Literature Review
2.1 Muslim identity: a background
2.1.1. The emergence of the concept of the ‘Muslim identity’ in
The notion of a ‘Muslim identity’ is relatively recent as its emergence dates back only to the late 80s and early 90’s of the last century. Before that, Muslims were usually perceived within ethnic categories inasmuch as ‘ethnic identifications […] rather than religion were recognised in society as the key signifiers of individual and collective difference’ (Ansari, 2003: 9). The rise of populist English nationalism and the New Right movement with its ‘exclusionary and cultural essentialist agenda’ (ibid: 9) led more diasporic Muslims to invoke religion as a basis of identification, and to use a religious discourse to address social problems (ibid: 9). It was the Rushdie affair, however, that witnessed the real emergence of the notions of Muslim ‘identity’ and ‘community’. Modood (2000:48) argues that ‘within a very short period, the label ‘Muslim’ became a principal element of identification on the political scene, and was adopted […] by the media and by the government’ (my translation). In fact, the feeling of being attacked and beleaguered by a ‘hostile’ majority led a great number of diasporic Muslims, ‘even those not practicing for whom their Muslim origins was not very important, to rediscover a new solidarity with their community’ (ibid: 48) (my translation). Accordingly, the notion of ‘Muslim identity’ in
2.1.2 - Muslim communities: diversity and multiple identities
Despite its widespread use, the notion of ‘Muslim identity’, however, remains problematic since it obscures the cultural and ethnic diversity that divides British Muslim diasporas. Indeed, Muslim diasporas in Western countries come from diverse ethnic origins, cultural backgrounds and have had different historical experiences that shape their existence as minority groups. Consequently, ‘values, symbols and aspirations, approaches to issues of identity, strength of adherence to ritual and loyalty to kin networks […] are likely to be extremely varied, making Muslims in Britain a very heterogeneous population’ (Ansari, 2003: 3). This diversity is bound to affect the way different Muslim groups interpret, practice and link religion to their daily life. Mandeville (2003: 135) maintains that ‘different understandings and interpretations of the religion map onto particular ethnic and communal affiliations’. Moreover, heterogeneity characterizes single diasporic groups, as well. Although they share many aspects, Arab Muslims, for instance, come from diverse backgrounds that run across regional, social and ideological differences. The label ‘Arab’ is also problematic since it may engulf ethnic and linguistic diversity, as is the case in North African countries where a considerable part of populations is from Berber origins.
Indeed, in most cases, ethnic, national, regional and class variables may strongly compete with religious identity and sometimes eclipse it among British Muslims. Halliday (cited in Ansari, 2003: 12) points out that ‘Islam may, in some contexts, be the prime form of political and social identity, but it is never the sole form and is often not the primary one within Muslim societies and “communities”’. Lending credence to Halliday, Dassetto (cited in Mandeville, 2001: 111) argues that the majority of people designated as ‘Muslims’ and who live in Western countries do not practice regularly their religion. These arguments provide an insight into the ‘Muslim’ identity and bring out its heterogeneous nature. However, they seem to ignore the influence of religion itself on the other variables of identity. Actually, because Muslims around the world try to adapt Islam to their own social and cultural experience, religion has become tightly interwoven into social traditions. It is not always possible, then, to disassociate the religious from the non-religious aspects of culture. This may explain why some non-practicing Muslims still invoke religion as an important factor underpinning their choices or perception of the worldas the research data reveal.
