Arab Cinema: Themes in Arab Spoken Films Made in Israel and Palestine at the Beginning of the 21st Century

(1)

Arab Cinema

Themes in Arab Spoken Films Made in Israel and

Palestine at the Beginning of the 21st Century

Amber Emmelkamp

10668969

University of Amsterdam

MA Thesis Middle Eastern Studies: Hebrew and Jewish Studies

Supervisor: dr. Y. Hagbi

June 15 2017

22,363 words

(2)

Amber Emmelkamp MA Thesis Middle Eastern Studies

Acknowledgments

This thesis could not have been written without the help of my parents whom have supported me throughout the process for which I am very grateful. Furthermore my sister has always encouraged me and I would like to thank her for her never-ending moral support and for helping me where she could. Finally I would like to thank my first supervisor Yaniv Hagbi for his help and feedback throughout the process and for making time for me when I needed his help. Without his encouragement and supervision I would not have been able to write this thesis.

(3)

Abstract

This study is about themes used in Arabic spoken films made in Israel and the West Bank at the beginning of the 21st century and what role these themes play in the message that the directors are trying to convey through the movies. With “Arab Spoken films” I mean those films in which the main characters mostly speak Arabic. This thesis aims to show the role of four themes in films that are mostly dominated by the Arab-Israeli conflict and how these are used in order to convey the directors’ views. A number of articles have been written on this subject, including articles by Dina Georgis, Hania Nashef, Nadia Yaqub and Rachel Harris that I have frequently used for this research. In order to gain enough material for comparison, I chose to watch six films and analyse them.

The goal of this study was to identify how certain themes are used by directors of Arab films in Israel and Palestine in order to convey their message to the viewers. The movies that I watched for this thesis are Ajami (2009), The Band’s Visit (2007), Lemon Tree (2008), Omar (2013), Paradise Now (2005) and Sandstorm (2016). In order to create an image that is as recent as possible, I chose modern films of which the oldest dates back to 2005. Another reason for choosing these films is their availability since there aren’t many older Arab spoken movies that were made in Israel and Palestine. A third factor that was considered important in deciding which films would be appropriate for this study was the variety of directors. I distinguished four themes that were frequently present throughout the six films that were included in this research: law; gender; landscape; and language.

After various times of watching the films, which are mostly dominated by the Arab-Israeli conflict, and analysing the themes, this study has led me to argue that language is used to strengthen a Palestinian national identity; landscape is used to distinguish a wealthy and powerful Israel from a broken and poor Palestine; law is mainly used to portray Jews as oppressors and Palestinians as victims; and finally gender is used to criticize the dominant and androcentric behaviour of men towards women and to show that even in conflict women are committed to terminate violence whereas men are the ones using it.

It would be interesting to see a study in which more aspects of these films are highlighted. Moreover more research should be done about other themes in these films that might be less present but not less interesting. In addition it would be interesting if more research is done about Arab spoken films in Israel and Palestine made by female directors in

(4)

Amber Emmelkamp MA Thesis Middle Eastern Studies order to be able to compare male and female directors, the messages they want to convey and to discover to what extend these themes play a role in their films. Furthermore one could examine how foreign directors display the Arab-Israeli conflict in their films and eventually it would be interesting to make a comparison between Arab spoken films about the conflict and Hebrew spoken ones in order to complement this study.

(5)

Introduction

This thesis talks about themes used in Arabic spoken films made in Israel and the West Bank at the beginning of the 21st century and what role these themes play in the message that the directors are trying to convey through the movies. With “Arab Spoken films” I mean those films in which the main characters mostly speak Arabic. This thesis aims to show the role of four themes in films that are mostly dominated by the Arab-Israeli conflict and how these are used in order to convey the directors’ views. Indeed Malek Khouri argues that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is (one of the) most frequently used theme in Arab cinema.1 A number of articles have been written on this subject, including articles by Dina Georgis, Hania Nashef, Nadia Yaqub and Rachel Harris that I have frequently used for this research. In order to gain enough material for comparison, I chose to watch six films and analyse them.

The movies that I watched for this thesis are Ajami (2009), The Band’s Visit (2007), Lemon Tree (2008), Omar (2013), Paradise Now (2005) and Sandstorm (2016). In order to create an image that is as recent as possible, I chose modern films of which the oldest dates back to 2005. Another reason for choosing these films is their availability since there aren’t many older Arab spoken movies that were made in Israel and Palestine. A third factor that was considered important in deciding which films would be appropriate for this study was the variety of directors. Four of the six films deal directly with the Arab-Israeli conflict; the main focus of a fifth one is coexistence and the last film revolves around a tight Bedouin community inside of Israel. I deliberately chose to use films of directors with different backgrounds in order to provide a broader view on different themes in Arab films about Israel and Palestine. Both Omar and Paradise Now are made by Palestinian-Dutch director Hany Abu Assad. Ajami was produced by Scandar Copti, an Israeli Arab and Yaron Shani, an Israeli Jew. The Band’s Visit, Lemon Tree and Sandstorm were all made by Israeli-Jewish directors; respectively Eran Kolirin, Eran Riklis and Elite Zexer.

The film Ajami consists of five overlapping storylines that focus on the lives of some of the residents of the mixed Arab Jewish neighbourhood of Ajami in Jaffa. The Band’s Visit tells the story of the Alexandria Ceremonial Police Orchestra that took the wrong bus and ended up in a tiny village in the Israeli desert but are welcomed and helped by the local residents. In Lemon Tree the focus is on a legal battle over a lemon grove, supposedly

1

(7)

Amber Emmelkamp MA Thesis Middle Eastern Studies dangerous to the national Israeli security, owned by a Palestinian woman on the border of Israel and the Palestinian Territories. Omar revolves around a Palestinian youngster and militant that is forced to collaborate with the Israeli authorities after he and his friends kill an Israeli soldier. In Paradise Now viewers can see the story of two young Palestinian friends that are recruited to carry out a suicide mission and their roads towards martyrdom. Finally in the film Sandstorm one gets to see the story of Layla, a girl that belongs to a Bedouin tribe in the south of Israel, and her struggle to be independent and make a change in her by men dominated culture and life.

During my research four specific reoccurring themes that are present throughout the movies caught my attention: the law; gender; landscape; and finally language. In the first chapter of this thesis I will be dealing with the way the law is represented throughout the films in order to convey a message. The second chapter focusses on how gender roles can be used by the directors to convey their message. Later on in the third chapter I will deal with space and landscape and in which way the directors have used this in order to show that there is more to space or landscape than merely a background. Finally in the fourth chapter the language in the films will be discussed.

