Arabic Poetry:  A Radio Script, Part One

Jack Foley


Ever since pre-Islamic days, poetry has been the mass art form of the Arab language. Through the centuries of classical Arab civilization in the Middle Ages, the long years of Arab decline, and into the decades of confrontation with European culture in the twentieth century, the poets have never lost their place of esteem in the minds of the people of the Arab world. In modern times, poets have had a greater impact on popular culture than novelists: there are more published poets than authors of literary prose in the Arab countries today, and public readings by poets consistently attract mass audiences, in settings ranging from rural villages to sprawling and sophisticated capital cities.

                --Abdullah al-Udhari, Victims of a Map

In Palestine and Modern Arab Poetry Khalid A. Sulaiman writes, “The Arab defeat in 1948 and the loss of Palestine to the Jews have been frequently called the nakba (the disaster), sometimes the ma’sa (the tragedy), by Arab writers when they talk about this subject.” The term nakba is perhaps in a sense the Arab equivalent to the Jewish term “holocaust,” though each of those words carries a different weight of history.

*

This is Jack Foley. Today’s show is the first of a series dealing with Arabic poetry. I want to begin with a quotation from John L. Esposito’s book, The Islamic Threat: Myth or Reality? The quotation concerns the term, jihad:

“The rapid spread of Islam proved a double threat to Christendom, both religious and political [writes Esposito]. The armies and merchants of Islam were its missionaries, bringing both Muslim faith and imperial rule. Islam was used to bind together, inspire, and mobilize the tribes as well as to provide a rationale for expansion and conquest. The Quranic notion of jihad, striving or self-exertion in the path of God, was of central significance to Muslim self-understanding and mobilization. The term jihad has a number of meanings which include the effort to lead a good life, to make society more moral and just, and to spread Islam through preaching, teaching, or armed struggle. Muslim jurists distinguished ways ‘in which the duty might be fulfilled: by the heart, by the tongue, by the hands and by the sword.’

“In its most generic meaning, ‘jihad’ signifies the battle against evil and the devil, the self-discipline (common to the three Abrahamic faiths) in which believers seek to follow God’s will, to be better Muslims. It is the lifelong struggle to be virtuous, to be true to the straight path of God. This is the primary way in which the observant Muslim gives witness to or actualizes the truth of the first pillar of Islam in everyday life. The spread of Islam through ‘tongue’ and ‘hands’ refers to the Quranically prescribed obligation of the Muslim community ‘to enjoin good and forbid evil.’ Finally, ‘jihad’ means the struggle to spread and to defend Islam. Just as the example of the Prophet offers a paradigm and the basis for the fusion of religion and state, so too Muhammad’s movement readily supplies the model for all Islamic movements in their struggle to reform society and the world. The world is a battleground on which believers and unbelievers, the friends of God and the enemies of God or followers of Satan, wage war: ‘The believers fight in the way of God, and the unbelievers fight in the idol’s way. Fight you therefore against the friends of Satan.’ The mission of the Islamic community is to spread the rule or abode of Islam globally much as Muhammad and his followers expanded Islamic rule through preaching, diplomacy, and warfare, and to ‘defend’ it. Islamic law stipulates that it is a Muslim’s duty to wage war against polytheists, apostates, and People of the Book who refuse Muslim rule, and those who attack Muslim territory. To die in battle is the highest form of witness to God and to one’s faith. The very Arabic word for martyr (shahid) comes from the same root as the profession of faith (shahada). As in Christianity, the reward for martyrdom is paradise.”

*

The poet Adonis (pen name of Ali Ahmed Said) is widely considered to be one of the Arab world’s greatest living poets. Born in Syria in 1930, Adonis enrolled at Damascus University in 1950 and read literature and philosophy. He began writing and publishing poems questioning the validity of various literary conventions and the social and political structure of Syria. This led to his imprisonment and finally to his exile to Beirut. He settled in Lebanon, where he became the central figure of the new Arabic poetic movement. Abdullah al-Udhari writes, “In 1957 the Lebanese poet Yusuf al-Khal and Adonis launched their epoch-making poetry magazine Shi’‘r, whose contributions eventually led to the breakdown of classical Arab poetic conventions and redrew the map of Arab poetry.” The rest of today’s program features selections from Adonis’ book, An Introduction to Arab Poetics.  The book was originally published in a French translation in 1985. An English translation by Catherine Cobham was published by the University of Texas Press in 1990. Adonis writes:

