Beauty

" It's beauty that's made me so bored I'm sick. It's like a new word that dazzles you the first time. Then you keep repeating it and using it until it's no different for you than words like 'dog,' 'worm,' 'lesson,' and other commonplace expressions. It loses its novelty and appeal. You may even forget its meaning, so that it becomes strange, meaningless word you can't use." (pg. 337)
Newly wed husband clearly has doubts and doesn't believe in love. This passage reminds me of pathos, since it holds lots of description and a nice metaphor, it contributes to the reader's emotions in an odd manner. Mahfouz uses beauty as if it were something boring and uninteresting in the minds of men. This passage shows how something so intoxicating can also bring about boredom and displeasure. It's hard to believe that Yasin would say something like this, since he " inherited" his father's lustful and " midnight amusement" qualities. But it's in my mind, as well as in most, that beauty is just among the first qualities a guy sees in a woman and is enticed by its pleasant and magnificent power to extract the emotions and thoughts of men. Beauty plays a vital role in this novel as we see with Aisha, Khadija, Al-Sayyid Ahamd and Yasin, but also it poisons them. Its wonderful that Mahfouz was capable of playing with his words and causing beauty to play with the emotions of men. In doing so, Mahfouz captivates the reader into thinking that beauty is marvelous and causes a great deal of controversy upon the novel's characters and the readers. Yet, does "beauty" ever get boring and unappealing? According to Yasin and Mahfouz's metaphor he simply states it as if it were a new word. I love that combination. Learning a new word provides a pleasing effect, yet once repeated it also brings about irritation. Think of it as if it were a repeated song over the radio station, getting played multiple times within every tuned-in station. But it's difficult to understand that a married man can find his wife unattractive. It creates a feeling of pity and doubt about how a woman can endure a man that finds her uninteresting. That can be a good reason why Yasin married her. He was so dazed about her "beauty" that that word stuck to his mind and that's the only characteristic that he truly found in her upon marriage. A woman would like to get recognized by other things, but since he was at a stage of lustful and disgusting manners, he only got caught up with what was put in front of his eyes and he fell in love with the appearance of his wife, not for who she was. As a reader, one is blinded by rage and curiosity as to why Yasin is the way he is. Of course he only states it trying no to sound cruel, but it seems that living with a wife and not be able to go out and do mischief when he was single is what leads Yasin to take that course and announce his message to Fahmy.
The passage chooses a metaphorical stance and provides some description, followed by emotions. The metaphor had an impacting effect when announcing that " beauty" was unappealing and that it was a word. But not just any word. A word that only characterizes Zaynab and to which shows that words have a great effect on people. Words convey messages, but here beauty has more emphasis to the things that distract men and to how men see women. They are seen as tools, but beautiful tools, to be fair. Even words like this can provide a certain way of talking, especially in this novel. Using the word beauty provides a good effect on men's wife, but when used to say it to another woman, is very illegal. Basically, this passage shows what Yasin feels and how Fahmy rejects the idea of having a woman be talked of as if she were just a breath of air.

Strength

Throughout Naguib Mahfouz's Palace Walk, both the men and the women in the novel display a certain type of strength. With the men, this is displayed by taking on the roll of a superior. With the women, it is a sense of fulfilling one's duty to their husband. When it comes to the protests in which the Egyptians hold in order to rid themselves of British rule, Fahmy is the first to display a different type of strength: the will to fight for what he believes in. Fahmy is a character that we first see as calm and tolerant, but as the novel comes to an end, we can see that he becomes somewhat of a hero, especially to his father Ahmad (which is shocking because Ahmad is a character who holds the largest superior attitude out of all the men). To him, superiority matters not; it is not what he considers a strength. Fahmy chooses instead to be heroic in standing for what he believes in and trying to free his country of the suppression of British rule. This is what sets Fahmy apart from his father, Ahmad.

When Ahmad is returning home from a night’s entertainment, he is stopped by a British soldier. This is the first time we see Ahmad submit to someone else’s orders rather than give them. “... [The soldier] seized him by the shoulder, forcibly turned him around, and shoved him in the back. Al-Sayyidd Ahmad found himself moving toward Palace Walk with the other man behind him. He surrendered to his fate, but his joints felt like rubber” (443). This is the first time Ahmad displays a sign of weakness. We are not used to seeing Ahmad in a vulnerable position. There is a point in during his walk where he wishes that he could communicate or even understand what his British captor was saying. He thought:

“Where was Fahmy to interpret for him? He was stung by painful

homesickness. Where were Fahmy, Yasin, Kamal, Khadija, Aisha,

and their mother? Could him family imagine his disgraceful state?

Their only image of him was one of venerable and exalted power.

Would they be able to imagine that a soldier had shoved him in the

back almost hard enough to make him fall on the ground and herded

him along like livestock?” (445).

Ahmad is in an uncompromising position and feels weak; it is the first time he will admit that one of his sons would be able to handle a situation better than he.