(8)

1. Depiction of the Law

Throughout these films we see the reoccurring role of power and of Jews as the embodiment of the law or the authorities by for instance being a police officer or an IDF soldier. Four of the six films included in this thesis indeed often depict Jews as being part of the law. The law however is not only represented by persons or institutions but also by checkpoints and roadblocks that we see in multiple films and by the separation wall that is strongly present throughout both Lemon Tree and Omar. Two other reoccurring themes are treason, which happens after breaking a law, and violence, which is against the law and if not so we could speak of lawlessness. Unlike in these movies, in The Band’s Visit and Sandstorm one does not find a profound hostility between Arabs and Jews, as this is also not the main theme of these films.

According to the French philosopher Michel Foucault power is asymmetrical and non-egalitarian, and it is present everywhere at the same time penetrating into every part of social life. He argues that power is present everywhere "not because it has the privilege of consolidating everything under its invincible unity, but because it is produced from one moment to the next, at every point, or rather in every relation from one point to another. Power is everywhere; not because it embraces everything, but because it comes from everywhere”.2 Hence power is present in every aspect of society.3 In addition he argues that every relation of power can change.4 Furthermore Foucault states that power is not oppressive but rather productive; that it's decentralized and multidirectional; that it's deliberate but at the same time objective; and that resistance is inherent to power relations.5

Power is everywhere; not because it embraces everything, but because it comes from everywhere … nothing escapes it.6

Therefore it is not possible for power to be (seen as) restricted or anchored to a single place, person or position. The many power relations that can be found throughout a 2 Dore (2010), p. 740. 3 Bevir (1999), p. 349. 4 Dore (2010), p. 741. 5 Flohr (2016), p. 41. 6 Jiménez-Anca (2013), p. 39.

(9)

Amber Emmelkamp MA Thesis Middle Eastern Studies society do not avoid one another but rather interact, challenge, change, fortify or reverse one another. Furthermore they combine, target and challenge on each other and thus even exercises of power that seem to be secluded are always relational.7 An example to illustrate how power is omnipresent is that both teachers and children have power over each other: the teacher is able to demand children to do something whereas the children have the power to resist these demands. Moreover parents have another kind of power over their children whereas the head of the school has some kind of power over the teachers.8

This notion of power that is constantly changing form but is always present is also seen in the films of this thesis. In the films Ajami, Lemon Tree and Omar we see respectively Dando (police officer), Israel Navon (defence minister) and Rami (special agent) that have power over the citizens but are overpowered by their wives since Dando is commanded to do the dishes, Israel is left by his wife, and Rami is ordered to pick up his daughter from school. Also in Paradise Now and Sandstorm one can see a change of power relations. The terrorist organization in Paradise Now initially has power over Khalid and orders him to execute a suicide bombing but a change of power slowly occurs when Suha talks him out of it. In Sandstorm Suliman has power over his family and uses it to banish Jalila which is when Layla decides to take control of the situation and the power switches from Suliman to her as she tells him she will marry the man he chose for her if he brings her mother back which leaves him no choice in order not to lose face.

1.1 Authorities Portrayed as the Embodiment of the Law

According to Richard Schaefer minority groups arise by migration, annexation and colonialism9 and he argues that minorities have five characteristics: “(1) unequal treatment, (2) distinguishing physical or cultural traits, (3) involuntary membership, (4) awareness of subordination, and (5) in-group marriage”.

1) Members of minorities do not have as much power over their lives as members of majorities have over theirs and they thus encounter unequal treatment and suffer from social inequality.

2) They have the same physical or cultural characteristics that make them different from the majority like skin colour or language.

7 Flohr (2016), p. 43. 8 Gallagher (2008), p. 398. 9 Schaefer (2001), p. 570-571.

(10)

Amber Emmelkamp MA Thesis Middle Eastern Studies 3) The members of the minorities are not voluntarily part of the group; rather they are

born into it.

4) The feeling of group solidarity among them is very powerful.

5) Usually members of minorities aim to marry members of the same minority because of the powerful feeling of group solidarity in-group marriage is encouraged whereas a marriage to an outsider is discouraged.10

A reoccurring disadvantage that minorities have to deal with is the bad access to the health care system and the subordination that comes with it.11 The consequences for the

minority group can be pluralism, assimilation, a fusion of both a minority group and a majority group are joined together in a new group and segregation. Other, more negative consequences can be secession by which another group establishes new nation or moves to another nation and becomes dominant, expulsion and in the worst case extermination through ethnic cleansing or genocide.12

According to Sammy Smooha, the goal of the Israeli government is to keep the state Jewish which, as Smooha argues, results in the fact that the democracy in Israel is subservient to the Jewishness. An example he gives is that it is not a big possibility that an Arab will be chosen as prime minister of Israel.13 He argues that the Israeli government

considers it its duty to preserve the Jewish people, not only in Israel but also in the diaspora and considers itself as the most important tool to implement this, which is why, according to Smooha, this is the most important feature of its foreign policy.14 In addition, Oren Yiftachel argues that although the Israeli Arabs are officially seen as a minority in Israel, governmental policies have the main goal of controlling the Arab part of the Israeli population since it's trying to maintain a Jewish majority and domination in the country. He argues that this control is mainly shown in territorial containment, economic dependence and political subordination.15 Smooha argues that political parties for example cannot participate in the

elections if they do not recognize Israel as a state for the Jewish people.16 According to him the Arabs consider Jews as a modern racist group that is controlling another group while the 10 Schaefer (2001), p. 569-570. 11 Detollenaere (2016), p. 443 12 Schaefer (2001), p. 571-572. 13 Smooha (2002), p. 482. 14 Ibidem, p. 486. 15 Yiftachel (1992), p. 60 16 Smooha (1990), p. 402.

(11)

Amber Emmelkamp MA Thesis Middle Eastern Studies Jews consider Arabs to be an underdeveloped and possibly violent group.17 A remarkable

outcome of a survey described in Smooha's article is that two-thirds of the Israeli and Palestinian Arabs say it is impossible to trust Jews and that Jews are exploiters18, which is reflected in the films. Because the Israeli government identifies itself as Jewish, many of the higher positions that exist in the state are taken by Jews. Consequently (Israeli) Arabs feel discriminated and suppressed which is expressed in Arab films that frequently portray Jews as the embodiment of the law and/or as villains and powerful suppressors.

