Interventions:
A Middle East Report Online Feature
Reel Casbah
Peter Lagerquist with Jim Quilty
March 2006
(Peter Lagerquist is a journalist based in Israel and the West
Bank. Jim Quilty is a journalist based in Beirut. They attended
the Dubai International Film Festival in December 2005.)
To live the
East as film is to be in Dubai in mid-December, perched front-row
in the outdoor cafés that dot the Madinat Jumeira
Oriental theme park. An integrated hotel, shopping and entertainment “experience” sprawled
on the city’s booming beachfront rim, the Madina and its
whimsy of stucco battlements mass an Arabian fort effect plucked
straight from an Indiana Jones set, and as such, the red carpets
and film banners that have also come to adorn it in wintertime
key a double sense of enframement. From December 11-17, 2005, the
Madina hosted the second annual installment of the Dubai International
Film Festival, a production whose rumored budget of $10 million
has quickly distinguished it as the richest Middle Eastern event
of its kind. The money already draws a bevy of Arab glitterati,
led in 2005 by Egyptian screen icon ‘Adil Imam. A few Bollywood
players were also in attendance, and though the Hollywood guest
list remains modest, returning festival guest Morgan Freeman echoed
the ambition of the week with assurances that Dubai will soon be
bigger than Cannes.
As Freeman
also pointed out, however, this filmfest was to be glitter with
a mission. Under the banner “Bridging Cultures,
Meeting Minds,” the festival has positioned itself as a venue
for cross-cultural dialogue, straddling East and West, as well
as North and South. Dubai is a good place to talk, argue the organizers.
A regional crossroads, the city is midway between Iraq and Afghanistan,
where inter-cultural encounters -- they note more somberly -- are
currently screening to very mixed reviews. It also hosts a burgeoning
media industry, the promotion of which is no small part of the
festival’s agenda. The ambition is to integrate Dubai’s
fast-growing Media City enclave into the global film production
circuit. “Embracing the reel world,” the Media City’s
director terms it. Yet in a city that itself figures as a motion
picture, his slogan delivers not a double, but a triple entendre.
A bridge, then, between where and where? From mock forts and silver
screens, the question rebounded on a Middle East framed by ever-shifting
political fantasies, and the grittier realities lived by its inhabitants.
City of Dreams
Far from the
maddened Arab crowd of Western newsreels, the city-state of Dubai
has sold itself over the past decade as a peculiar version of
the “global village.” Unlike Iraq, Iran and, to
a lesser extent, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, the southern Arab Gulf
states have managed to steer clear of political turmoil. Record-high
oil prices have shored up once creaking rentier economies and unleashed
a rapid inflow of dollars in search of investment opportunities.
As the most ambitious of the United Arab Emirates’ seven
princedoms, Dubai has soaked up a considerable share of this windfall.
An economic diversification strategy begun in the 1980s, leveraged
by the massive importation of cheap Asian labor, has consecrated
its place as the Gulf's premier commercial hub and stoked even
bigger ambitions. Seeking to expand its successful port management
business into overseas markets, Dubai has recently run afoul of
US sensibilities, popular and Congressional. But while its relatively
small citizenry continue to enjoy enviable lifestyles, a leadership
whose only business is business has effortlessly ducked American
calls for “democratization”
of the region. Lauded by the Economist as a “benign
autocracy,” the city now postures as the Middle Eastern cosmopole
of the future -- a trans-cultural free port blending the appeal
of Monaco, Hong Kong and Disneyland.
Dubai’s easygoing, cosmopolitan image has been particularly
heavily promoted as part of a drive to lure tourists to the city’s
growing assortment of theme-park hotels and shopping emporia. To
such visitors, the city peddles a kaleidoscope of alternative realities,
exotically familiar or familiarly exotic, but never clashing. For
those who so desire, there are stylized Western reveries about
the East, replete with camel safaris and Oriental architecture
more Oriental than the Orient itself, because they assemble in
one place all the features of what that place is thought to look
like. For evening drinks, the city offers totemic pastiches of
the cosmopolitan good life, conjured up in yacht clubs, gleaming
high-rise apartment buildings and chrome-festooned mega-malls.
As a destination at once hyper-Oriental and hyper-modern, Dubai
on the map of the airport lounge imagination would be both in the
Middle East, and not.