For the fist time, Fahmy is exercising his strength to go against his father’s will. This is not only a rebellious display against his father, but more of a commitment to his principals. He takes part in the protests although his father forbids it and gains a sense of patriotism and self worth from it. “He had not defied his father verbally but had acted against his will and had done so repeatedly. Moreover, he had refused to swear an oath the day his father had asked him to, announcing with his tears that he would stick to his principles despite his father’s wishes” (484). Fahmy even goes as far as to ask for his father’s approval to participate in the protests. Although Ahmad is still resistant, Fahmy decides to go along anyway. The fact that Fahmy had the courage and strength to put his life at risk and go against his father’s will was very brave and heroic of him. Throughout the novel we have seen that Ahmad’s relationship with Fahmy was one of the strongest and for Fahmy to risk that, and in this culture, is a very powerful thing.

When Ahmad finds out that Fahmy was killed in one of the protests he feels a pang of guilt and sadness. “...he would scrutinize Fahmy’s life in the prime of his youth, the hopes he had aroused and the memories he had left behind, giving free rein to tears so he could totally exhaust them” (497). Ahmad is worn down and realizes that his son died doing something brave for his country. This is the turning point for Ahmad; it is sad though, that it finally stuck at the expense of his son’s life. By the end of the Palace Walk we have seen the characters develop into something greater. Fahmy, a submissive son, finally stands for what he believes is right. Ahmad, a strict and egotistical father, realizes that being harsh and following the rules is not the way to earn respect and it is certainly does not compare to the strength that his son showed.

Work Cited

Mahfouz, Naguib. Palace Walk. Toronto: First American Edition, 1991. Print.

Ahmad's Achilles Heel

Omnipotent. This is how Naguib Mahfouz presents al-Sayyid Ahmad in the beginning of his novel Palace Walk. Ahmad is the father of five, Yasin, Khadija, Aisha, Fhamy, and Kamal, and the husband of Amina. In his household, like in most Islamic households, he was king and whatever he said went. What was different in his house was that he didn’t follow any rules, not even the rules in the Koran. He would stay out partying and drinking until really late, and possibly having extramarital relationships with other women, which are both unacceptable in the Muslim world. His family wasn’t really comfortable with his behavior but they couldn’t say anything because if they did, Ahmad could have gone berserk, and nobody wanted that, so they just put up with it. At one point his oldest, Yasin, begins to follow in Ahmad’s footsteps. He becomes a man crazy about women and Ahmad doesn’t think much of it. And as the rest of his children grew, Ahmad began to lose his omnipotence.
When a child becomes a teenager, takes school more seriously, and makes more friends, he develops his own ideas and becomes interdependent. He still needs his parents for economic and emotional support, but he no longer needs them for decision-making, at least that’s what he thinks. We’ve all gone through it. Ahmad had five, and they would all go through it. When asked what the worst part of being a parent is, McKennasmom03 answered, “…When [your kids] are hurt or sick and there isn't a thing you can do. Watching them go off to Kindergarten... Watching them take the keys to the car and drive off. Watching them leave home when they [have] ‘grown’. (McKennasmom03)” Ahmad would have to see his five children leave one day, and he did. Once his two daughters were married, Ahmad was left with only boys and his little girls didn’t need him any longer. But before they left him, Ahmad showed some weakness. When the possibility of his youngest daughter, Aisha, getting married before her older sister, Khadija, came up, Ahmad became concerned with the possibility of Khadija getting depressed because her younger sister married before her. Mahfouz says,

When he could at last sit down again, he was breathing heavily. He was distressed and dejected. He had a sensitive heart, more sensitive than most people would have suspected. In fact, it was too sensitive. How could anyone believe that who had only seen him grinning, bellowing, or laughing sarcastically?... Sorrow was going to scorch his flesh and blood in a way that could spoil his whole life, making it seem ugly to him... Each of [his daughters] was a vital part of him (Mahfouz, 229).

Ahmad's kindness is exposed and a small window into his sensitivity is opened.
Daniela mentions this in her blog, Hiding Behind the Wall. The way to get to his weak side is through his children, and this isn't the only example of this in the novel.
The next time that we see Ahmad's sensitivity, it is in a much more extreme manner. It isn't about hurting one of his children, it is about one of his hurting, or no longer hurting, children.“The young man said with obvious sorrow, 'We are sad to inform you of the death of our brother freedom fighter Fahmy Ahmad'… (495)” Ahmad goes crazy. If seeing your children leave once they're grown up hurts, imagine how much knowing that you will never get to see your child again hurts. But he doesn't only show his sensitivity by going crazy and crying because his son died, but he also worries about Amina's feelings. As Tianna puts it in her blog Death in the End, “He does not know how to break the news to his wife.” How would she react to finding out that her son had died. He had never really seemed to care about what Amina felt or thought, but this time it was different, very different. Her feelings were one of his main preoccupations. He couldn't believe that his son had died. He always thought that Fahmy was a nice kid that never went to any rallies or things of that matter. In actuality, Fahmy was constantly attending rallies. But this was unknown to Ahmad, and even if he did know, the loss of his son would still hurt.
By the end of the novel, Mahfouz has taken us through Ahmad's transformation from an “omnipotent” tyrant, to a sensitive person similar to everyone else. By the end of the novel we discover that Ahmad's Achilles heel is his children.