Not surprisingly this is also the case in four of the six films that I included in this study. In Ajami for example one of the main characters Binj arrives at his home near the crime scene when he and his father are violently arrested by the Israeli police and taken for questioning.19 Later, the police enter his home to search it which results in a big mess.20 We also see this negative attitude towards Jews in Lemon Tree where they similarly are portrayed as powerful figures with authority such as the defence minister, the soldiers, the guards, the judges and the members of the secret service. Furthermore throughout the movie there is a great hostility between the Israeli Jews and the Palestinians. The minister and his security guards see there is a lemon grove next to the house and immediately decide it’s necessary to cut the trees and build a security fence even though a citizen that lives close to the grove for a long time tries to convince them it’s safe since nothing ever happened and Salma is just a poor and lonely woman.21 At the same moment, the security guard spots Salma and Abu Hussam in the grove and immediately points his gun at them.22 After the court rules in favour of the minister, the secret service builds a fence all around the grove and forbids Salma from entering.23 At the Supreme Court a soldier shows the judges some earth of the grove that’s very dry and pleads that Salma does not take care of the grove which leads to dryness and diseases and he implicates that the wellness of the grove must not be important for Salma at all.24 In this scene the director aims to show the cunning nature or character of the Israeli soldier since Salma could not enter the grove without being arrested. During these scenes we see Foucault’s notion of power being everywhere and 17 Smooha (1987), p. 4. 18 Ibidem, p. 19. 19 Ajami [01:18:38]. 20 Ajami [01:24:40]. 21 Lemon Tree [00:06:05]. 22 Lemon Tree [00:10:20]. 23 Lemon Tree [00:31:55]. 24 Lemon Tree [00:55:00].

(12)

Amber Emmelkamp MA Thesis Middle Eastern Studies changing constantly since the defence minister has power over Salma whereas the judge has power over the minister. Although in Paradise Now one does not see many Israelis, the ones one does see are indeed mostly cruel soldiers.

Similar to the these films, in the movie Omar the Palestinian boys are portrayed as freedom fighters, fighting to end the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and therefore bettering their circumstances of living and giving them more chances at a successful life, whereas the Jews in this film are portrayed as mean policemen, soldiers and guards that don’t care about the Palestinians whatsoever. At the beginning of the film Omar is climbing a wall and some soldiers spot him, go after him and humiliate him by making him stand on a rock while laughing at him.25 Later, after Amjad shoots a soldier, undercover agents storm into the city and arrest Omar after which they torture him by letting him hang naked while hitting him, in order to make him confess to the attack or to who actually shot the soldier.26 One of the inmates that warns Omar not to trust anyone is actually agent Rami who is undercover and wears a wire in order to let Omar state he would never confess, which itself is taken as a confession by the authorities.27 In this way they can use the tape to blackmail Omar into becoming a collaborator since they know he did not shoot the soldier. On top of that, agent Rami threatens to ruin his life and to hurt Nadia. Here again Foucault’s notion of power arises since initially the soldiers that humiliate Omar have power over him but later on we see that Amjad has power over the soldier when he shoots him. In Lemon Tree Israeli soldiers even attempt to hinder the process because the roads to Jerusalem are closed and even the letter of the Supreme Court does not grant them permissions to pass through the checkpoint according to the guarding soldier.28 All these examples show the Jews or Israelis as deceitful, calculating and cunning persons with no moral understanding or compassion whatsoever that try to learn everything about someone (especially if this someone is Arab) in order to use it against him. Thus the message that these directors are trying to convey is not particularly positive towards the Israeli government, army and police; but rather the directors aim to show the viewers their critical view on Israeli policies. The characters in the films are used in order to create or rather emphasize the already existing (and by Arabs

25 Omar [00:08:40]. 26 Omar [00:21:48]. 27 Omar [00:29:16). 28 Lemon Tree [01:27:15].

(13)

Amber Emmelkamp MA Thesis Middle Eastern Studies strongly supported) image of the all-powerful and vicious Israelis that represent the government institutions.

Viewers also encounter the mistrust and discrimination that Smooha describes in his article. For instance in Lemon Tree when during Mira’s housewarming party a bomb explodes and secret service immediately suspect Salma.29 The army storms her house and destroys her furniture to eventually leave with nothing. This movie pictures the secret service not only as rude to the Palestinian woman but also to Mira, who sympathizes with her.30 While hosting the party the minister finds out that the caterer forgot to bring his lemons; hence he sends his guards to the grove to get them some.31 Salma tries to get her lemons back but the guards push her onto the ground and tell her that they will arrest her if she will not leave the grove. Here the director is portraying Jewish Israelis as men eager to obtain everything the Palestinians have and through this scene he is referring to and criticizing the establishment of the State of Israel and the Israeli occupation.

A remarkable feature that one can see throughout the films is the fact that soldiers of the Israeli army are always Jewish whereas in reality there are many Druze soldiers as well as a growing amount of Arab soldiers. Hence we can see that the negative attitude of the films towards the Israeli army is not so much about the army in general but rather about the Jews specifically. Thus what the directors are trying to address and particularly criticize are the Jewish soldiers and the Jewish character of the Israeli state and army; most likely because it were the Jews that established the State of Israel, took over the British Mandate of Palestine and occupied (parts of) the West Bank instead of the Arabs and the Druze; and in order to uphold the already existing image of the all-powerful Jewish Israeli army.

1.2 Israeli Actions as a Justification of Palestinian Violence

Violence is against the law and when committed a state of disorder arises due to a disregard of the law; in other words lawlessness. Hillel Frisch argues that although Israeli Arabs wish to change the identity of the Israeli state in order to create Arab cultural autonomy, most of them still work within the system.32 They enjoy the economic and democratic advantages that their Israeli identity provides them with but at the same time, as a result of Israel 29 Lemon Tree [01:05:10]. 30 Lemon Tree [01:18:05]. 31 Lemon Tree [00:59:20]. 32 Frisch (2005), p.220.

(14)

Amber Emmelkamp MA Thesis Middle Eastern Studies conquering the West Bank and the Gaza Strip during the Six Day War in 1967, nationalist sentiments began to grow among Israeli Arabs.33 These growing nationalistic feelings of the Palestinians (the Israeli-Arabs as well as those that live on the West Bank) resulted in the First and Second Intifada and the recent so called Knife Intifada of 2015/2016. The violence committed by Arabs is also reflected on in the films in order to create a more balanced view of the situation. Although in the majority of the films the Jewish Israelis are the aggressor, viewers indeed also encounter Arab violence. In The Band's Visit one does not see any violence towards one another from either Arab or Jewish side since the main message of this film clearly is coexistence and thus violence in general does not really play a part in the movie. Although Sandstorm’s main message is not coexistence, it rather deals with the position of women in Bedouin society, viewers do not encounter many moments (if at all) that include violence. While watching the movie Omar, most hostility and violence is committed by the Jews towards the Arabs instead of the other way around; again emphasizing the hostile and vicious character of ‘Jews’.