“If we go back to the root of the Arabic word for poetry (shi‘r), that is to the verb sha‘ara, we see that it means ‘to know,’ ‘to understand’ and ‘to perceive.’ On this basis, all knowledge is poetry. We call the poet sha‘ir (literally, ‘one who knows, understands, perceives’) in Arabic because he perceives and understands that which others do not perceive and understand...he knows what others do not know. But in general the term ‘poetry’ is used for a type of speech regulated by metre and rhyme, speech ‘defined by markings which are not to be violated,’ and the verb sha‘ara has come most often to have another meaning: ‘to feel.’

“Arabic poetry at the time of the Jahiliyya (the pre-Islamic era in Arabia) was rooted in the oral and developed within an audio-vocal culture;...this poetry did not come down to us in written form but was ‘anthologized’ in the memory and preserved through oral transmission...

“Pre-Islamic poetry was born as song; it developed as something heard and not read, sung and not written. The voice in this poetry was the breath of life--‘body music.’ It was both speech and something which went beyond speech...When we hear speech in the form of a song, we do not hear the individual words but the being uttering them: we hear what goes beyond the body towards the expanses of the soul. The signifier is no longer an isolated word, but a word bound to a voice, a music-word, a song-word. It is not merely an indication of a certain meaning, but an energy replete with signs, the self transformed into speech-song, life in the form of language. From this comes the profound congruence between the vocal and acoustic values of speech and the emotional and affective content of pre-Islamic poetry...

“If we go back to the root of the word ‘song’ (nashid) in Arabic, we see that it means the voice, the raising of the voice and the recited poetry itself. Two basic principles of pre-Islamic poetry were that it should be recited aloud and that the poet himself should recite his own poem: as al-Jahiz says, a poem sounds better from the mouth of its composer. The Arabs of the pre-Islamic period considered the recitation of poetry as a talent in itself, distinct from that of composition; obviously it was of considerable importance in drawing an audience and impressing them enough to hold them there--especially so since, at the time, listening was essential to the comprehension of words and to musical ecstasy (tarab)...The...performance of poetry had its own rules in the pre-Islamic period which survived into later ages...[S]ong was a discipline of the voice which required a corresponding aural discipline. The need to co-ordinate the various elements of song led gradually to the devising of special rhythmic structures.

“The characteristics of pre-Islamic poetic orality formed the basis for the major part of the criticism and theory of poetry in subsequent periods. Rules and criteria were evolved which still dominate not only the technique of poetry but the tastes, ideas and areas of knowledge reflected in it...

“The Qur’an was not only a new way of seeing things and a new reading of mankind and the world, but also a new way of writing. As well as representing a break with the Jahiliyya (pre-Islamic era) on an epistemological level, it represented a break on the level of forms of expression. The Quranic text was a radical and complete departure: it formed the basis of the switch from an oral to a written culture--from a culture of intuition and improvisation to one of study and contemplation...[The Qur’an became] a new literary ideal that [transcended] the old pre-Islamic ideal...Modernity in Arabic poetry...has its roots in the Qur’an; the poetics of pre-Islamic orality represents the ancient in poetry, while Quranic studies laid the foundations of a new textual criticism, indeed invented a new science of aesthetics, thus paving the way for the growth of a new Arab poetics...Bashshar Ibn Burd (714-84) was one of the first poets to attack the poetics of pre-Islamic orality and to invent a language of written poetics, or a language of the city instead of a language of the desert...Bashshar Ibn Burd was called the ‘master of the moderns’ and was said to have ‘travelled a road which no one else had travelled.’ [His work and that of his followers] involved an insistence on the continual violation of established practice in order that poetry should always be strange and new in its language, structures, images and meanings...

“[Literary criticism, however, ] for the most part took pre-Islamic poetry as a model and an ideal and evaluted subsequent poetry according to how closely it adhered to its poetic method. [Criticism] was based on the assumption that pre-Islamic poetry was the depository not only of Arab songs and music but also of truths and knowledge...[In fact, pre-Islamic poetry] was not uniform but plural. The problem arose when this plurality was compressed into a single model, viewed by the critics simply as ‘song.’ Thus the values peculiar to song and recitation became predominant in pre-Islamic poetry, and subsequently the criteria of poetic orality were the ones most often applied in appraising poetry. As a result, poetry and thought were definitively separated...