Being also
a place where you need only see what you want to see, the city
cleaves readily to the grandest imaginations of the region’s
future. “It will be years before Iraq becomes a beacon of
political liberty for the region,” writes one entranced American
journalist. “Dubai offers another route: a model inspired
not by Western democracies but by American-style enterprise --
free markets, open immigration and satellite dishes.” It
is appropriate that this impression was published by the high-tech
crystal-ball gazers at Wired magazine, because it envisions
not so much a real politics for the Middle East as a virtual one. “Dubai
is the most autocratic state in the Middle East,” rejoins
a locally based European political scientist, who insisted on remaining
anonymous. “Even in Saudi Arabia they have consultative bodies.
Here it is just one man who decides everything, which is also why
things get done so quickly.”
Welcome to the city of other people’s dreams.
Excursions in Dreamland
On a balmy
winter afternoon in Madinat Jumeira, a Palestinian film director
sipped his cappuccino with a frown. The previous week, he had
swapped the West Bank’s walled vistas for the
palm-studded beaches and ablaq marble of the Madinat’s Qasr
Hotel. Like the score of independent Arab filmmakers who were also
invited to the party, he was grateful for the opportunity. But
he was also here to make a living, which meant finding distribution
partners for his small film, and money for the next one. And he
could not shake the feeling of being a guest on a show made for
people not like himself. “They probably spent $20,000 on
me personally, to keep me here,” he said. “But when
you look for this kind of funds to develop a film, it’s impossible.” The
director was hoping to stay on for a while after the festival,
and as he would soon be evicted from paradise, he was searching
in vain for an affordable hotel. “This country is so expensive,” he
sighed.
Further out
of frame, Rajesh chauffeured one of 50 leather-upholstered BMWs
that transported filmmakers and other festival guests to outlying
screening venues interspersed between the high-rise developments
of Sheikh Zayed Road and an 80-tower seafront development known
as the Dubai Marina. Both are currently the loci of a $225 billion
construction frenzy that will, the city planners hope, cement
Dubai’s
reputation as a place where the world can come to work and play.
For Rajesh, as with much of the world that is already here, it
is all work. One of an estimated 700,000-900,000 South and East
Asian guest workers who build, move and service the city, he makes
about $400 a month, and sends most of it back to his family in
Mumbai, whom he sees once a year. Since he makes less than a $1,000
a month, he cannot obtain visas for them, and he could at any rate
hardly afford to maintain them here. “This place is very
expensive,”
he sighed.
Not
surprisingly, Rajesh does not shop at the brand-name boutiques
that line his main dropoff point, the 6.5 million-square foot
Mall of the Emirates. In addition to a 12-screen cinema complex,
the Gulf’s biggest metaphor for plenty houses the world’s
first indoor ski slope, contained in a looming aluminum shell that
vaguely evokes a moored spaceship. Inside, $75 will buy two hours
in Switzerland, ski rental included. On weekends, those city residents
who cannot afford to buy into the illusion cluster by the roof-to-floor
viewing gallery, gazing in at the snowy dreamland. The scene well
frames a city that tantalizes its upwardly mobile residents and
taunts the rest, its irony crowned by a snippet of inspirational
film dialogue pinned to the back of Rajesh’s seat by the
festival’s promotional team: “I’m going to hang
up this phone, and then I’m going to show these people what
you don’t want them to see,”
read the parting lines from the virtual reality blockbuster The
Matrix.
“A world without rules and controls, without borders or boundaries.
A world where everything is possible.”
In
its source of inspiration, Dubai’s message
to visiting moviemakers cut as close to a deeper meaning as can
be found in this city of glossy surfaces. As pop culture lore recounts,
the alternate reality conceit that animated the Matrix franchise
was loosely lifted from French cult philosopher Jean Baudrillard
and his notion of “hyper-reality.” Deconstructing today’s
virtual cities and virtual wars, embodied respectively by Disneyland
and CNN’s 1991 Gulf war, Baudrillard posits that the contemporary
circulation and replication of images has reached a level at which
the real can no longer be separated from its simulation, to the
extent that this distinction has in fact become meaningless. It
is difficult to argue too much with this speculation in Dubai,
and on the occasion of its film festival, harder still to ignore
why the Middle East has provided such ready grist for Baudrillard’s
mill. As the reels rolled this past December, both visiting filmmakers
and anonymous stagehands could be observed negotiating fantasies
and realities equally not of their own imagining.