Works Cited

Mahfouz, Naguib. Palace Walk. New York: Anchor, 1990. Print.

McKennasmom03. "What Do You Think the Worst Part of Being a Parent Is? - CafeMom." CafeMom - Moms Connecting About Pregnancy, Babies, Home, Health, and More. 24 Mar. 2009. Web. 06 Apr. 2010. .

Bruno, Tianna M. "Death in the End." Web log post. Digging Even Deeper. 26 May 2010. Web. 9 Apr. 2010. .

Barajas, Guadalupe D. “Hiding Behind The Wall.” Web log post. Digging Even Deeper. 23 Feb. 2010. Web. 9 Apr. 2010. .

Not A God, But A Human

Throughout the first part of Palace Walk, Naguib Mahfouz portrays Ahmad as a powerful, and feared man that thinks highly of himself and whose family views him as a god. Ahmad controls every move his family makes. But through his death and rebellion, Fahmy helps his father to realize that he is nothing but a human. Towards the end of the book, Ahmad loses control of his son Fahmy, who dares to disobey him. Fahmy’s behavior strip Ahmad of his power, driving him closer to admitting his humanity. Later faced with Fahmy’s death, Ahmad feels extreme sadness, which leads him to realize and accept that he is not to a god, allowing himself to break down. With this break down, Ahmad appears to be a new man that accepts his powerlessness and that gives into his human emotions.

Throughout the first part of the book, Ahmad has power, and control over everything that happens to his family because his ego has been aggrandized by the way everyone in the family fears, loves, and respects him as if he were a god. As TheJavi says in his blog, Ahmad Never Changes, that “ [Ahmad] thinks really highly of himself” so he never questions his behavior. He always wants things to be his way. He always has the power over everything and always uses that power to manipulate things, so that he can be at the center of them. For example when the officer wanted to marry Aisha, he said that “no daughter of mine would marry a man until I am satisfied that his primary motive for marrying her is a sincere desire to be related to me…me…me…me” (157). Here one can see how egotistical Ahmad is. Another time when we see that Ahmad thinks so highly of himself is when he tells Fahmy, “The only word that counts here is mine. Mine, mine, mine…” (425). Once again, Ahmad shows that he wants things to be centered around him as if he were god. Through these examples, one can see his power to control the family.

But it is the way the family behaves with Ahmad and the way they feel about him that allow Ahmad to have the power to control everything. The family adores Ahmad in a very extreme way. I feel like everyone in the family blindly follows his lead, even when he is wrong. One really gets a sense of this affection, loyalty and fear for Ahmad when the author describes the feelings Aisha had when her father decided that she wouldn’t get married before Khadija, thus denying Aisha from the opportunity of marrying the officer she had fallen for. The author writes:

Although she was hurt, angry, and resentful, these emotions could not touch her father. They fell back impotently like a wild animal stopped by its trainer, whom it loves and fears. Aisha was not able to attack her father, not even in the depths of her heart. She continued in her love and devotion for him. She felt sincerely dutiful to him, as though he were a god whose decree could only be received with submission, love and loyalty. (160-161)

Here we see that the love and fear she felt towards her father was much too strong to allow Aisha to let any of the negative emotions be against her father. The fear and the love she had wouldn’t even let her think of feeling the hurt, anger, and resentment against her father even in the secrecy of her heart. Not even the other strong emotions she felt could erase the deep love and great fear her father incited in her.

No one dares to speak against Ahmad because the fear incited by his power is intimidating. Even more than the intimidation, the affection they feel for Ahmad makes the family look at him as something close to a god. Here one can instantly see a cycle. The family’s veneration causes Ahmad to be powerful and Ahmad’s power causes the family to venerate him. Seeing not only Aisha, but everyone else comply to his wishes, simply makes Ahmad feel more powerful, even as powerful as a god. Aisha obeys him because she feels “dutiful to him, as though he were a god whose decree could only be received with submission, love and loyalty” (161). This last sentence proves that Aisha, and even the rest of the family see Ahmad as a god. They obey him because to them he is like a god; in their eyes, he has power to control everything.

Since Ahmad’s is empowered by his family’s submissiveness, when one of them, Fahmy, goes against his will, Ahmad starts doubting his power and seeing that he’s weak. Fahmy always venerated his father like the rest of the family; thus, he never dared to disobey his commands. But things change with the war because Fahmy has really strong feelings about the war, even stronger feelings than the fear for his father. When Fahmy has to confess to his father that he has been distributing handbills to promote Egypt’s independence, Ahmad is alarmed and angry, and tells Fahmy to stop. Fahmy, ultimately, refuses to swear on the Qur'an that he will stop, and instead, he continues his behavior, going against his father’s will. He does this even though in the Qur'an it says, "Three persons shall not enter the Garden: the one who is disobedient to his parents,” meaning that his offense is a great one. But despite the divine law, Fahmy disobeys his father. His son’s rebellion causes Ahmad to be stripped of his power. Ahmad says, “He said no to me for the first time in his life…should I reveal my lack of power to [Amina]? Should I seek help from her weakness after my power has failed” (449). By opposing him, Fahmy takes away the power that Ahmad was so sure he possessed, and makes him feel weak, showing that Ahmad’s power was in the hands of those that feared it. Here we see clearly that the submissiveness of the family built Ahmad’s power; thus, without everyone’s submissiveness, he lost the power to control. Here Fahmy has taken Ahmad closer to seeing his humanity.

