Download Our App
Shop your way

The Myth of Uthri Criticism - Dr. Ghassan Ismail Abdel Khaleq
JOD
Get it by 5 Aug | Order in 3 Hours 8 Minutes
Does the foregoing necessitate that we turn our backs on this literature, which has so often been presented to us, or which we have so often presented, in a beautiful, rosy picture? Especially if we consider, for example, the fact that the two main narrators of our ancient poetry (Hammad al-Rawiya and Khalf al-Ahmar) are no more than roguish adventurers, or that the gatekeepers of our ancient prose (Ibn al-Muqaffa' and Sahl ibn Harun) are no more than a heretic and a Shu'ubi?! I believe the sound answer lies in the necessity of understanding this confusing overlap, which can sometimes reach the point of chaos, and in the necessity of confronting it instead of continuing to bury our heads in the sand of deceptive, rosy stereotypes. For it is this understanding and confrontation that can put an end to the state of absurd denial, which might lead a traditional researcher to vehemently denounce the beliefs of the Jahiliyyah on one hand, and to elevate the Mu'allaqat above analysis and criticism to the point of sanctification on the other. What a dissociation and duality after this paradox! I also believe that all of the above—despite the contemporary Arab critical corpus containing bold deconstructive efforts—compels me to say that the majority of our critical efforts are steeped in celebrating our ancient Arab literature in an idealistic, romantic, and selective manner. The majority of these efforts are timid, cautious, and filled with the fear of falling into feelings of guilt, due to their apprehension of transgressing the limits in engaging with this literature that has been elevated, purified, and stereotyped, in a way that reminds us of the prohibitions of the myth of Uthri love, which I have spared no effort in this book to dismantle in its entirety. This stems from my conviction that radical criticism is a continuous cognitive and methodological violation of the transcendence of the text and context, and that shirking this duty—by hiding behind neutral aesthetic facades or cold, academic objectivity—is nothing more than a blatant escape from the necessity of tilling them.