Reflecting the Gaze
“Why do we make a film, and for whom?” In Underexposure,
the fictional debut of Iraqi director Oday Rasheed, the question
is posed to the audience by a disillusioned Iraqi filmmaker leading
his crew on an existential trawl through post-Saddam Baghdad. Armed
with expired film stock whose condition is also a ready metaphor
-- “We ourselves are underexposed,” muses the cameraman
-- the crew tries to make sense of life and art amidst the physical
and human debris that is contemporary Iraq. It is a landscape strewn
with burning cars and vacated political iconography, inhabited
by beggars and artists begging answers, and that they do so of
the camera as much as of themselves was a theme tellingly invoked
by many of the festival’s Arab films. Few contemporary filmmakers
can pretend ignorance of the lens’ power over its subject,
least of all those so persistently pictured and bombed through
the same viewfinders.
Among the
festival selections that stared directly back into the aperture
was Nour Eddine Lakhmari’s stylishly rendered Le
Regard (The Gaze). Lakhmari’s first feature follows an
award-winning French photographer who returns to Morocco to come
to terms with his experience as a young army photographer during
France’s 1950s counterinsurgency. Fittingly, his is a return
to an image: a photo of his platoon posing over three captured
resistance fighters on the eve of their execution. One set of Arab
eyes hold the camera; in flashbacks of his unit’s romp through
the countryside, the Frenchman is haunted by memories of the same
prisoner glaring stubbornly at a soldier dealing out beatings. “Eyes
down!” shouts the unnerved private.
“Why are you looking at me?” Throwing back the gaze, Le
Regard subtly probes the complicity of embedded image makers,
past and present. In a signal scene, the protagonist sets his aperture
and, commanded by his platoon, steps reluctantly into the kind
of trophy photograph that has since been taken all too frequently,
from Vietnam to Iraq. “I want to liberate myself from those
images!” exclaims the Frenchman four decades later.
Sayed Badreya knows the feeling. In the 1980s, the
actor left Egypt for Hollywood with dreams of the big screen, but
found that his hulking, swarthy frame fit only into its darkest
corners. After a career of being typecast as a terrorist, including
an appearance in the infamously racist True Lies, he teamed
up with Egyptian-American director Hesham Issawi to make T for
Terrorist, a short that screened at the 2004 Dubai film festival.
In this film about a film set, Badreya is yet again forced to play
the incomprehensibly crazy Arab and responds by literally turning
his gun on the director. Over the course of their careers, many
other festival guests might have wished they could live out such
fantasies. Since few Arab governments or production companies provide
funds for independent films, most independent directors rely disproportionately
on Western financing to realize their projects, and the checks
often come with strings attached. “We have a tendency to
make films that are dénonçiateur,” complained
Lebanese director Philippe Aractingi in the Madina. “If we
have a problem with the hijab, let’s talk about the hijab,
and so on. It’s about the commissions who read us and pay
for the films. So you rewrite and rewrite, because you are 25,
26 years old and you want to make a film.”
Pandering
to the gallery might be a natural temptation for films about
that most sensational of Middle Eastern fetishes -- the suicide
bomber -- and to add to the suspicions of some, Dubai’s opening
gala feature came laden with Western recognition. Distributed by
Time Warner in over 50 countries, the Palestinian director Hany
Abu-Assad’s Paradise Now had already taken home the
2005 Silver Bear in Berlin; over the next two months, it won the
Golden Globe Award for Best Foreign Film and was nominated for
an Oscar. The feature follows two young West Bankers on their way
to “martyrdom,” and, to Abu-Assad’s considerable
credit, it brooks no easy exits for anyone. Yet his is also a work
that resounds tellingly with proclamatory monologues. Paradise
Now has to work over time to cut through the cloud of Western
misconceptions that presently obscures the Palestinian predicament;
consequently, there are likely to be few so understated films in
which so much is also literally stated.
Occasionally, the transpositions fall incongruously on Palestinian
ears. In a much replayed scene, one of the would-be bombers records
a video testament which, though an admirably rigorous exegesis
of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, sounds more like the media-speak
of Western-attuned human rights campaigners like Mustafa Barghouthi
than the nationalistically self-contained rhetoric of the al-Aqsa
Brigades.
Like Elia
Suleiman, hitherto the most celebrated contemporary Palestinian
filmmaker, Abu-Assad has a keen sense for the absurd. In often
trading suggestiveness for dictation, however, he is also the
inverse of his insouciantly allusive compatriot. Yet if there
is a critique here, it need, as Rasheed’s director-protagonist
notes, also involve the audience. Literally cornered in a dark
place, his conclusion to the camera could equally have come from
Abu-Assad’s martyr-to-be:
“I hate you. You are the reason we came to this. You. Who
are you?”