But it isn’t until Ahmad’s death that Ahmad realizes and accepts that he is not god, and allows himself be human and break down. When Ahmad finds out his son had died, one can see how human, how sensitive Ahmad truly is because he finally lets us see it. He thinks when he gets the bad news, “How can I have a home without him? How can I be a father if he’s gone?” (495). Here Ahmad is saying that he can’t have life without his son; he can’t be a father without him. Before getting to this part, one would have never thought that Ahmad would think this way because one always perceived Ahmad as egotistical man and as one who never needed anyone. But with Fahmy’s death, he’s humbled. As Mauricio discusses in his blog, Sensitive Soul-dier, Fahmy makes Ahmad change his ways. Ahmad finally touches the ground and sees that he can feel pain too. Mahfouz says, “ a time would come when [Ahmad] would be all alone and could devote himself to his sorrow with all his soul…giving free rein to tears so he could totally exhaust them” (497). Ahmad sees that he can suffer too because he’s just human.

A cycle can always be broken; it just takes a small change in one of the elements involved. Fahmy broke the cycle going on with the family and Ahmad. He changed his behavior when he went against his father’s will, stopping the source of his father’s power. By dying, Fahmy places his father in a situation that Ahmad has never been in, making him feel new strong emotions such as sorrow. By making Ahmad feel powerless after disobeying him and sad and hopeless after dying, Fahmy lets Ahmad see that he can be human, and that he doesn’t always have to act like he can control everything because he can’t. Death comes when it wants to come, and Ahmad has no control over that.

Works Cited

1. Mahfouz, Naguib. Palace Walk. New York: Anchor Books, 1991.
2. Mvazquez. "Sensitive Soul-dier." Weblog post. Digging Even Deeper. Web. 06 April 2010. <http://diggingevendeeper.blogspot.com/2010/04/sensitive-soul-dier.html>
3. TheJavi. “Ahmad Never Changes.” Web log post. Digging Even Deeper. Web. 24 March 2010. < http://diggingevendeeper.blogspot.com/2010/03/ahmad-never-changes.html.>
4. The Holy Quran. Maulana Muhammad Ali, 2002. Web. 6 Apr. 2010. <http://aaiil.org/text/hq/trans/ma_list.shtml>

Ahmad’s Regrets

Throughout Naguib Mahfouz’s novel, Palace Walk, we see how Ahmad treats his family with detachment and harshness. Although he does feel affection for his loved ones he does not show it. He acts like this because he believes that if he shows any sign of agreement toward them, they will begin to disobey him. Because of this Ahmad appears to never be pleased with anything his family does no matter how good it is. Ahmad acts detached and indifferent towards his family until his son, Fahmy, dies and he realizes that he was always too strict with them.

The reason Ahmad acts so strict towards his family is because he is thinks that if he shows that he’s pleased with anything they do, they will immediately start disobeying him. Yesenia describes Ahmad’s thinking perfectly in her blog entry, “Disobedient”. She says, “Ahmad is a typical father who forces his entire family to be submissive to him. He is strict to the point where he manipulates the way his wife and children act. The reason why Ahmad doesn’t show affection towards his own family is because he believes that if he does then they will take advantage of him.” Because of this fear he has of losing control over his household, Ahmad is very demanding of his family. Nothing, even anything his best son, Fahmy, does, is ever good enough.

Throughout the novel we can compare and contrast how different Fahmy and Yasin are. One of those moments in which we can see how different they are is the way the way Yasin reacts versus the way Fahmy reacts when they find out the truth about their father, Al-Sayyid Ahmad. In their eyes their father had always been a proper, honorable, and pious man. However, they then find out that he has been going to parties to sing and drink and has been having affairs with various women. Yasin and Fahmy react very differently when they learn this truth. Fahmy condemns his actions and Yasin praises him. We get a glimpse of what they about their father’s actions on the third and fourth paragraphs on page 271.

The first of these paragraphs show Fahmy’s thoughts. He says, “‘My father doesn’t differ at all from Yasin except in having sunk lower…. There must be something I don’t know… My father hasn’t done anything wrong…. He can’t do anything wrong (271).’” To Fahmy his father was a true hero, so much so that when he learned this he believed it was a lie. When he finally accepted it as the truth the image he had of his father was marred. He no longer regarded him with the same respect and admiration. He believed he was even worse than Yasin. When Fahmy learned this truth he was appalled and condemned his father’s actions.