A reoccurring pattern throughout the films is that although the Arabs use violence, somehow the Israelis are blamed. It seems that the tendency in these movies is that Israeli actions and the occupation justify Arab violence. In Paradise Now for example viewers encounter a lot of violence and hostility from the Arabs towards the Jews. Somewhat at the beginning of the film Said tells Suha that he and some others burned down a cinema in Nablus because the Israeli government did not allow Palestinians to work in Israel, showing their mad and violent reaction towards Israel’s actions.34 Here one can see that Said uses Israeli actions as a justification for burning down a cinema and frankly commits aimless violence since a cinema in Nablus has no connection to the Israeli government. In the same conversation Said praises Suha’s father Abu Azzam, a Palestinian militant who fought to end the occupation, caused much damage and drove the Mossad crazy. Also in Khalid’s opinion it’s their task to defend freedom and justice which is why he wants to partake in the terrorist attack. According to him they don’t have a choice but to carry out the attack since they are already dead by living in Nablus. Thus he (and with him the director) blames the (worsening) living circumstances of Nablus to Israel; in their specific case however it is ignorant to only blame Israel for their living conditions because Nablus is located in area A of the West Bank

33

Beyer and Hamad (1992), p. 39.

34

(15)

Amber Emmelkamp MA Thesis Middle Eastern Studies and thus the jurisdiction over the city was given to the Palestinian Authority in the Oslo Agreements even though by many Israel is still considered responsible for this area as well.

A survey held by Lisa Beyer and Jamil Hamad showed that males are more likely to use violence than females which we can also see in these films. In Paradise Now for example a debate takes place about whether an armed battle or a moral battle is the right solution for the occupation. When Suha tries to convince Khalid that violence is not the solution he tells her she is naive, that there can’t be freedom without a fight and that sacrifices must be made.35 Suha argues that the victim will be equivalent to the tormentor to which Khalid answers that suicide bombers wouldn’t be necessary if the Palestinians had the same weapons as the Israelis. Suha tells him that those attacks will only cause Israel to continue the occupation. According to her one should engage in a moral battle, not an armed one. Here we see that although Suha disagrees with an armed struggle and eventually does change Khalid’s mind, Said is still convinced that carrying out the attack is the only solution. Later on in the second chapter I will further elaborate on masculinity and femininity in these films.

Remarkably we do not only see violence against soldiers or representatives of the Israeli government, but also against regular Jewish citizens of Israel. In Ajami we meet a Jewish man who complains about the noise of the sheep of his Arab neighbours causing him to have a lack of sleep.36 In the beginning the encounter seems to be a pleasant one with mutual respect, but soon the atmosphere changes when the Arabs respond angrier and angrier to the Jewish man and eventually stab him to death. This scene shows the quick tempered personality of the Arabs in these films; that not all fights or disputes are related to the conflict; and moreover it criticizes the amount of violence that exists in the Arab community of Israel in general.

We do not only see the hostile attitude of the Arabs towards the Jews through their actions, but also through their words. There are many moments in which one does not specifically see the act of committing violence but rather the speculation about it. In Ajami for example Binj wakes Malek in order to go to work while wearing a gas mask and says laughing: "stand up, the Jews have arrived".37 Furthermore Malek immediately assumes that 35 Paradise Now [01:07:00]. 36 Ajami [00:51:55]. 37 Ajami [00:41:40].

(16)

Amber Emmelkamp MA Thesis Middle Eastern Studies the three Jewish men who came by Binj's house murdered him, while there is no single evidence this happened and it eventually turns out that this is indeed not the case.38 Also in Lemon Tree it is no so much about the act of committing violence by the Arabs, but rather about the conversations on violence by the Jews. In this sense there is some hostility portrayed from the Palestinian point of view towards the Israelis. For example when Salma asks for help with reading the letter send to her by the Israeli army about her trees being destroyed, the Palestinian man that helps her tells her she should know that all the Israelis do is taking Palestinian land and destroying Palestinian houses and that the Palestinian people would never take money from them.39 In addition, when Salma’s lawyer calls Mira pretty, Salma and Abu Hussam look disapproving at him whereafter he immediately changes the subject.40 A reason for the Arab violence could be their grudge towards the Jews for (in their view) stealing their land and afterwards oppressing them hence the violence serves as a means to liberate themselves from the Jews. However, another aspect of this film is not how the Israeli’s bother Salma, but rather how the Palestinian Authority does nothing to help her which leaves her and her lawyer fighting alone.41 This does give an indication of how the Palestinians view the Jews and the Palestinian Authority as well and we see that although the main focus is put on the how the Israeli government neglects its Arab subjects, the director of this film also feels the need to criticize the Palestinian Authority and aims to show that in the end the Palestinians citizens can also not count on the support of their own government.

1.3 Treason in the Form of Collaboration

Treason is against the law, whether governmental law or personal laws, and is often associated with violence. In fact when committing treason one disregards the law and does not respect it. In Lemon Tree we also encounter a kind of treason from a government towards its subjects when the Palestinian Authority refuses to help Salma with her case which definitely can be seen (at least through Salma’s eyes) as a form of betrayal or abandonment. Another moment of treason on a personal level is in Ajami when Abu Elias finds out Omar is secretly dating his daughter with which the director aims to show the 38 Ajami [00:45:35]. 39 Lemon Tree [00:13:13]. 40 Lemon Tree [00:25:00]. 41 Lemon Tree [00:38:20].

(17)

Amber Emmelkamp MA Thesis Middle Eastern Studies tension between Muslim Arabs and Christian Arabs. Abu Elias as being a Christian does not want to see a relationship developing between Omar, who is a Muslim, and his daughter Hadir.42 Here Abu Elias feels betrayed by his employee that dates his daughter behind his back, but he feels betrayed by Hadir as well since she is in love with a Muslim and dates him secretly.

A major form of treason in Palestinian society that viewers often see or hear about in the films is collaboration with Israel. In fact even having a Jewish girlfriend is a reason for other Palestinians to doubt your intentions which we see in Ajami when Binj and his friends get together and his friend Rabi'a tells him that Binj increasingly behaves like the Jews because of his Jewish girlfriend and says: "Soon you will be one of them. After everything that has happened you want to live with them? The both of you can leave, teach your children Hebrew and let them become good Jews".43 Here Binj is seen as a betrayer and a possible collaborator because of his Jewish girlfriend and the good relationships he has with some Jews. Furthermore, the fact of being an Israeli Arab can lead to the assumption that you are a traitor or collaborator among Palestinians. For example when during the film Ajami a man from a village near Nablus approaches Malek and says the following words about the Israeli Arabs: “These Arabs in Israel we are talking about are much worse [than the Jews]”.44 This does not just show a negative image of the Jews, but more importantly how the hatred for Arab Israelis, which are thus seen as traitors, is even worse. Also in the film Omar collaboration and betrayal play a key part in the plot when Amjad betrays his two friends Omar and Tarek by spying for the Israelis. Because of Amjad the Jewish authorities know about the planned ambush and are one step ahead of the three, leading to a second arrest of Omar.45 Again showing that treason and violence often go hand in hand for if Amjad would not have betrayed his friends, perhaps Omar would not be arrested a second time and forced or blackmailed into working for the Jewish authorities.