In and Out of the East
As an interrogation
of identity, “Who are you?” was
Dubai’s other question of the week. Concluding with a gentle
plea to Hollywood to dispense with stereotypes and recraft better
types, T for Terrorist is a distinctly American film, but
as such also prefaced the festival’s subtler probing of hyphenated
belongings. This past year, the questioning was led by Being
Osama, a documentary collating the tribulations of a group
of eponymous Arab-Canadians. It was also the fictional stuff of
Ruba Nadda’s Sabah, in which a conservative, veiled
Canadian played by Arsine Khanjian finally comes home to her repressed
sexuality, breaks free of but also learns to understand the sacrifices
of her dominating brother, and tastes forbidden wine.
Both more
polished and more irreverent, Josef Fares’ Zozo is
the semi-autobiographical story of a boy making his way to Sweden
after his family is killed in the Lebanese civil war. Once on the
Scandinavian scene, Zozo enters the trench warfare of cultural
assimilation, guns blazing. Equal parts tragedy and comedy, Fares’ film
pokes bleak fun at his host country, carrying on from his breakthrough
hit Yalla! Yalla!, whose commercial success conferred on
the director the kind of “hip medina”
immigrant aura minted over a decade ago by Cheb Khaled and Rachid
Taha. Made for easy digestion, Yalla! Yalla! subsequently
helped to cue the name of a Swedish yogurt beverage-on-the-go,
marketed, ironically enough, by the Danish-Swedish dairy conglomerate
Arla. Currently the collateral victim of a global Muslim boycott
sparked by Danish cartoons satirizing the Prophet Muhammad, Arla
has since learned the fine limits of cultural commodification.
Invariably,
the festival’s
treatments of fractured Middle Eastern identities in the West
shaded into varied reconstructions of the region itself. In making Bosta (Bus), Philippe Aractingi
enjoyed the privilege of reimagining contemporary Lebanon with
100 percent Lebanese financing. A vehicle for reconciling Oriental
identity with modernity, Bosta ferries a troupe of Lebanese
folk dancers through a campy musical version of their country.
They are led by a returning expatriate, a war-wounded ex-dancer
who composes updated tunes for the traditional Levantine dabka and
borrows from non-Lebanese forms in the choreography. The traditionalists’ rejection
of these innovations sets the scene for the troupe’s tour,
projecting Lebanon’s social and political incongruities onto
the screen. As such, Bosta eschews the subtler treatment
of the Lebanese condition offered by Joana Hadjithomas and Khalil
Joreige’s award-winning A Perfect Day, which also
screened in Dubai. The film struck a chord, however. When released, Bosta was
the only Lebanese production to best Hollywood at the Beirut box
office.
What audiences
came to enjoy, according to Aractingi, was “an
experience of movement.” “We need a different view
of the Middle East than we are seeing now,” explained the
director in Madinat Jumeira. “We are trying to say: after
30 years of war and occupation there are some people who are trying
to move on with life.” Appropriately, Bosta’s
journey concludes with a placard-waving nod to the elusive spirit
of Istiqlal 2005 -- the uprising that prompted Syria’s 2005
withdrawal from Lebanon. In this instance, however, the gesture
was not without wider implications. Assisted by the global advertising
house Saatchi &
Saatchi, Istiqlal 2005 was one of the color-coded, brand-named
revolutions that screened to global acclaim that year, and as such
it points along with Bosta to the kind of future that many
Lebanese are not alone in aspiring to. It points to Dubai.
Since its
launch, the Dubai International Film Festival has afforded glimpses
of this future both off and on the screen. Carrying on from the
winter of 2004, this past season featured a series of shorts
exposing the ambition and budding talents of young Emirati directors.
The real spirit of the place, however, played in 2004 to more
carefully coordinated publicity. A Western tourist’s
guide to her city, Nayla Al Khaja’s feature-length Unveiling
Dubai sought to “capture the essence of Dubai for what
it is and has developed into -- a buzzing, modern, cosmopolitan
city -- very much in tune with the rest of the developed world.” As
with its subject, the film’s ambition is to showcase a Middle
East aligned with Western teleologies of progress, a place where
it all comes together. And how. Under the headline “How Real
Can it Get?” Unveiling Dubai’s promotional packet
took pride in noting that the film was jointly funded by a ministerial
member of Dubai’s ruling family and local tourist enterprises.
“In-movie advertising will be the next available medium for
many corporates targeting their customers,” wrote al Khaja.
The future is bright, was the message; the future is marketing
synergy.