In the second of these paragraphs we see the way Yasin thinks. He says, “’He sings. So what’s wrong about singing? He gets drunk, and believe me, drinking is even better than eating. He has affairs and so did the Muslim caliphs…. Our father isn’t doing anything sinful (271).’” Yasin always held his father in the highest esteem. However, when he learned about this truth he became even admirable to him. Yasin thought it was great that his father acted the way he did. He thought that there was nothing wrong in having many affairs and objectifying women.

This contrast of what Fahmy thought versus what Yasin thought about their father’s actions is just one example that shows how Fahmy is a better son than Yasin. Everything Ahmad has taught Yasin has been to no avail. Yasin still drinks, wastes his money foolishly, has lovers, and if that weren’t enough he praises his father when he learns he does this. Fahmy on the contrary is a proper, honorable, and pious young man; everything his father always wanted his sons to be. However, does Ahmad praise him for this? No. All he ever has to say to his family are negative things. Although Fahmy was a much better son and overall person, he never received any kind of praise from his father.

Another example of how Fahmy is a much better son than Yasin is the way Yasin tried to rape Umm Hanafi. With this incident we saw what a savage animal Yasin is. His brutal sexual desires are well described here: “He was blinded by lust. What kind of lust was it? A lust kindled by a woman simply because she was a woman, not because of any of her qualities or associations. It was a lust that loved beauty but would not turn away from ugliness. In these crises, everything was equivalent. He was like a dog that eagerly devours whatever scraps it finds” (277). This is something Fahmy wouldn’t have even thought of doing.

Another incident that greatly angers Ahmad is when Yasin sleeps with his wife’s personal maid, Nur. When this occurs Ahmad is enraged but not so much at the fact that Yasin has slept with a woman that isn’t his wife; he’s more enraged because of whom that woman is. He explains why giving us examples of his own affairs

Just as he loved beauty in the abstract, he loved it in its glittering social framework. He liked to be noticed and to have a widespread reputation…. This social use of his love did not require him to sacrifice beauty, for in his circle beauty and reputation went hand in hand, like an object and its shadow. Beauty was most often the magic wand that opened the door to reputation and noteworthy status. He had been the lover of some of the most famous entertainers of his time. Not one of them had disappointed his yearning for beauty or his craving for loveliness. For these reasons he thought scornfully of Yasin’s conquests. He repeated disapprovingly, “Umm Hanafi! … Nur! … What a beast he is (391)!

With these statements Ahmad is basically saying that he disapproves of Yasin’s conquests because they weren’t beautiful, distinguished, or influential. Yasin had no criteria to choose his mistresses; when lust blinded him he would be content to lie with any woman. And this was exactly what enraged Ahmad; he didn’t like that his son was a savage willing to sleep with any woman regardless of what she looked like or who she was. Here we see how much Ahmad disapproves of Yasin’s actions.

These reproachful actions, however, aren’t reason enough for Ahmad to value what a good son Fahmy is. Like Marixa says in her blog entry “Wake-Up Call”, “Unfortunately Ahmad only realizes where he has gone wrong when he learns that Fahmy has died while at a demonstration. This is the turning point in Ahmad’s life. It becomes the wake-up call that Ahmad needs to realize that he is not the almighty and that he is human just like everyone else.” It’s at this point that Ahmad realizes that he had a great son and that all he ever did for him was point out his flaws.

After Ahmad learns about Fahmy’s death he begins experiencing what, according to “Coping with Grief and Loss” an article in Helpguide.org a trusted non-profit resource, calls common symptoms of grief. He experiences the physical symptoms of grief, shock and disbelief, and guilt. His shock is apparent when he learns the news, “Although there was an unmistakable look of belief and dismay in his eyes, the father rejected the news, shouting, “Fahmy?” (495). And after the shock comes the guilt, Ahmad begin thinking of all the things he didn’t say or do for his son. He begins thinking about the last time he saw his alive, “Consider the memory of the quarrel they had had after the Friday prayer at al-Husayn or that of their conversation that morning, when Fahmy had appealed for his affection and he had reprimanded him –– how much of his heart would they consume? How many tears would they stir up?” (497). It’s very unfortunate, but Fahmy had to die for Ahmad to realize what a great son he was.

Works Cited

"Coping with Grief and Loss: Support for Grieving and Bereavement." Helpguide.org:

Understand, Prevent and Resolve Life's Challenges. Web. 31 Mar. 2010. .

Chavez, Yesenia, “Disobedient”. [Weblog entry.] Digging Even Deeper. The Chinquapin

School: AP English Class. 24 Mar. 2010. (http://diggingevendeeper.blogspot.com/2010/03/disobedient.html) 27 Mar. 2010.

Mahfouz, Naguib. Palace Walk (Cairo Trilogy). New York: Anchor, 1990. Print.

Rodriguez, Marixa, “Wake-Up Call”. [Weblog entry.] Digging Even Deeper. The Chinquapin

School: AP English Class. 30 Mar. 2010. (http://diggingevendeeper.blogspot.com/2010/03/wake-up-call.html) 31 Mar. 2010.

