|
Lost In Translation: Ahmadinejad And The Media
By Ali Quli Qarai
09/28/07 "ICH" -- - First I want to make some remarks about that
now world-famous statement of President Ahmadinejad at Columbia:
“We do not have homosexuals in Iran of the kind you have in your
country.” The American media conveniently ignored the second,
and crucial, part of his sentence as something redundant.
Obviously he was not saying, We don’t have any homosexuals
whatsoever in Iran—something nobody in the world would believe,
not even in Iran. And by implication, he was not telling his
audience, I am a plain liar! —something which his audience at
Columbia and the American media construed him to be saying.
What he was saying is that homosexuality in the US and
homosexuality in Iran are issues which are as far apart from one
another as two cultural universes possibly can be. They are so
dissimilar that any attempt to relate them and bring them under
a common caption would be misleading. “Homosexuality is not an
issue in Iran as it is in present-day American society.” This
was, apparently what was saying in polite terms.
Homosexuality in the US is a omnipresent social and political
issue which crops up in almost every discourse and debate
pertaining to American society and politics. So much so that I
think it was a major issue, if not the deciding factor, in the
last two presidential elections which paved Bush’s way to the
White House and saddled the Democrats with defeat, because a
large so-called conservative section of the American public (the
red states) felt wary of the pro-gay liberalism of the
Democratic Party.
By contrast, homosexuality is a non-issue in Iran and is
considered an uncommon perversion (except as an occasional topic
of jokes about a certain town). Prom the viewpoint of penal law,
too, it is does not receive much attention as the requirements
for a sentence (four eye-witnesses, who have actually seen the
details of the act) are so astringent as to make punishment
almost impossible. (It would be interesting to know how many
have been accused of it during the last two decades)
By contrast adultery and homosexuality are legalized forms of
behaviour in most of Europe and America, and regarded not as
criminal acts but as perfectly acceptable forms of sexual
behaviour and as legitimate natural human rights which need to
be taught even to all Asian and African societies as well.
There was also a subtle hint in his remark that he wanted to
move on from this topic to more serious and relevant matters, a
point which would be obvious to anyone conversant with Persian
language and culture (like his another hint concerning the
disgraceful conduct of Columbia president, when, while formally
inviting Columbia academics to Iran, he added that “You can rest
assured that we will treat you in Iran with hundred percent
respect.”
Iranians, being linguistically a very sophisticated people,
speak a lot in hints which are invisible to outsiders. Americans
in comparison tend to be straightforward and often as primitive.
(In general the Persians, like other civilized societies, have
developed the art of making and responding to harsh remarks in
soft and friendly words. Americans, as Prof. Bollinger proved,
have still much to learn from civilized nations concerning the
civilities of civilized hostility.)
Mr Bollinger’s hostility towards President Ahmadinejad had
obviously been fed by devious translations and interpretations
of his earlier—also world-famous—remarks about Israel and the
Holocaust. As if, as one commentator has remarked, the professor
had been watching only CNN and Fox News.
· Unfortunately for more than an year these remarks have given a
ready-made excuse to his critics to demonize him and attack
Iran’s foreign policies. Although he has made some attempts
(unjustifiably belated, I think, and not quite adequate) to
clarify himself, we who hear these remarks have also an
intellectual duty to ourselves and others to see exactly what he
exactly meant.
It is a basic linguistic principle of civilized discourse that
so long as there is an acceptable and upright interpretation for
someone’s remark, it should not be given a devious meaning.
Moreover, as one of my teachers often says, it is easy to reject
and denounce the statements of others, but the worthy task of
every intelligent seeker is to try to understand people who hold
different opinions. This is particular necessary when such
statements originate in a different linguistic and cultural
domain.
When Ahmadinejad repeated Ayatullah Khomeini’s words that
“Israel baayad az bayn beravad,” (which literally means that
Israel should cease to exist), what is critically important for
understanding is to see how Iranian people understand these
words of their president. I don’t think any mature Iranian with
some awareness of regional politics has ever thought that the
late Leader of Iran, or the present president of the country,
were advocating some kind of military objectives against Israel.
By citing the example of the Soviet Union and the Apartheid
regime in South Africa Ahmadinejad, too, has clarified what he
meant by ‘Israel ceasing to exist.’ By the rules of civilized
discourse, every speaker’s clarification concerning what he
means is authoritative as he is entitled, before all others, to
state and clarify what he means by his statements. In this case,
Ahmadinejad has also clarified as to how he thinks that my
happen: a general referendum in undivided Palestine with the
participation of its Arab, Jewish and Christian population.
As for his statement that the Holocaust in a myth, we all know
that the word “myth” has several meanings in the dictionary. One
of its meanings is “A fiction or half-truth, especially one that
forms part of an ideology” (The American Heritage Dictionary of
the English Language). Thus a myth is not something necessarily
untrue and Ahmadinejad has not denied outright that the
Holocaust did occur, although he seems to have—what he considers
to be legitimate—doubts about its exact extent, doubts which are
prone to be strengthened, rightly or otherwise, by attempts to
persecute or prosecute scholars whose research leads them to
conclusions different from main-current historiography. What he
basically appears to question is that the Holocaust should be
made an ideological tool for the pursuit of unfair and inhuman
objectives—something which most of us acknowledge has happened
in the case of Palestine. Why should the people of Palestine be
made to pay the price for the guilt and failings of Europe? He
asks. I think that is a legitimate question.
The savants of the media are free to interpret Ahmadinejad’s
statement with the purpose of demonizing him and excoriating
Iran, but there are better and alternate paths for those who
strive for understanding and peace between nations, and to an
objective like this should institutions like universities,
including Columbia, contribute.
I hope that Mr Bollinger will advance a courageous apology to Mr
Ahmadinejad and take advantage of his standing invitation for
continuing the exchange of ideas with academic circles in Iran.
Iranians generally are a large hearted people, like most
Americans, and I hope the bitterness which has arisen from the
unfortunate event of the past week will soon be forgotten with
the sincere efforts of well-meaning intellectuals and officials
on both sides. I cannot think of any other way in which good
will between these nations as well as the good repute of an
outstanding institution of higher learning such as Columbia can
be salvaged.
Ali Quli Qarai is an Iranian scholar. He has published several
books, including a translation of the Quran. He can be reached
at
altawhid@gmail.com
Click
on "comments" below to
read or post comments
Comment
Guidelines
Be succinct, constructive and
relevant to the story.
We
encourage engaging, diverse and
meaningful commentary. Do not
include personal information such
as names, addresses, phone
numbers and emails. Comments
falling outside our guidelines
– those including personal
attacks and profanity – are
not permitted.
See our complete
Comment
Policy and
use
this link to notify us if you
have concerns about a comment.
We’ll promptly review and
remove any inappropriate
postings.
Send Page To a Friend
In accordance
with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational
purposes. Information Clearing House has no
affiliation whatsoever with the originator of
this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
|