2.2 Muslim identity and mass media
2.2.1. Representation of Muslim before and after 9/11
The emergence of a ‘Muslim’ community proclaiming a shared identity has been generally opposed from the start by both the liberal and conservative media in
Actually, a research study that surveyed the British newspapers between 1993 and 1997, found that these newspapers predominantly ignored covering British Muslims’ life and culture, and that when they did, the coverage was predominantly negative (
It may be argued that
In fact, as was the case during the Rushdie affair and the second Gulf war, British Muslims found themselves once again under heavy media spotlights after the events of 9/11. A research study spanning a period of one year from 9/11 found that references to Muslims by British broadsheet newspapers increased by 250 to 280 %, and, in some papers like the Sun, by 658% (Whitaker, 2002). Moreover, recurrent stereotypes, mainly negative ones, inform Muslims’ representation in the media (ibid). Though reference to British Muslims was kept low as most coverage concerned Muslims outside Britain, (see Whitaker, 2002 & Werbner, 2002), research studies conducted among British Muslims have revealed that the majority regard news media with great mistrust and suspicion (www.AfterSptember11-TV). Those findings testify to the fact that minorities, in general, and diasporic Muslims, in particular, are sensitive to the way mainstream media portray them. They seem also to confirm that identity construction is contingent as much upon the way people represent themselves as on how they perceive the ‘Other’ portray them (Hall, 1996: 8).
2.3. Understanding identity
2.3.1. Identity as a discourse
Before investigating further identity construction among diasporic Muslims, it is primordial to explore the concept of identity itself. It is commonly assumed that identity is a unified essence made of a set of clear and stable characteristics that give a human being his/her uniqueness. Yet, as Gidens (1991: 53) asserts, ‘self-identity is not a distinctive trait or even a collection of traits, possessed by the individual. It is the self as reflexively understood by the person in terms of her or his biography’. In this sense, identity can be understood as discursive constructions made by individuals about themselves since ‘there can be no identity experience or social practice which is not discursively constructed’ (Barker, 1999: 23). It is via various forms of expressions, either linguistic, visual or others, that meaning can be produced and identities can be constructed (Hall, 1997:3). It is noteworthy that considering identity to be discursively produced can be very productive for the purpose of this research, as it allows for investigating identity construction empirically through the study of the discourse diasporic Muslims produce.
Furthermore, while viewing identity as constantly changing is important, this definition does not account, however, for how people can still identify with particular forms of individual and collective identities. This fact can be more relevant to certain communities where identification with traditional forms of affiliations run across tribal, sectarian and regional divisions, as is the case with many Muslim diasporas. Accordingly, it is possible to argue that identity is neither wholly fluid nor open to endless reconstructions, for ‘we can alter it, but only within the constraints imposed by our inherited constitution’ (Parekh, 2000b: 5). The latter view of identity can be more appropriate to investigate the way many first generation British Muslims hold to traditional forms of affiliations, such as tribalism, while at the same time engage actively in modernistic forms of allegiance, such as citizenship in the British society.
Furthermore, since identity is discursively constructed, it is built around and within the notion of difference inherent in all forms of expressions and languages. It is therefore ‘continually being produced within the vectors of a similarity and difference’ (Barker, 1999: 28). Because of that, identities can incorporate discourses of inclusion as well as exclusion. In fact, if the notion of difference has a positive function that allows the production of culture and identity, it can also be ‘a site of danger, of negative feelings, of splitting, hostility and aggression towards the ‘Other’ (Hall, 1997: 238). This sheds light on the way diasporic Muslims construct their identity within a context in which they feel beleaguered and rejected by the dominant ‘Other’. It can also highlight the way the ‘other’ is constructed within diasporic Muslims’ discourse about identity.
2.3.2. Diasporic experience and identity
Terms and concepts such as ‘minority’, ‘ethnicity’ and ‘diaspora’ are often used interchangeably to refer to immigrants who have settled down in a second country. Sreberny (2000: 182) maintains that the term diaspora is more appropriate to study migrants’ communities. Unlike the term ‘ethnicity’, which implies ‘a group looking inward to its new national host context’, the concept of diaspora offers more than the others ‘a critique of discourses of fixed origins, while taking account of a homing desire which is not the same thing as desires for ‘homeland’’ (Brah, 1996: 182). Because this research concentrates on the first generations of British Muslims, the term ‘diaspora’ offers an adequate conceptual framework from which to investigate people who are still closely attached to the cultures of their countries of origin while at the same time trying to adapt to that of their host society. It equally provides a framework within which it is possible to investigate identity construction within power relations between different ethnic groups. Thus, studying identity construction among diasporic Muslims can reveal how diasporic experience is tightly interwoven into discursive patterns that represent the self, the other and power relations between the two.