Jamil Hamad, Aharon Klein and Matt Rees described how deep the hatred for and obsession with collaborators is rooted in Palestinian society especially.46 According to them people that are suspected collaborators are doomed from the start and are called traitors 42 Ajami [01:38:15]. 43 Ajami [0:21:58]. 44 Ajami [00:35:35]. 45 Omar [00:57:20]. 46

(18)

Amber Emmelkamp MA Thesis Middle Eastern Studies immediately, even by the judges. In addition they do not have the right to choose their own lawyer and the lawyers provided for them by the government nearly don’t defend them. David Hoffman argues that they are often wiped out of their houses and towns by violent organizations and as an example presents the residents of Fahma that openly collaborate with Israel and live in a special camp which is protected by the Israeli army.47 In addition they are supplied with weapons by the Israelis in order to be able to protect themselves. Hamad, Klein and Rees argue that the hatred has turned into paranoia and that even an allegation of collaboration most likely results in a death sentence.48 Even family members stay away from the (suspected) collaborator because of shame and fear. This shame is reflected in Paradise Now’s Said that cannot deal with the shame and fear after which he concludes that a suicide bombing is the only solution for him. In this film viewers are immediately confronted with the notion of Palestinian collaborators and the hostility towards them from Palestinian society. At the beginning of the movie, a short conversation about collaborators takes place between two men in a cafeteria when one of the two concludes one should drag the collaborators by the hair and cut them, their families, and their loved ones into pieces.49 This paints a clear picture of how this man feels about Palestinians that work together with Israelis. Later Said’s mother tells him how much he looks like his father, which upsets him since he does not want to be seen as a collaborator.50 Said blames the Jews for exploiting the weaknesses of Palestinians and through that turning them into collaborators. He considers this as their worst crime since it destroys the morality and divides families. According to him his father was weak and this was also caused by the occupation.51 At one point he states the Israelis convinced themselves and the world that they are the victims whereas in his opinion they play the part of tormentor and victim at the same time leaving him no choice but to react by dying and killing.

The reason why collaboration is highlighted in the films is because, as described earlier, it’s a major focus of the Palestinians and deeply rooted in Palestinian society. To the directors it’s important to highlight this topic in order to criticize collaborators. Moreover in Omar we see the storyline aims to criticize the Israeli secret services that take advantage of

47

Hoffman (1993), p. A13.

48

Hamad; Klein; Aharon (2001), p. 30.

49 Paradise Now [00:10:00]. 50 Paradise Now [00:24:20]. 51 Paradise Now [01:12:15].

(19)

Amber Emmelkamp MA Thesis Middle Eastern Studies poor Palestinians in order to use them as collaborators. However this focus could also be used to criticize the society’s attitude towards the collaborators because (1) it’s not always their own fault: one can be forced to collaborate as Omar was; and (2) because relatives suffer the consequences as we saw in Paradise Now where the fact that his father was a collaborator tore Said apart.

In short we learned that power is everywhere; that Jews in these films are usually depicted as oppressors whereas Palestinians are mostly portrayed as victims; and that collaboration has a significant role in Palestinian society. Another important theme throughout the films is the use of gender which we will see in the next chapter.

(20)

2. The Way Gender is Used

This chapter is about the use of gender and what role it plays in the message that the directors are trying to convey through the films. During my research three specific reoccurring themes that are present throughout the movies caught my attention: women during conflict, masculinity and food. First I will be dealing with the way women are portrayed in these films, and then I focus on the masculinity of the male characters in the movies. Later on I will deal with food which is a reoccurring theme in combination with women; a stereotype that is used by all directors.

2.1 Women in Conflict

Three of the six movies revolve mainly about the Arab-Israeli conflict. According to Nadine Puechguirbal women are often marginalised on the basis of essentialist gender differences where biology is used as a symbol for discrimination because their presence in the public space of politics is considered threatening to male domination and power.52 She argues men claim to stand for gender neutrality but at the same time go on imposing their rules that continue to place women in an inferior status and are just challenged by feminist that aim to discover secret power hierarchies. After a conflict ends most countries aim to return to the way their societies functioned before the war, without taking in consideration the different impact war has on men and women and the change in gender roles. Women stand on the basis of local peace initiatives and try to keep the things they achieved during the war by not adhering to the traditional roles, but since they also have to perform their household chores, they frequently relinquish their presence in the public sphere as a result of their heavy workload.53 On the one hand women have to take care of themselves inside their homes as well as outside and protect themselves from gang members or violent soldiers and on the other hand they need to hold families and communities together. In the aftermath of the conflict women are not in all occasions aware of the changes in themselves and how, with these changes, they are able to influence the re-masculinisation of post-war society. Puechguirbal argues that in most societies women are not seen as capable of everything whereas men are.54

52 Puechguirbal (2012), p. 18. 53 Ibidem. 54 Ibidem.

(21)

Amber Emmelkamp MA Thesis Middle Eastern Studies These clear distinctions between men which represent public, war and protector; and women that stand for private, peace and victim are nowadays more and more being criticized. According to Sophie Richter-Devroe women must not be seen only in the role of passive victims since they indeed have the power to influence the conflict positively as well as negatively55 which we saw when Suha persuaded Khalid to abandon his suicide mission. She argues that Palestinian resistance to the Israeli occupation takes many forms. Militant resistance is seen as a form of resistance reserved for men, nonviolent forms of resistance such as protesting are considered proper for both women and men; moreover women are expected to join these kinds of resistances. Hence women play a serious part in Palestinian resistance which could not take place without them. Thus one could say that this gives Palestinian women an opportunity to enter public spheres that initially were only open to men, which gives them room for female political agency.56 Richter-Devroe argues that there are two kinds of gender interests for Palestinian women and she makes a distinction between "practical gender interests", like the access to childcare, healthcare and food; and "strategic gender interests" which stand for gender change in the social sphere. According to her Palestinian women are more focussed on the former rather than on the latter. Development work has helped these women with both interests by, for instance, setting up projects in order to gain more income and projects with which they aim to strengthen women's feminist consciousness in order to, for example, fight discrimination based on gender.57

Throughout the film Lemon Tree viewers encounter many moments of Salma and Mira gazing at them or at each other. Traditionally, cinematic gaze is only used in a power relationship, a masculine gaze where women are merely seen as an object.58 In Lemon Tree however this is not the case. By the way this movie was filmed Eran Riklis encourages the audience to look back while Mira and Salma gaze at each other. These gazes back and forth between both women symbolize a shared companionship.59 According to Rachel Harris Riklis aims to fight the idea of women as being merely an object by showing the women as the centre of attention and many times let them fill the screen. When Mira is hosting her 55 Richter-Devroe (2008), p. 31. 56 Ibidem, p. 39. 57 Ibidem, p. 41-42. 58 Harris (2013), p. 85-86. 59 Ibidem.

