concept of a rational…negotiating process.” We can help them by serving as a model: their limitations, manifested by the “government’s failure to ensure personal security, crude attempts at censorship, and scandals involving the revolutionary court system” may eventually cause the rise of moderate groups who “favor a more balanced society resembling a Western social-democracy.” We can also help them by compensating for their lack of rationality, remembering that in negotiation “interlocking relationships of all aspects of an issue must be painstakingly, forcefully and repeatedly developed.”

– Fereydoun Hoveyda: Not a complete micromyth. Mentions mostly the weaknesses of the “Iranian mindset” without any explicit remedy …but we still hear the echoes of Balfour. Iranians, after overthrowing one repressive rule, “immediately submit to a far more intense tyranny…Iranian rulers have always been autocratic and more often than not, very cruel…Contrary to Oedipus, Iranian sons do not kill their fathers. (Actually the reverse often happens in Iran; Iranian fathers do not hesitate to kill their sons whenever they consider it necessary to do so. I have coined the phrase Rostam Syndrome to characterize this particularity of Iranian society.)…To be sure, rulers sometimes wear soft gloves for a while, but they remove them rapidly so that they can indulge in and manipulate absolutism.”

A new dimension of variation: Languages of

Orientalism• Comparing Balfour, Cromer, Laingen and Hoveyda, we see that Oriental deficiencies are often described according to two “languages.”– One language (employed mostly by Cromer and Laingen) emphasizes the Oriental’s supposed lack of rationality or the Oriental mind’s “want of accuracy,” its “deficient” state.

– Another language (employed by Hoveyda and Balfour) describes the Oriental’s supposed inability to embrace democracy or “self rule,” manifested in generation after generation of tyranny.

300 and Orientalism

Problems that invite a Saidian analysis• 300 is a curious twist on what we can call the

American political myth of Sparta—differing in the sense that the American author/audience actually identifies with Sparta .– Prior modern versions of the myth of Sparta date back to Germany in the leadup to World War II: Germans fancied themselves Spartans

– During the Cold War, American economists likened the Soviet economy to that of Sparta: with the underlying analogy being that military expenditures would ultimately be its undoing

(see the RAND Corporations “Soviet Defense Spending: The Spartan Analogy”—readily available online--for an overview of early uses )

-As Murat Es notes (p. 10, or Walker in the bibliography), this analogy was invoked in post-9/11 America as a warning—we should be more like Athens than Sparta, went the argument.

Spartan defense spending (Chapter 2)

Problems that invite a Saidian analysis (second

part)• 300 is also loosely based on accounts from Herodotus’ histories—with the difference that Spartan motivations are completely changed and their character somewhat changed.– Leonidas does not trust in “reason”: he consults the Pythian Oracle—NOT under the control of the Ephors-- not to mention the prophet Megistias (7.219-220).

– The Spartans are held back by the Carneia festival, the others by the Olympic games—so it’s not a question of corrupt and superstitious Ephors (7.206)

– The Spartans are described as the “noblest”/ “best” of Hellenic men (7.210), but NOT the freest

– Motivation is glory and the preservation of the prosperity of Sparta (7.220), not protecting our freedom

Problems that invite a Saidian analysis: Women in

300• Bold Gorgo (with *some* basis in Herodotus) vs. enslaved Oracle (with *no* basis whatsoever)—remind us of anything?

Orientalism in 300• Our two languages of Orientalism return: – Reason vs. mysticism: Spartans are associated with reason so many times it’s ridiculous; contrasted with the Persians’ “mysticism” and the “diseased old mystics” represented by the Ephors.

– Freedom vs. slavery/tyranny: especially toward the end of Chapter 3, the beginning of Chapter 4, and the beginning of Chapter 5.

Languages of Orientalism--illustrated

Gendered Orientalism in 300—the movie version

• Gorgo’s role is enhanced—she becomes the spokesperson for freedom etc. in the assembly

• The Oracle is made to be even more pathetic. In the graphic novel, she first seems to be a force of nature. In the movie, she looks like—and is called—a “drunk adolescent.”

• The Persian messenger decries the practice of letting women speak before men (when in fact, according to Herodotus, it is Xerxes’ wife Atossa who convinces Xerxes to pursue the Greeks)

• An additional misogynistic character is added in the Spartan ranks (like the Ephors, he is under the influence of the Persians), who, after he forces himself upon Gorgo, declares, “You will not enjoy this. I am not your king.”

• In other words, women become the subject of “sympathetic scrutiny,” and Oriental men become their perverse oppressors.

Orientalism in 300--micromyths

Micromyth 1 (“sympathetic scrutiny”): Leonidas is the protagonist; he laments the deplorable state of the drunken Oracle. He wishes he could liberate the Oracle from the Ephors by getting them to trust in reason—but the Oriental mysticism that the Ephors represent precludes too much success in that respect. In (Frank Miller’s) Leonidas’ eyes, the Oracle and the Ephors are reminiscent of a prior, pre-rational version of Sparta.

Orientalism in 300--micromyths

• It is the second micromyth that is most clearly at play.

Leonidas finds that Xerxes and his army represent a danger that he must come to terms with. Xerxes presents perverse versions of recognized ideas, values and or/customs—such as kingship and reasoning. Xerxes offers mysteriously attractive opposites of normal values (attractive enough to tempt even Leonidas)—and he looks smashing in his henna and bling. Xerxes is thoroughly alien to the Westerner, and alarmingly powerful.

Micromyth 2: Perverse versions of recognized ideas/values/customs

Kingship (relevant to one language of Orientalism)

Micromyth 2: Perverse versions of recognized ideas/values/customs

Reason (relevant to another language of Orientalism)

Xerxes—mysteriously attractive

Xerxes—alien and alarmingly powerful

• “A beast approaches”—constant comparison of Xerxes’ army to the (made up) wolf from Leonidas’ childhood. A threat foreign to humanity itself.

Orientalism in 300--summary• Both languages of Orientalism are at play

• As for Oriental micromyths: the “sympathetic scrutiny” mode in relation to women is at least marginally at play—but it is mostly the second micromyth— “coming to terms with…danger” that we see.

• More explicit political discourse concerning Iran tended toward the “sympathetic scrutiny” model up through 1979…we still see this directed toward Iran today in Hoveyda, and in discourcs about women

• Why the shift to the second micromyth? Likely because post-1979 Iran is a force beyond our control.

Postscript: Iranian female activists and their male

allies• From Kurdish Iranian protests last week (https://www.facebook.com/KurdMenForEquality; English article)

• See also Parvin Fahimi and Hila Sedighi, empowered Iranian women from last quarter’s Week 9 lecture