“It is important to note that the Arabs codified poetic orality...in the early years of the interaction between Arab-Islamic and other cultures, in particular Greek, Persian and Indian...In this climate the rules of language were laid down for fear that solecisms and corruptions would creep into the Qur’an and the hadiths (sayings of the Prophet). Poetic metres were fixed to preserve the rhythms of poetry and to distinguish them from Greek, Syriac, Persian and Indian metres and rhythms, and rules for the composition, appreciation and transmission of poetry were laid down...

“[It was argued that] Arabs recited and sang their poetry guided by their instincts and natural aptitude; they had no rules to bring order to these but relied instead on their taste and perceptions...Arab scholars feared that:

this faculty would degenerate and as time went on the Qur’an and hadith would no longer be understood. They therefore devised rules to govern this faculty, based on their normal way of speaking, which are now generally applicable, like universals and basic principles. They used them to classify all parts of speech...These terms...they set down in writing and developed...into a separate discipline, to which they gave the name nahw (grammar).

...[T]he view of poetry in Arab-Islamic society, particularly in the early years, was dictated by pre-Islamic orality...Rhyme was the basic element which distinguished pre-Islamic Arabic poetry from the poetry of other peoples. Neither in Aramaic, Syriac, Hebrew or Greek was it considered an essential feature of poetry in the way it was for the Arabs. Because of this, the ancient Arab critics maintained that the structure of pre-Islamic prosody was not an imitation of that of any other nation but was exclusive to the Arabs...

“Today...we are confronting a crisis in our relationship with this poetry...[C]ritical discourse, having defined the characteristics of pre-Islamic poetry as oral poetry, then transformed them into absolute criteria for written poetics: henceforth poetry was only to be considered as poetry if its metres followed the rules of oral poetry.... these rules prevailed, drawing the dividing line between poetry and nonpoetry. The climate of rule-making and intellectualization, generated by the climate of ideological struggle between the Arabs and other peoples in the seventh to the tenth centuries, helped these rules to become firmly established...As a result, the written poetic text was viewed by the critics as if it were an oral text, in so far as all that writing demands--contemplation, exploration, abstruseness, thought itself--was banished from the domain of poetry. In other words, although oral and written poetry involve two different physical activities, the same critical standards were applied to both...

“[The great critic] Al-Khalil’s successors read a nationalist ideology into his descriptive work and, influenced by the political, cultural and nationalist struggles between the Arabs and other peoples, raised it to the level of a set of normative rules. This was how poetical speech became confined by specific metrical systems rather than remaining free, its movement dependent on the creative power of the poet...

“[W]e can understand how disturbing the ‘creative text’ was for those who adhered to the religious and rational systems of knowledge...[The ‘creative text’] offers a kind of knowledge not incorporated into their systems, and impossible to acquire by the means which they use. [T]he knowledge in [the] text is dynamic, explosive and unfettered. It is a dislocation, an experimentation...There is no stability, and nothing in thought is pre-established...In the Arab-Islamic epistemological tradition, thought is an answer, and as poetry offers no answers it is therefore defined as being entirely separate from thought. But while the poet does not provide an answer, this is not to say that he does not think: as poetry is a questioning, it leaves the horizon open to inquiry and further knowledge; it offers no certainties. Questioning is thought, giving rise to anguish and doubt, while answering is a sort of cessation from thought, bringing confidence and certainty. Questioning, in other words, is thought which provokes more thought...

“Metaphor in Arabic is more than an expressional device; it is in the structure of the language itself, an indication of a spiritual need to transcend reality...metaphor is an act of rejection of existing reality and a search for an alternative...[M]etaphor releases reality from its familiar context...changing the meaning of both words and subject matter...

“[I]f the spirit does not understand exactly what is meant by the words it will continue to long for complete understanding, whereas if the sense is immediately obvious, the yearning for perfection ceases to exist. The aim of what we know is to arouse a desire in us for what we do not know, a desire to increase our knowledge until it is perfect. Thus the world existing within the boundaries of religious and philosophical knowledge is closed and finite because it is certain; it becomes a system of beliefs and an ideology. But from the perspective of poetic, that is metaphoric, knowledge, the world is by contrast open and infinite, because it is possibility, a continuing process of search and discovery.