(22)

Amber Emmelkamp MA Thesis Middle Eastern Studies housewarming party some of the caterers attempt to steal Salma's lemons which she is desperately trying to protect. She calls them thieves and as the security guards attempt to throw her out of the grove whereafter Mira takes a stand for her since she is clearly upset. As Mira apologizes both stare at each other which calms Salma down and enables her to regain her dignity. At first Salma seems to be a weak woman and Mira a strong one but eventually it’s the former that is strong and fights for her rights and thus becomes an example for the latter to do the same; creating a sense of sisterhood. In this scene Riklis treats the women in a delicate way and questions the female objectification.60 According to Dorit Naaman the gaze between both women stands for power, agency and subjectivity. Furthermore she states that even nowadays women do not play the leading role in films and that most of the time their gaze is concerned and neither empowering or pleasant.61 In Lemon Tree however women play key roles and their gaze is not uneasy; rather these women grasp the viewers' attention and encourage the viewers to support them and the troubling conditions they face while fighting external authorities. According to Harris the women sometimes even perform a stare down with the viewers in order to show one should not question women's authority. Naaman states that throughout history women have been discarded because they don't join the military conflict in Israel and thus don't defend its borders and therefore women in Israel also suffer from militarism and the occupation. Yet since women participate less in the military they also have less power within the Israeli establishment.62 Harris argues that Riklis aims to go against the traditional patterns in Israeli filmmaking in which the white man has to protect the white woman from the non-white man and sometimes also from herself. Lemon Tree gives a more refined image of the conflict and the role of women facing the Israeli society and the male-dominant military system represented by the state. Although the (stereotypical white Ashkenazi) Israeli woman lives in a more luxurious environment and enjoys more material wealth than the Palestinian woman, she is just as trapped within the political and patriarchal system.63 For Riklis the women in his movie are not 'just some part of the conflict'; rather he represents them outside of it.64 Just like the Palestinian woman, the Israeli woman is restricted and trapped in 60 Harris (2013), p. 85-86. 61 Ibidem, p. 86. 62 Ibidem, p. 87. 63 Ibidem, p. 88. 64 Ibidem, p. 91.

(23)

Amber Emmelkamp MA Thesis Middle Eastern Studies the political system that is under control of the Israeli establishment and the patriarchal cultural system that she lives in. Even though the women are unable to really make a change, their fight appeals to feminist filmmakers. Harris argues that this movie notably changes the traditional story by trying to expose the effect of the conflict on women's everyday life; women that are entangled in a system they didn't choose but are not able to fundamentally change.65

The concept that gender roles during a military conflict are unchanging throughout cultures and time periods caused a long-term discussion about the meanings of the term gender as well as the term war. Even though masculine warriors are mostly depicted with feminine persons around them, the female's peaceful character continues to be an indirect subject that is described as the Women and Peace Hypothesis.66 According to this concept women (and especially mothers) are more focused on peace and compromises than their male counterparts; are less supportive of the usage of military forces than men; are probably more committed to terminate violence and to keep peace because of their unique experiences during war and conflict; are more collaborative while negotiating than their male counterparts; and are better at participating in conversations about differences.67 In addition there are other ideas that exist alongside the Women and Peace Hypothesis such as the idea that for women the term peace is understood more broadly. Peace is not only see as the deed of terminating armed violence but also includes economic and social justice and human rights and deals with the causes of the war and the concern for broader public needs during the transition to post-conflict life.68 In Paradise Now we see a confirmation of the

stereotypical female in Suha. According to her the only way to reach a solution for the conflict is by peaceful resistance. Especially because her father was killed by the Israeli secret service she does not see the use of military resistance. In addition she is a human rights activist and does not view military resistance as heroic; on the contrary, she’d rather see her father alive and argues that an armed struggle would just strengthen the Israelis.69 According

65 Harris (2013), p. 99. 66 Aharoni (2016), p.3. 67 Ibidem. 68 Ibidem. 69 Nashef (2016), p. 87.

(24)

Amber Emmelkamp MA Thesis Middle Eastern Studies to Hania Nashef the women in Paradise Now honour life whereas the recruiters do not care about it.70

The idea of someone being suitable to go into battle is based on gender rather than on the capability of combat.71 During the first Intifada the Palestinians did not make a great distinction between masculine and feminine which made it possible for women to perform many different roles. Yet during the second Intifada the combatants were largely determined by gender and age. This led to a change in the roles of women from fighters to wives and mothers of martyrs that became the embodiment of Palestinian resistance. The women that did not lose sons or husbands however were faced with many dilemmas.72 According to a study that Penny Johnson and Eileen Kuttab describe in their article, 16 per cent of women and 22 per cent of men consider armed resistance the only way to 'liberate' Palestine and most of them consider a combination of popular and armed resistance as the best way.73 When asked about official peace negotiations the difference between men and women got bigger; 27 per cent of women considered negotiations as the only way to end the conflict whereas only 16 per cent of men thought peace negotiations are the solution. The same study shows that there is a difference in the support of the peace process as well. The majority of women (nearly 75 per cent) support the peace process whereas only 65 per cent of men is supportive of this process.74 Johnson and Kuttab also conducted a study themselves which showed the same big differences between both genders however their research showed that 50 per cent of women and 42 per cent of men were supportive of the peace process which is a strikingly lower percentage.

In Paradise Now women are portrayed as agents of culture and keepers of life. Multiple times we see Said's mother as well as Khalid's mother cooking for their husbands and children. Often when we encounter both women they are occupied with household chores such as cooking and cleaning as will be mentioned again later in the chapter on food. When one meets Suha, one can see how different she is since she has spent most of her life out of Palestine and tries to share her interest in and love for cinema with Said. Yet no

70 Nashef (2016), p. 88. 71 Johnson, Kuttab (2001), p.31. 72 Ibidem. 73 Ibidem, p.32. 74 Ibidem, p.33.

(25)