The Prices for Freedom

Is freedom really free when there’s a high cost to pay for it? In Naguib Mahfouz’s Palace Walk the characters have to pay with their reputation, their family, or their lives for freedom. Mahfouz tries to answer the question are these prices for freedom greater than the things you give up when suppressed. Taking freedoms means not accepting submission and being rebellious. One can rebel against their parents, culture, government or religion; whatever sets the rules and limits. Mahfouz wants his readers to realize the consequences to rebellious behavior because in Islamic countries there is a contradiction in their ideology and actual practices. There seems to be a struggle between the traditional Islamic beliefs and modern ideologies. Almost all the members of the family had gone against Islamic rules and culture to steel even a small bit of freedom their religion doesn’t allow.
The different views of the intimacy music creates in the book reflects the debate of the acceptance of music in Islam. Some Muslim scholars believe music should be banned because of its association with sensuality, dancing and drinking (Kutty). Music overall is a very controversial and heavily debated topic by Muslim scholars for many years. In general Islam does not either absolutely accepts music or remains indifferent (Sabir). Here’s an example of an argument against Music in Islam: “In modern schools and universities, we observe independence, free expression and secular thinking being encouraged. This idea of freedom…is a predominant, underlying theme of today`s music. It is being used as a means for drilling those modern ideologies that are totally contrary to Islamic Shariah and values, into the minds of Muslims” (Music and Islam). This opinion is interesting in the way it connects music with freedom. It suggests that freedom especially in relation to secularism and modernism is something bad. Musicians have a lot more freedom and play than any other character in the book. Musicians like Jalila take social and sexual freedoms which cost her the traditional life of a husband securing her. Jalila, for example, as a musician has sexual and social freedom but at what cost? She avoids her arranged marriage and lives a risky life; however, she has the freedom to chose her lover and she is free to walk over to the men’s side in the wedding. Music has modern and traditional views because of the kind of intimacy it creates. Traditionalist wants to protect Islamic people from its association with sin like fornication and adultery. Modernist wants the freedom to indulge in not only the sinful intimacy but the intimacy of communication and connection when it's intangible. An example of this kind of intimacy is when “Jalila united the two of them [Fahmy and Maryam] in a single experience of listening and possibly feeling. She had created an occasion for their spirits to meet” (261). This intimacy is a spiritual intangible connection. Then there’s the intimacy between family members shown through how Yasin feels music connects the family. He thinks to himself, “Everyone sings. It’s a family with deep roots in music” (251). Since music knows know limits and touches the core of people’s emotions, there’s no consequences or prices to pay to feel the connections it creates. Since people do not have to give up anything to feel, they are free to experience music with no cost.
The struggle for traditionalism and modernism also appears in marriages. Married women gives up the most freedom for the security of a husband.. As a woman Amina is forced to adapt to husband wills and submit to his rule. In Havi’s blog Women’s Role he compares the treatment of woman to the treatment of animals when he examines how Amina is not even allowed to sit next to her husband but on the floor because she feels she is not worthy. She has the least freedom of anyone in the novel however it is impossible to believe that she would never exercise her free will. An online article from Time magazine states
Among the gravest oppressors of Muslim women today are Family Laws, the legal frameworks governing marriage and divorce, inheritance, and custody. The laws are the front-line in the war between traditionalists and modernizers. Laws about women remain in the grip of medieval legal reasoning about the family. They vary by nation, but their message is consistent: the husband is the provider, and the wife submissive (Power, Lumpar)