“[Metaphor]...is a perpetual beginning, a bridge connecting the seen and the unseen...the joining of two separate worlds into one...It is a perpetual act of discovery of the infinite, involving a constant destruction of forms. It does not remain settled in one form....

“Since the 1950s the cultural background of Arab poets and critics has derived from two divergent traditions: that of the self (ancient, traditionalist) and that of the other (modern, European-American)...I was one of those who were captivated by Western culture. Some of us, however, went beyond that stage, armed with a changed awareness and new concepts which enabled us to reread our heritage with new eyes and to realize our own cultural independence. I did not discover...modernity in Arabic poetry from within the prevailing Arab cultural order and its systems of knowledge. It was reading Baudelaire which changed my understanding of Abu Nuwas and revealed his particular poetical quality and modernity, and Mallarme’s work which explained to me the mysteries of Abu Tammam’s poetic language and the modern dimension in it. My reading of Rimbaud, Nerval and Breton led me to discover the poetry of the mystic writers in all its uniqueness and splendour, and the new French criticism gave me an indication of the newness of al-Jurjani’s critical vision...

“The problem...is that the modern Arab poet sees himself in fundamental conflict both with the culture of the dominant political system, which reclaims the roots in a traditionalist manner, and with the images of Western culture as adapted and popularized by this system. The system separates us from our Arab modernity, from what is richest and most profound in our heritage. It is in collusion with the prevailing traditionalist tendencies and also with the cultural structures which came into existence in the climate of colonialism, imposing this relationship with the technical and consumerist forms of Western achievement upon us...

“[M]odernity is the problem of Arab thought in its dialogues with itself and with the history of knowledge in the Arab tradition. If we are to treat the problem of modernity, we must first re-examine the structures of Arab thought. To question modernity, Arab thought must question itself. Arab modernity can be studied only within the perspective of Arab thought, on the level of principles and actual historical developments, within the framework of its specific assumptions, using its epistemological tools and in the context of the issues which gave rise to the phenomenon and have resulted from it. To study it from a Western perspective would be to distort it and distance oneself from the real issues.

“Today when we read the poets of the past it is not only to see what al-Khalil and his successors saw, but also to see what was hidden from them, what they did not see. We read the blank spaces which they left. Legislation and codification go against the nature of poetic language, for this language, since it is man’s expression of his explosive moods, his impetuousness, his difference, is incandescent, constantly renewing itself, heterogeneous, kinetic and explosive, always a disrupter of codes and systems. It is the search for the self, and the return to the self, but by means of a perpetual exodus away from the self...

“[W]e must examine the silence and ask questions of it: why did a single critical and legislative discourse prevail which expressed a uniform point of view, despite the many different voices involved? Did it eclipse the others, and if so why, and how? Was it considered the only correct view of poetry, and how had this come about? How was it decided that pre-Islamic poetry could only be understood and evaluated according to this view when reading it today we become aware of a diversity which demands a more pluralistic and complex critical response? Did more diverse views exist, and were they obscured or forbidden? Why? How? Was there an authority which monopolized the prescriptive discourse to the point where others ceased to exist? Was this authority religious, linguistic, nationalistic? Did it represent a commitment to bedouinism--symbol of purity and authenticity; and a rejection of the city--symbol of hybridization and a lowering of standards? Was it an amalgamation of all this? Is the continuation of this discourse, the repetition of these same views and axioms, an assertion of identity, and is this why it has a tendency to suppress all others which may cast doubt on it, so that identity becomes mere reiteration of the same thing?

“These questions all imply that behind this permanent, uniform, prescriptive discourse there exists a silence, an absence, a blank. Today we are called upon to embark on a reading of our critical heritage which will reveal these absences and make the silence speak.”

 

                                                            --Adonis, An Introduction to Arab Poetics

*

THE PASSAGE

I sought to share
the life of snow
and fire.
               But neither
snow nor fire
took me in.

                      So
I kept my peace,
waiting like flowers,
staying like stones.
In love I lost
myself.

                I broke away
and watched until
I swayed like a wave
between the life
I dreamed and the changing
dream I lived.

 

THE DAYS

My eyes are tired, tired of days,
tired regardless of days.
Still, must I drill
through wall after wall
of days to seek another day
Is there? Is there another day?
 
--Adonis, from The Pages of Day and Night, translated by Samuel Hazo)

 Jack Foley