Staging the Orient
That Dubai’s embrace of the world-as-film is a warm hug
of itself was also amply evidenced off-screen. As regional economic
analysts frequently point out, much of the city’s recent
growth owes to an ever expanding real estate bubble, further inflated
by secondary markets in houses that have not yet been built, on
land that is still in the process of being reclaimed from the ocean.
As a result, a good portion of the city’s present-future
exists only digitally, as finely detailed architectural models.
Conjuring the national “experience of movement,”
Dubai’s highways are lined with banners and block-length
billboards reproducing these vistas in meticulous renderings. The
impression is one of driving through a CGI dream, and appropriately
so. Film industries, and Hollywood in particular, have always been
in need of malleable sets, and the Dubai film festival promotes
local hopes that the Middle East can continue to furnish a flexible
canvas.
For over three
decades, the location of preference has been Morocco. The country
offers cheap labor, political stability and proximity to Europe,
as well as perfectly varied and stylized landscapes. “You
can ‘film’ anywhere in the Arab world, anywhere in
Africa. And outer space,” mused one Arab filmmaker. As such,
the country has provided the setting for such diverse fare as Lawrence
of Arabia, The Mummy and Black Hawk Down. With
the US, like Britain and France before it, scripting itself into
a long-term engagement in the Middle East, Hollywood’s interest
in desert scenery shows no signs of abating, and Dubai is now bidding
to become a high-end stage for such enactments of the familiar
Elsewhere.
The fulcrum
of this ambition, and also the festival’s major
sponsor, is the Dubai Media City. Hosting
“20,000 people working in some 850 enterprises,” including
major regional networks like al-Arabiyya and MBC, the specially
designated free zone is already the Middle East’s premier
media hub. Most recently, it provided facilities for Warner Brothers’ Syriana,
starring Matt Damon and George Clooney. “It’s becoming
a competitor to Morocco for big-budget productions,” noted
one Warner executive. “It’s not been exposed yet, [but]
it’s got wonderful high-tech cityscapes, coastal regions
and, of course, the desert, along with a First World infrastructure.”
Building on the Media City’s success, Dubai has since launched
an affiliate Studio City. Investors can already buy plots in the
$100 million estate, though they exist so far only as digital renderings.
That Dubai’s new film interest might support a critical
Arab cinema has proved a more illusory hope, however. Since the
festival was launched, independent regional filmmakers have latched
onto speculation that some of its lavish hospitality and promotional
budget would be diverted toward the kind of patronage extended
by European film funds. So far, the speculation has been just that.
Currently, the festival does not bestow prizes, monetary or otherwise.
Nor does it offer tie-ins to screenwriting fellowships, competitions
for production grants or the kind of industry networking opportunities
that ground much of the appeal of its competing Western venues.
Though connections were made at the 2005 festival, therefore, it
was comparatively slim pickings. “They do a better job in
Europe,” observed one director. “They really work hard
for us. It’s one meeting after another.” Dubai, by
contrast, wants to make things work for Hollywood, and as the contrarian Syriana only
highlights, the Middle East is accordingly likely to remain a region
simultaneously framed and invaded through foreign scopes. As such,
the most revealing entry in the 2004 Festival magazine was an advertisement
for the “Night Vision: Low Light Imaging Solution” of
the US optics firm Atlas Telecom: “has supported the military
and law enforcement communities for years,” read the caption
on a grainy, green-tinted screen shot of Marines on night patrol.
Other People’s
Fantasies
What the festival’s other East-bound Americans had to offer
in 2005 largely added to the sense of gloom. In the runup to the
festival, much anticipation focused on a collection of features
screened under the heading Operation Cultural Bridge. Billed as
the week’s centerpiece, the program prominently hosted Hollywood
comedian Albert Brooks and his Looking for Comedy in the Muslim
World. Aimlessly trailing Brooks’ bungling, but well-intentioned
American on a government assignment to “find out what makes
Muslims laugh,” the film’s low-budget introspection
was trumped only by its sense of geography. The entire film was
shot in India, though it does conjure at least one heavily veiled
anti-Semite as a stand-in for the country’s 200 million strong
Muslim population. It also produces an Iranian exchange student
to spread frowning dolor and deliver jokes like:
“I was the funniest one in school. And the funniest in explosives
training.”
Throughout, Brooks’ purportedly “healing feat” is
to smile good-naturedly at it all.