Amber Emmelkamp MA Thesis Middle Eastern Studies matter how much the women in this movie try, their actions do not have much effect.75 We see this in the way Khalid does not care when his recruiter eats the lunch his mother made him whilst he is recording his martyr's video. Here one gets to see a clear connection between the food that serves as physical sustenance and the mother that serves as a communal sustainer. When Jamal starts to eat the food we see how much it affects Khalid that immediately stops his martyr's speech and instead records a message for his mother.76 According to Nadia Yaqub this symbolizes Khalid's mothers' distance from the deed of the resistance in which her son and his friend Said are involved. Other than the mothers of the first Intifada that protected their children and the men that were combatting the Israelis, Khalid's mother seems unconscious of what's happening around her. In addition one could understand that she would be shocked if she would know that the last sandwich she made for Khalid was eaten by his recruiter who would eventually lead him to his death.77 Like Yaqub states: "she and Umm Said are realistic portraits of the marginalization of women and the inadequacies of maternal protection that characterized the second Intifada". Like Khalid's mother Suha is also rather ineffective. She is self-conscious in her goal to reach a relationship with Said but eventually does not succeed in doing so.78 She is highly respected and popular among the young men since she is the daughter of Abu Azzam who was a famous Palestinian martyr. Nevertheless, she speaks Arabic with an accent since she lived abroad for such a long time. In addition her period abroad influenced her culturally which becomes clear in the conversation she has with Said in which she talks about Japanese minimalistic cinema whereas Said speaks of videos about martyrs and collaborators and of how he and his friends burned a cinema Nablus while protesting against Israel. Moreover Suha is, as Yaqub puts it, a privileged Palestinian that is economically independent and is able to choose whether she stays in Nablus or leaves, a choice that the other characters don't have. Although Suha is free to go when she pleases, she decides to stay in order to realize her ideals.79 Her relationship with Said however is not able to evolve because of his terrorist attack and the last time we see Suha she's crying over his photo. According to Yaqub the roles, concerns and values of men and women are completely different from each 75 Yaqub (2007), p. 78. 76 Ibidem. 77 Ibidem. 78 Ibidem, p. 79. 79 Ibidem.

(26)

Amber Emmelkamp MA Thesis Middle Eastern Studies other. She argues that "Suha and Said’s failed relationship can only be read as the fragmentation and sterility of the community from which Palestinian culture and politics should (but cannot) arise".80 Throughout the film Suha is depicted as an independent woman that is very present in public spaces. She wears pants with a shirt and does not wear a veil, she passes through checkpoints on her own, she has conversations with mechanics, and she is not afraid to express her opinion on the political situation of Israel and Palestine. At the beginning of the film Suha has to pass through a checkpoint near Nablus, however the checkpoint is Palestinian and not Israeli which right away makes the relationship between gender and politics in the movie more difficult because of the hostility of the encounter.81 Suha and the soldier do not speak to each other and while the soldier goes through her stuff Suha refuses to look away. When he finishes he moves his head to let her know she can go. Here the seemingly arrogant Palestinian soldier takes on the part that in Palestinian films is generally reserved for Israeli soldiers. This encounter shows us that for him, Suha does not belong in Palestine. Yaqub argues that this should be seen as a “challenge by Palestinians to women’s rights to occupy such spaces”.82

According to Sarai Aharoni throughout the years many studies of the Women and Peace Hypothesis performed in Israel and Palestine have led to three main conclusions.83 Firstly they argue that feminist academics do not longer stick to the one-dimensional instruction of the Women and Peace Hypothesis but want to develop complicated methods in order to comprehend how the inconsistent logics of war create and sustain incoherent gender stereotypes, roles and opportunities for women as well as men. Secondly, they argue that contextual circumstances such as political violence, class and collective identity influence women's political commitment with matters of peace. In addition, even though the lives of Israeli and Palestinian women are formed by corresponding forces of gender (such as motherhood, violence, underrepresentation and poverty), their outlooks on the conflict are not just influenced by sex, nationality, ethnicity, religiosity or class, but by their mixture. Third of all the absence of women during official peace negotiations in Israel and Palestine indicates that institutional and organizational elements influence women's capability to participate in conflict-affiliated politics. Furthermore, the masculine dominance in peace 80 Yaqub (2007), p. 79. 81 Ibidem, p. 79-80. 82 Ibidem. 83 Aharoni (2016), p.13-14.

(27)

Amber Emmelkamp MA Thesis Middle Eastern Studies negotiations leads to the invisibility of the women and to a lack of their thoughts or influence. Although Israel and Palestine share a bloody history and a pessimistic present, women are still playing the part of peaceful citizen or mad civilian in naive as well as in strategic ways. They act like this in order to be seen and to obtain a voice, means and legitimacy.84 In Paradise Now this role is played by Suha who is against an armed struggle

and favours peaceful resistance.

Indeed in most of the films we see the traditional gender roles of men going out and working and women that stay at home and perform the domestic chores. In Ajami we can see Omar’s traditional family in which he works and his mother stays at home with the kids. Omar is seen as the head of the family since his grandfather is too old and sick and apparently women cannot serve as head of a family; a critical note by the directors pointing to the dominant position of men in Arab society. The same goes for Sandstorm in which the women are restricted to stay in the village and preferably inside the house. Throughout the film Omar the gender roles are more or less identical; men work and save money in order to buy a house and the women stay at home to cook, clean and take care of the children. Furthermore Nadia is ordered by Tarek to prepare drinks for him and his friends and later he does not allow her to go out with them; again referring to the masculine domination. During Omar’s times in prison however we see his lawyer is female showing that there are possibilities for women to work and develop a career. During the film Ajami viewers do not only encounter Arab families but also Jewish families. Remarkably there is a rather large difference between the role divisions based on gender because at Dando’s the division is not quite traditional since he bathes his own daughter and he and his wife argue about who should cook and do the dishes when his wife raises her voice and tells him she is not a maid. In addition viewers meet Dina in The Band’s Visit who owns her own diner and is very independent.

Malek Khouri argues that the idea of national identity and resistance is more and more taking a central place in the debate on gender and sexual politics.85 He brings up the example of the film Wedding in Galilee which shows its viewers a link between oppressive gender and sexual relations in Palestinian culture and the stalled attempts to gain an independent and free Palestine. Another movie Khouri addresses is The Silences of the

84

Aharoni (2016), p.13-14.

85

(28)

Amber Emmelkamp MA Thesis Middle Eastern Studies Palace in which the main female character fights a personal struggle to obtain and carry out her personal identity. In the end she is able to make her own decisions and does not abort her baby as her boyfriend asked for, but instead keeps it which symbolizes her resistance to the masculine dominated society.86 In the film Lemon Tree we do not just learn Salma’s story, in which she fights the Israeli authorities by taking legal measures, but also Mira’s story in which she changes from victim to a strong woman that is determined to take control of her own life. Viewers can see this change at the moment that Mira decides to leave her husband who, as the film hints, is cheating on her with his assistant. Thus Salma’s story is one of politics whereas Mira’s story is personal. In this case the law, defence minister Israel Navon, is masculine whereas the liberation, of Salma and Mira after their struggle, is feminine. In addition we see many other female characters portrayed in commanding functions such as a female journalist; some wives of politicians that get a tour through Mira’s new house; and the judges at the Supreme Court. Even more striking is the fact that when the judges read the verdict, they speak in female gendered language which puts the focus on the development of women gaining power in government institutions.87 Riklis’ aim with this film is to break free from the traditional roles women play in films about conflict and does not portray them as ‘home’ or femininity. Women in those movies represented the opposite of the battlefield and were merely seen as war widows whereas the man served as a combatant. Moreover, although the man had died and is physically not present, he still exists in the movies through his wife that lives in memorial for her dead husband. In this movie however, the women challenge the masculine dominance that they meet.88

During an interview Riklis said that he wanted to use women in order to put the focus on the complexity of the conflict and stated:89

I felt that in the Middle East the women are the underdogs, the under-privileged, and I thought, in both cases, that they should be the centre of the story to show support for women in the region and perhaps worldwide. But beyond that I also thought the women will bring more complexity and emotion to a story where men tend to hide behind pre-conceptions. I believe the 86 Khouri (2007), p. 102-103. 87 Harris (2013), p. 94-95. 88 Ibidem, p. 80-81. 89 Ibidem, p. 83-84.