Traditionalist need these rules and regulations to keep away and control modernism. Modernism allows more freedom but not without a price. The movement toward modernism is a movement toward freedom from the traditional limitations. Ahmad, who sets the most traditional rules for his family tries to control this freedom movement but he cannot control the movement of modernism from entering his house. Amina exercised her free will regardless of the rules he sets. She pays the price when she gets hit by the car because she gave up the security of her home and husband offers however she gains an experience of her lifetime. Mahfouz describes, “There was no way to quench her thirst. Visiting the shrine had so stirred up her yearnings that they gushed forth from their springs, flowed out, and her yearning that they gushed forth from their springs, flowed out, and burst over their banks. She would never stop wanting more of this intimacy and delight” (170). Usually Amina is able suppress her wants and desires and adapt but she finally owns a desire she could never rid of. Is it worth it? She’ll most likely never see the place again. She’s also separated from her family for going against Ahmad’s strict rules. She risk never seeing her family again for that small bit of freedom to visit her beloved al-Husayn. Was never experiencing better than only being able to experience it just once? She considers this for herself when she is invited back to her home. Amina “…stood for a little while in a strange confusion. Before she realized what she was doing she turned and asked, ‘Should I go’” (232). She wonders for a second if she should return home to her husband. It’s like she’s asking herself is her submissive life worth all the sacrifices. It’s amazing that she even wonders this because she never before thought she had the choice. When she exercised her free will she realizes giving up her freedom is a choice not a obligation. However she decides her family is worth more than her selfish desire for freedom.
In the Islamic culture, education is a freedom because and one gains the power of knowledge and must give up ignorance. The power of knowledge makes people less likely to submit which is why many woman are forbidden from education. Ignorance of the world keeps them at home. Fahmy takes the most of this freedom and his education about what is going on within his country gets him deeply involved in it. With the power of knowing he clearly sees his enemy and his reason for fighting. He fights for freedom of his country which to him is worth his life. Fahmy tells his mother “A people ruled by foreigners has no life” (347). Fahmy feels like the fight for freedom is worth his life because he feels like the foreigners that rule his country already has his life. He is fighting to win it back. He literally lives the contradiction in political views before and after the movement for independence when he goes home and then goes to school. At home he feels The moment his mind had returned to this stifling atmosphere of lassitude, ignorance, and indifference, he felt a blazing fire of distress and pain that desired release from confinement…. At that moment he wished…he could be surrounded once more by a group of his fellow students. Then he would be able to quench his thirst for enthusiasm and freedom…” (326).
The home represents traditional values in the way the home limits and suffocates him. “ Life strengthen this hope with exertion, and death strengthened it with sacrifice” (357). His life is lost and his country is still not free. Ahmad tells his friend, “Fahmy learned how the boy had been lost and might just have never existed…the poor lad perished, but Sa’d didn’t return and the English didn’t leave” (466). Is all this death necessary for freedom? Is Fahmy’s death for his country really pointless? In the long run the demonstrations and rebellion are necessary. If the country continues to be submissive and servile to the English then nothing will ever change.
Yasin and Ahmad takes sexual freedoms going against their religion. Islam does not allow fornication or adultery and yet this does not stop them. As Lauren writes in her blog “They consider themselves to be devout, faithful muslims, yet from most of the men in the book, we see them living lives that are contrary to what they should be doing as well-practicing muslims.” Only when Ahmad’s life is threatened does he think about quitting his night life. They give up the chance to fall in love and truly love a woman for these sexual freedoms. Yasin looses his family because he can not control his lust and takes too much sexual freedom. “…Love for him was nothing but blind desire. It was the most elevated form of love he knew” (72) pg 81 Yasin’s view of woman “ It was for the sake of this lust alone that he had married the first time and then the second. Over the course of time, his conjugal love was affected by calm new elements of familiarity, but in essence it continues to be based on bodily desire” (99). Fahmy who does not take these sexual freedoms is able to fall in love even though he’s not allowed to marry his love because he took the freedom to look at her and she took the freedom to show herself when it was forbidden.
With such huge prices to pay for freedom, the reader must conclude that freedom is not really free. There is such a huge struggle between modernism and traditionalism but both come with a cost. It is up to the individual to chose and measure the consequences and no one no matter how hard they try can take that from a person.

Work Cited
Mahfouz, Naguib. Palace Walk. New York: Anchor books, 1990.
Power, Carla, and Kuala Lumpar. "Muslim Women Demand an End to Oppressive Family Laws - TIME." Breaking News, Analysis, Politics, Blogs, News Photos, Video, Tech Reviews - TIME.com. Time, 17 Feb. 2009. Web. 05 Apr. 2010. .
[Weblog] Clemons, Lauren, “Leading a Double Life.” Digging Even Deeper . 3/24/2010. 4/5/2010 (http://diggingevendeeper.blogspot.com/2010/03/leading-double-life.html).
[Weblog] Macias, Javier, “Woman‘s Role” Digging Even Deeper . 2/11/2010. 4/5/2010 (http://diggingevendeeper.blogspot.com/2010/02/womens-role.html).
Sabri, Mustafa. "A Topic of Dispute in Islam: Music." Wake Up! 1995. Web. 25 Feb. 2010. .
"Music and Islam." Inter-Islam: Relaying the same message brought by the Prophets, Prophets Adam - Muhammad (Peace and Blessings be Upon Them All). 1998. Web. 25 Feb. 2010. .
Kutty, Sheikh A. "What Does Islam Say on Music?" Islam Awareness Homepage. Aug. 2002. Web. 2010. .

Sensitive Soul-dier

The ending of Naguib Mahfouz’s novel, Palace Walk, shows one of the main characters opening himself up to the reader. Like an oyster, he opened his strong shell to expose his soft inside. Throughout the entire novel, al-Sayyid Ahmad plays the tough dictatorial father who allows no questioning of his authority, and does whatever he pleases whenever he pleases. But in a dramatic change of events, Ahmad reveals that he isn’t only the strict tyrant that he is perceived to be, he is a delicate, innocent person who, like most other on this world, is torn apart after finding out terrible news about one of his children.