This was also
the approach of Ari Sandel’s short West
Bank Story. In this sendup of the Broadway musical, the Israeli-Palestinian
imbroglio is rendered metaphorically as a squabble between neighboring
fast-food outlets. The romantic interest is provided by a Palestinian
waitress who signals customers with bursts from her Kalashnikov,
and falls in love with an Israeli soldier manning the very pleasant-looking
local checkpoint. West Bank Story was a 2005 Sundance
Official Selection and merits this distinction all the less for
so thinly reproducing the Israeli as an American comfort figure:
handsome, thoughtful and sufficiently morally confused as to
be forgiven for not following ethical misgivings to coherent
conclusions. “Maybe the Wall will bring peace” was
the festival’s most forgettable line.
For someone just flown in from the real West Bank, the coy glances
exchanged in West Bank Story provoke more than embarrassment,
and what screened outside Operation Cultural Bridge reminded audiences
why. In Women in Struggle, Ramallah-based director Buthina
Caanan Khoury deploys more modest production values and real stories
to searing effect. The film weaves testimonies of Palestinian women
arrested for their participation in military operations, and then
romanced by the Israeli prison system. One describes being stripped
naked by soldiers who display her, first to other male prisoners,
then to her trembling father. He is instructed to have sex with
his daughter; both break down in the refusal. “They brought
me naked into the room,” she recounts of another experience. “Another
prisoner was tortured in front of me with electric shocks….
He was martyred in front of me.” Then she was raped with
a stick.
“[Afterwards] I was never able to function like a normal
woman,” she concludes quietly.
There is a
relentlessness in these testimonies that echoed through the festival
week, in Djamel Sellani’s Algeriennes (Women
of the Algerian War) a documentary narrated by female veterans
of the anti-colonial struggle with France; in Nuit Noire: 17
Octobre 1961 (Black Night), a recreation of the night when
Paris gendarmes killed and “disappeared” between 48
and 200 peaceful Algerian demonstrators; and in Massaker (Massacre),
which presents testimonies by some of the Phalangist militiamen
who, as the film shows, enacted but did not script the 1982 slaughter
of some 2,000 people in Beirut’s Sabra and Shatila refugee
camps. Not all the festival’s entries were unequivocal in
their message. “There is no need for a plot,”
proclaims the protagonist of Underexposure. Yet the overall
impression was indelible: a pictorial staccato of Arabs being mauled,
executed and herded into variously configured holding camps.
It is over
such images that bridges need to be built and as such, Sandel’s ethereal offering figured paradoxically as one of
the festival’s most sinister. If a Guardian critic
could see “the banality of evil” at work in Paradise
Now, West Bank Story flaunts its vacuous cheerfulness
-- not a cultural communication glitch, but a sort of political
and moral autism. Pitching the rub between Israelis and Palestinians
as a “2,000-year old conflict” while positing their
common ground as a shared appreciation of hummus and falafel, the
film makes both too much and too little of history. It would be
easier to excuse these bungling, but well-intentioned Americans
had their alternate realities not mirrored a bigger delusion, one
partly reinforced by the Dubai film festival. If the problem were
indeed a clash of civilizations or at least of cultures, then Brooks
could have made a point, had he first found one. Instead, both
he and Sandel confirm that to trace the sources of the Middle East’s
problems, audiences may need also to look outside the region. Appropriately
enough, the subject of Abu-Assad’s next film is the American
dream.
Suspended Realities
As it were, Abu-Assad need not have traveled as far as Hollywood
to see this dream at work. Dubai has not so much embraced the American
model, as Wired infers, as it has taken it to another level.
This is a level plumbed most tellingly amidst the guest worker
camps that have sprouted on the city’s desert fringes, currently
constituting the city’s latest boom industry. In the local
business pages, one operator breezily details the healthy profits
that come from squeezing 12 men into a single room. His tenants
live on narrower margins: many work for as little as 15 dirhams
($4) a day, mostly in construction, and when overly ambitious contractors
run into financial difficulties, as happens quite frequently, wages
are not paid for months on end. Health services are scant; regularly,
the papers carry reports of impromptu strikes with demands as basic
as
“clean water,” news of camp foremen beating up dissenting
residents and murky stories of worker suicides. With labor organizing
effectively prohibited in the United Arab Emirates, desperate measures
are often the only leverage left. Dubai incarnates a final fantasy
of the global open shop, spared the economically redundant populations
that so weigh on some other capitalist societies. Those who have
no productive place here are simply repatriated.
The
money that can nevertheless be made here continues to lure workers
from across the world. Among them are a group of Kenyans recruited
for their imposing, exotic looks to work the doors at the Qasr
Hotel. “I make the same salary here as
an office worker makes in Nairobi,” said one with a smile. “But
the office worker has to pay tax, rent and support his family.
