In 2008, Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders released the film Fitna, which purports to be a movie about the Qur'an, and which consists of the display of Qur'anic verses alongside violent and other disturbing images. The images are allowed to speak for themselves, depicting Islam as a brutally intolerant religion whose followers have little or no regard for human life (warning: this film contains images that may be disturbing or inappropriate for some viewers):
The problem with Fitna, however, is that the viewer is given absolutely no context within which to understand these verses and images. We do not know whether the Qur'an is being translated accurately. We are not told whether the ideas expressed in these ayat are to be understood within the context of a larger passage or a specific historical event. Neither are we informed about the origins of the clips and other images depicting Muslims wielding swords and calling for the deaths of Jews and Christians. So, not only are the Qur'anic verses taken out of context, but the clips themselves are also pulled out of their contexts and portrayed as singular events. The film is powerful because it lets the images speak for themselves, but this is also its deepest (and most unforgivable) flaw.
Not long before Fitna's release, Wilders was interviewed on Fox News about the film, and during this interview he defends his point of view by reverting to arguments that have their roots in the Orientalist tradition of Europe, as that tradition is defined by Edward Said:
Rejecting what he perceives as the failed political system of multiculturalism, Wilders claims that the Islamic civilization is "retarded" in its development, harkening back to an earlier period of European history during which social Darwinism ruled the intellectual landscape. In his book Following Muhammad: Rethinking Islam in the Contemporary World, Carl Ernst begins with a chapter entitled "Islam in the Eyes of the West", in which he discusses this long history of European elitism. During his assessment of Samuel Huntington's "Clash of Civilizations" (interestingly enough referenced here by the interviewer), Ernst states, "it lacks the overt dependence on racial theory that was fashionable in the nineteenth century, but it shares the basic prejudice of reserving true civilization for Europe, which is opposed by barbarism everywhere else" (7). It seems that Wilders has inherited this prejudice and assumes that there is a sharp distinction between the "West" and "Islam" and that these two ideological behemoths are currently in the midst of a culture war.
Wilders is certainly entitled to his opinion of Islam, and he is entitled to his freedom of speech in expressing his concern for the efficacy of multiculturalism or his fear of those Muslims who interpret their religion radically and advocate for violence. He even admits that not all Muslims are terrorists, but in the next breath he states, "I don't believe in a moderate Islam" and that Muslims who wish to assimilate must get ride of the portions of the Qur'an that are deemed unacceptable within the context of Dutch society. He claims, essentially, that Muslims must become more "like us" in order to live in the Netherlands. He is entitled to these opinions.
The primary problem is how he has expressed his view of Islam in Fitna. The film is not a measured or serious study of Islam or the Qur'an. It is, at the most basic level, a piece of anti-Islamic propaganda. And this piece of propaganda will do nothing but enrage Muslims and widen the gap between Muslims and non-Muslims attempting to live together all over the world.
No comments:
Post a Comment