2.4 Mass media and identity construction
Mass media play a central role in the formation of communities by creating an imagined unity among people and a sense of belonging to a community among them (
2.4.1. The role of transnational media
While many types of media have developed in recent years, transnational television channels remain the most important ones that play a prominent part in the life of diasporic communities. Diasporic people living in western countries were generally ‘among the earliest adopters of DBS for cross-border transmissions - with its pizza-sized receiving dish installed on homes becoming the symbol of community self-assertion’ (Karim, 1998: 1). As far as Arab Muslims are concerned, transnational news channels like Al-Jazeera have become the main source of news for many Arabs living in many western countries (El-Nawawy and Iskandar 2002: 65-6). By allowing them to view events and issues through similar perspectives as do people in their countries of origin, transnational media reinforce among diasporic people the sense of belonging to these communities. Besides, because diasporic people are able to follow news on both transnational and local media, they are in a better position to compare and contrast the way both types of media cover various issues and events. Indeed, transnational television news channels offer diasporic Muslims different perspectives on events that meet their own concerns and expectations. Consequently, most diasporic Muslims in
2.4.2. Mass media and alternative forms of communication
Despite their pervasive presence, mass media ‘do not monopolize the flow of information we receive, nor do they intervene in all our wider social relations’ (McQuail, 2002:65). Other forms of communicative systems are also very influential in channelling people’s experiences and bringing them together. Various commentators have, thus, tried to define different media forms that compete with mass media, such as ‘small media’, ‘community media’ and ‘radical media’ (Sreberny & Mohammadi, 1994: 20). Concerning diasporas, Dayan (1998:181) proposes a more inclusive definition of the communication networks that play an important part in the experience of diasporic people. He maintains that it might be unproductive to limit the concept of diasporic media to conventional media such as the radio, television and journalism. According to him, it is more useful to include the ‘“smaller” media and to focus on the various practices, institutions and organizations […] that link the different segments of diasporic ensembles each other’ (ibid).
As far as diasporic Muslims are concerned, various communication systems shape their life apart from the mass media, such as community societies and religious institutions. Rawan (2001: 179) advances that the Mosque, for instance, is among ‘the most important pillars of traditional and interpersonal communication throughout traditional Islamic society’. Diasporic Muslims bring with them these traditional communication systems and try to adapt them to their experiences in various social and cultural contexts. It can, thus, be argued that mass media and ‘small’ media as systems of communication, though operating at different levels, interact dynamically with the daily experience of diasporic Muslims, and contribute to shaping the way latter perceive themselves. This begs the question as to how the interaction between audiences and various communication systems can be best investigated.
2.5 Investigating Audiences
2.5.1. The notion of the active reader
Recent media studies have deeply challenged the linear model of media effect as a process involving sender/message/receiver. Among the most influential of these are the ones that draw on Hall’s encoding/decoding model. Hall advances three decoding positions, namely those of a dominant hegemonic, a negotiated, and an oppositional decoding ‘in which people may understand the preferred encoding but reject it and decode in contrary ways’ (cited in Barker, 1997: 117). Though this model restores the balance between text and audience, the role of the latter remains restricted by the boundaries set by the text. Ang (1996: 20) contends that the notion of the active audience in this context is ‘limited to negotiations open to viewers within the given range of significations made possible by a text or genre texts’.
2.5.2. Audience and daily life experience
Actually, the concept of the active reader should not be limited to a relation between reader and text but should also include ‘the relationship between the textual and extra-textual resources drawn upon during making sense of television’ (Livingston, 1998: 189). Indeed, the act of decoding cannot be separated from the wider social and cultural context within which it takes place, neither from other activities accompanying the act of viewing television. Besides being part of a wider context, audiences are not fixed entities inasmuch as they are unstable and rather fluid. Ang (cited in Morley, 1992: 195) suggests that ‘people constantly move in and out of “the TV audience” as they integrate viewing behaviour with a multitude of other concerns and activities in radically contingent ways’.
No comments:
Post a Comment