We work tax-free.” The hotel provides shared flats for accommodation,
he continued, and the doormen eat for free while on the job. They
get two weeks holiday per year, and after two years the hotel may
pay for the flight back. The wages are offset by the rising cost
of living, but the interviewee said that he usually keeps around
500 dirhams ($136) for his living expenses and sends as much as
$2,500 annually to Kenya to pay for his mother’s rent, groceries
and his little brother’s school fees. “I’m not
living now,” explained his colleague.
“Just making money.” The doormen grew circumspect when
told they were talking to a journalist, one glancing nervously
at a group of staring South Asian hotel staff. “If they find
out we spoke to you, they’ll have us sacked,”
he said. “I can’t lose this job, man. It’s my
future.”
As filmfest
revelers convened for sponsored evenings of music, free drinks
and oyster buffets, this tightly reined, internal periphery was
hard at work. Those in search of Dubai’s “buzzing,” “modern” Arab
need not have looked further than Hicham, a Moroccan waiter decked
out in a zebra skin toga. (That evening’s festivities were
sponsored by an African travels company, which also offered guests
the chance to have their pictures taken with another African decked
out as a Zulu warrior. While the music played, the human window
exhibit stood at attention for three hours.) Hicham graduated from
hotel school in his native country and has worked Dubai for five
years. “Very much in tune with the rest of the developed
world,” his monthly wage would buy half a day’s stay
in the Qasr Hotel’s cheapest room. He is 30 years old and
not yet married. Ideally, he would like to go to Europe, where
the money is better. “And you get rights there,” he
said as he passed the wine.
“Eventually.”
In a city
of people who live for years away from their families -- the
child of a motherless Philippines and fatherless Pakistan --
there were other reminders that Hicham may be best off never
settling down, among them Yasmine Kassir’s beautifully
wrought and stunningly acted L'Enfant Endormi (The Sleeping
Child). Her film hovers over a small rural community in Morocco’s
Atlas Mountains, its vast landscapes and open skies echoing with
the absence of husbands and sons who have to the last man left
for Spain and France in order to support their families. What remains
is a world of pregnant women and children, eking out a sparse,
isolated existence in anticipation of the men’s return. The
Sleeping Child sensitively paints these women’s struggles
with economic survival and village “traditions”
that both confine and offer succor. Yet it is foremost a story
of lives and loves aborted metaphorically and literally, of endless
waiting. On a different level, waiting was also the theme of Palestinian
director Najwa Najjar’s short, lyrical and walled love story Yasmine’s
Song and of Rashid Masharawi’s eponymous feature about
Palestinian refugee filmmakers in Syria and Lebanon. It is revealing
that these refugees do not figure in Bosta’s journey
into the future. In a Middle East ever admonished to forget enduring
injustices and embrace the globalized future, it is for directors
like Masharawi, Najjar and Kassir to carry the voices of others
-- people and peoples -- stuck in place and losing hope.
Between the
diverging concerns of these contemporary Arab directors, the
migrant returns of veteran Chilean filmmaker Miguel Littin build
a fleeting, dreamlike bridge. Littin hails partly from Chile’s
400,000-strong Palestinian community, many of whom originally emigrated
from his ancestral village of Beit Jala, near Bethlehem. A pioneer
of socially critical South American cinema, the director went into
exile during the rule of the junta and, from his subsequent years
as an itinerant dissident, still keeps Fidel Castro’s personal
number. Now approaching the twilight of his career, he has embarked
on a Palestine trilogy, the first installment of which screened
in Dubai this past December. La Ultima Luna (The Last Moon)
portrays a fragile moment of Jewish-Arab solidarity in a pre-Zionist
past, framed by the venality and avarice of Ottoman administrators
and colluding Arab landowners. Through these faint echoes of shared
social inequity, and his own political trajectory, the director
tenuously links a politics rooted in transnational notions of solidarity,
in struggles about class and economy, to more currently fashionable
concerns.
Other festival entries also tackled material inequities. Since
its launch, the Dubai film festival has self-consciously addressed
itself not only to East-West divisions, but also to the gap between
the global South and North. In 2005, A Decent Factory accordingly
asked mobile phone giant Nokia whether “a corporation can
balance profit-making and social responsibility.” The fraught
reality, however, need not only have been branded Made in China.