(29)

Amber Emmelkamp MA Thesis Middle Eastern Studies people want peace and quiet but it does not always show in reality. The film community is of course more outspoken about it and I think we all feel a responsibility to tell these stories. And yet I don’t think enough films about the reality of the Middle East are made.

According to Harris his film shows that the domestic stories that take place in and during the conflict give a more nuanced representation and in addition focus on the difference between the effect of the conflict and its rhetoric.90

2.2 Masculinity and its Feminine Side

According to Nurith Gertz, Israeli cinema is mostly masculine and dominated by “its central Zionist male protagonist”.91 In Israeli film everything was built around this masculine Zionist hero and the main focus was placed on his connection to the homeland and on the power he had to control it. Moreover the best techniques were used to strengthen this idea of the invincible Zionist hero who determined history and the cinematic plot. The film revolved around him and others were made subordinate.92 Be that as it may, in Lemon Tree Itamar

who guards the lemon grove is the complete opposite of this heroic Zionist image. Indeed the other men such as the members of the security service, Abu Hussam and Abu Kamal that represents a Palestinian authority figure confirm and stick to the status quo, Itamar's kind personality and non-effective way of guarding the grove shows us another side of this 'Israeli man'.93 Thus Riklis depicts him as a feminine man and aims to show us that masculinity is a negative of the feminine.

According to Dina Georgis, Khalid and Said in Paradise Now feel aimless and castrated as if they are stripped off their masculinity and thus made weak. They want to fight this feminization of their masculinity which is how the Islamic terrorist organization is able to take a hold of them. Since both do not have a 'good father', the terrorist organization takes on this role. The recruiters exploit the youngsters’ masculinities by cultivating it for hostility and assassination and eventually sacrificing their bodies.94 Georgis states that in Paradise Now the conservation of racial and religious bloodiness is expressed by masculinist 90 Harris (2013), p. 83-84. 91 Gertz (2002), p. 157-158. 92 Harris (2013), p. 85. 93 Ibidem, p. 82. 94 Georgis (2011), p. 140-141.

(30)

Amber Emmelkamp MA Thesis Middle Eastern Studies nationalist connecting and allegiance to 'the father' that territorializes guards and reclaims the state from other 'father-heads'. A state that functions as homeland is many times symbolized in the image of a woman which according to Georgis is maternal, sexually available and requiring safeguard. Thus we could see the reverence to nationalism as ruptured legacy of the "territorializing and womanizing archaic father on human history".95 She argues that the country as a sovereign state due to tribalism and the connecting of sons absorbs the femininity and introduces prohibitions; presumes loyalty; and demands obedience. However by raising the ghost of the archaic father in the country we can comprehend the affective power, coercion and aversion that shape the paternal relationship in nationalisms. Indeed, a majority of the readings of nationalism show an absence of the comprehension of the unsteady nature of nationalist loyalties, particularly when they are psychic methods for surviving racial trauma.96 Georgis describes the symbolism between fathers and the nation as followed:97

Relationships to actual fathers symbolically, and perhaps psychically, reflect their relationships to the nationalist movements. Their susceptibility to nationalism is directly related to their affective responses to their inadequate fathers, and metonymically the nation, but their subjectivities also express ambivalences in excess of this logic. 98

Both Khalid and Said have gentle masculinities of whom the latter in special. Georgis describes him as "soft looking and round faced with soft cherub curls" and states that he has a disarming character. Viewers get to know him as loving to his mother and his crush Suha. Nevertheless both Khalid and Said are required to follow the reasoning of their nationalist father and Georgis describes their obedience to this nationalist father as a "feminine passivity", or as mentioned earlier feminine masculinity, since martyrdom and sacrifice are usually seen as representative of a womanly performance.99 At first, Khalid is excited about becoming a martyr. Although it is probably Suha who eventually convinces him not to go through with the suicide mission, the first cracks in his believe that a terrorist attack is the 95 Georgis (2011), p. 140-141. 96 Ibidem. 97 Ibidem, p. 142. 98 Ibidem. 99 Ibidem, p. 145-146.

(31)

Amber Emmelkamp MA Thesis Middle Eastern Studies solution are shown when one of their recruiters eats a sandwich his mother made. Georgis argues that on this moment the logic of suicide starts to fall apart and she describes this moment as his "feminine revolt". Said's story however develops the other way around; at first he is not convinced to take part in a terrorist suicide attack but later he is the one that actually carries it out. Georgis argues that his initial doubt could be a result of his relationship with Suha (and the love he had for her) who gave him a reason to live however love is considered feminine and hence it threatens his masculine pride and the logic of nationalist obedience.100 The reality that Abu Azzam was an important martyr whereas Said's father was a collaborator haunts Said and causes him to feel an excruciating shame. Consequently he wants to repair his broken masculinity by having the nerve to die for the nation and for God. In contrast to Khalid for whom the main reason to commit suicide is the idea of heaven or paradise, for Said it's not heaven that urges him to carry out the terrorist attack but rather his contradictory ideas about and hatred of the nation. In addition Said considers himself as being already dead. Because he is seen as son of a traitor in an environment that is unforgiving of sons, he deliberately chooses to commit suicide as an "ultimate declaration of love to the nation".101

According to Hania Nashef Paradise Now demystifies the part of the courageous martyr that is committed by the likes of Jamal who attempts to give grounds for the attack to Khalid and Said by saying that its goal is to avenge the death of two Palestinians by an Israeli attack. Jamal is the one that recruits Said and arranges everything but ironically he is also viewed as an admired and respected community official. Even more ironic is the moment that Said's mother, who knows nothing about what's actually happening, tells Jamal that she is glad that somebody like him works on a school and guards the children and teenagers.102

2.3 The Symbolic Meaning(s) of Food

Since women are usually stereotypically pictured as wives and mothers that mainly perform domestic chores they are often seen cooking as well. Also in these films we can view moments of the stereotypical wife such as Said’s mother that’s making dinner for her children and Jamal. Another moment in which we see a role for food or drinks is when Said’s 100 Georgis (2011), p. 145-146. 101 Ibidem. 102 Nashef (2016), p. 87.