At a 2004 screening of the anti-globalization documentary The
Corporation, one audience member cornered the festival’s
most apparent irony with a question to director Mark Achbar:
“Do you know that there are sweatshops operating just half
an hour from here?” Even for some of the 2005 directors,
it was hard to escape the feeling that Dubai’s film festival
forecloses just the kind of universal solidarities that it would
call forth. “This place represents everything we are fighting
against,” averred former International Solidarity Movement
activist Alberto Arce, co-maker of the biopic Internationals
in Palestine.
“I know after having been here five days how this place works,” he
said.
“Just one kilometer from here and all this luxury we have
slaves.” As a deferential Filipina waitress materialized
by the table, he corrected himself.
“No, we have them here…. We learned yesterday that
Medecins Sans Frontiers have been trying to establish a clinic
here, but until now the government has not allowed them to.”
What's Culture Got to Do with It?
That both
Arce and the message of his low-budget overtly political intervention
felt precariously out of place at the Dubai International Film
Festival was broadly reflective of an event heavy on heartwarming
messages and light on political engagement.
“We came to present a film in solidarity with Palestine,” continued
Arce.
“They have been very supportive. People come to say: great
work! But nobody came to talk to us about distribution or production.
We are here to clear their conscience. They are doing nothing for
the Palestinians and by showing our film they can continue doing
nothing.” Though happy to be in attendance, some Palestinian
directors could not help but draw similar conclusions.
“We are here to give them credibility,” concluded one
with a shrug of the shoulders. “We filmmakers have political
problems and cinema problems,”
elaborated Rashid Masharawi gingerly. “This isn’t the
venue to air your political problems. For that, you go to Venice
or Rotterdam or Cannes. At Venice, I had 20-30 television interviews
that gave me a chance to talk politics.” Like Masharawi’s Waiting,
many of the Palestinian entries that screened in 2004 and 2005,
including Mohammed Bakri’s Jenin, Jenin, drew substantial
audiences, particularly from among the tens of thousands of expatriate
Palestinians who live and work in the Emirates, sometimes over
multiple generations, and so often sustain little contact with
their home country. Yet it was also for these audiences to observe
most keenly how their national plight has been reduced to a sentimental
commodity for otherwise preoccupied Arab audiences.
As one of
the festival’s
few genuinely pop cultural Arab films, al-Sifara fi al-‘Imara (The
Embassy Is in the Building) handled such packaged pathos with
more than the usual care. The film features festival guest of
honor ‘Adil Imam
in the comic guise of an Egyptian petroleum engineer-cum-playboy,
who, aptly enough, has grown wealthy and complacent in Dubai, and
returns to his native land to discover that the Israeli embassy
and its accoutrement of Egyptian state security has occupied his
building. Imam mirrors Egyptians’ conflicted feelings about
their country’s uneasy peace with Israel, their enduring
sympathy for the Palestinians and their building anger over Arab
impotence in the face of Palestinian travails, while always beating
off the temptations of ideologically radical politics, whiskey
bottle in hand. In this vein, the film’s brief scenes of
halfhearted Egyptian police repression are further lightened by
the revelation that demonstrations also happen to be great places
to pick up girls. Incidentally, al-Sifara fi al-‘Imara was
massively popular in Palestine, with Ramallah’s Kasabah cinema
all but exclusively devoting its late winter schedule to the film.
Though few
of the Arab directors who made it to Dubai would aspire to this
kind of cinema, Imam did strike an underlying tone of sorts.
Closest to the Egyptian’s
comic sensibilities, and with the homemade and home-played success Bosta under
his belt, Philippe Aractingi said he has given up on making films
for others. “The
thing is, we have a complex about Westerners,” he explains. “I
was brought up speaking French better than Arabic. I was taught
they were better than I was. Now I lived in France and the complex
is over. But we are still trying to explain to you who we are: ‘Blease!
We are not that bad!’” he intoned self-mockingly.
“Forget it! Either you get it or you don’t get it.” Hany
Abu-Assad concurred.
“I think the West, politically speaking, will not understand
us. They have no political interest in understanding us. Believe
me, they can always find a reason to demonize us.” In this
sense, it may be appropriate that the expression “just for
show” is rendered in colloquial Levantine Arabic as hada
film --
“this is (just) a film.” The question is whether cinematic
fiction could reshape facts, outside the city of dreams, as well
as in it? Or, as the question is put to the guilt-laden photographer
of French Morocco in Le Regard: “Do you think that
you would change something with some pictures of prisoners and
soldiers?” Fifty years after that dirty Western war ended,
Abu Ghraib and Guantánamo fill the headlines, and the Middle
East waits for the audience to get out of their seats.

|