“The young man said with obvious sorrow, 'We are sad to inform you of the death of our brother freedom fighter Fahmy Ahmad… (495)'” Ahmad learns that his son Fahmy just died during a peace rally. He asks the soldiers many questions and among them is a comment which shows Ahmad's ignorance. Ahmad thinks that this was Fahmy's first rally against the war, well it wasn't. Fahmy had gone behind his father's back and attended other rallies before. He must have thought of the saying, “What daddy don't know, wont hurt him.” Well that didn't, but Fahmy's death did. And with Fahmy also died the tyrannical Ahmad that Mahfouz portrayed throughout the novel. Like Daniela mentioned in her blog, Hiding Behind the Wall, “...[H]e was too sensitive, he acted so rough with them to protect himself from being hurt by them.” She is talking about how he acts with his daughters, and this also applies to his sons. But after Fahmy died, he can't be tough on him anymore, and there is no more act.
Like previously mentioned, Ahmad wasn't the nicest guy in the world. He wasn't faithful either to his wife or his religion, he was mean spirited, and he obviously wasn't a good role model, but an even like the death of your child, that can really turn a person around. I'll sidetrack to my personal life briefly. Whenever my mother hears a story about how someone's son died, she says, “Ay no! Yo no podria vivir sabiendo que se me murio un hijo.” With that, she summarizes some of the feelings that Ahmad is having. He could not live knowing that one of his children died. No one can truly feel what Ahmad feels unless they are a parent themselves.
And Ahmad learned a lesson that any other parent in this situation would learn. As I believe Johnathan tries to get at in his blog Father's and Children's Relationships, he learns what the role of being a father is. The death of Fahmy is going to bring him closer to his remaining children.
Fahmy is now dead, but he left an inheritance of lessons for his family, and the first one to get his share, Ahmad, learned quickly, and changed his ways.



Works Cited

Mahfouz, Naguib. Palace Walk (Cairo Trilogy). New York: Anchor, 1990.

Life and Death

“His arms and legs began a slow limp disjoint motion. ‘How loud the clamor is. But what are they screaming about? Do you remember? How quickly memories are slipping away. What do you want? To chant? What chant? Or just call out? To whom? For what? There’s a voice speaking inside you. Do you hear? Do you see? But where? There’s nothing. Nothing. Darkness and more darkness. A gentle motion pushing with the regularity of the ticking of a clock. The heart is flowing with it. There’s a whisper accompanying it. The gate of the garden. Isn’t that so? It’s moving in a fluid rippling way and slowly dissolving. The towering tree is dancing gently. The sky… the sky? High, expansive…nothing but the calm, smiling sky with peace raining from it”’ (493).

This paragraph is the description of Fahmy’s death. It describes the quick thoughts that flows through his mind as he is dying. there is a lot of questions racing through his head because as Tianna puts it "Death at the end of the novel poses a lot of questions in many people's minds and influences their actions" Death leaves things unaswered and pointless. It’s interesting how Naguib does not outright say Fahmy is shot and killed with a bullet. Death for Fahmy did not end with darkness and nothingness, it ended with peace. The thing he fights for and the reason why he’s in the demonstrations and risk his life for. Peace. Ahmad wonders, “ Peace? Where had it gone and when would it be ready to return? Even in his store there were distressing, whispered conversations about bloody events” (463). The revolution took away peace not only in the streets and in his store but in his very household since his rebellious son was so ready to demonstrate in the bloody revolution. Fahmy’s ‘peace’ will only be felt by him as his life slips away. His death brings the worse part of the war right in his home. All he wants is for everything to go back to normal but was the way everything was the best for his family and for his country. Death is the point of no return for change. Nothing will ever be normal or the way it was without Fahmy. Even though his death will change everything for his family but what about his country he fights for. His life is lost and his country is still not free. Ahmad tells his friend, “Fahmy learned how the boy had been lost and might just have never existed…the poor lad perished, but Sa’d didn’t return and the English didn’t leave” (466). Is all this death necessary for freedom? Is Fahmy’s death for his country really pointless? In the long run the demonstrations and rebellion are necessary. If the country continues to be submissive and servile to the English then nothing will ever change.
Toward the end of the book death and new life are being compared. Aisha and Khadija are pregnant and Aisha gives birth to her baby however it has a high risk of dying, Yasin’s mother dies, and Fahmy is killed in what is suppose to be a peaceful demonstration. Also Mahfouz includes small scares of death with Aisha, Ahmad, Kamal and Fahmy before he actually dies. Chapter 67 ends with gruesome descriptions of death that happened in al-Aziziya and Badrashin and chapter 68 begins with the birth of Aisha’s baby. Its no coincidence that Sa’d Pasha has been freed on the same day Aisha delivers her baby which happens in the next chapter. The revolution relates to Aisha’s birth because in a way it’s like a new birth of the nation and a new birth of freedom. Since Mahfouz does not kill of the baby, the reader is left with hope that it will live which compares to Sa’d Pasha’s return which gives people hope for the freedom of Egypt.

Bruno, Tianna. Death in the end. Digging Even Deeper. http://diggingevendeeper.blogspot.com/2010/03/death-in-end.html

Leading a Double Life

In my opinion, nothing is more aggravating than a person who tries to portray themselves as something they are not. In Palace Walk, a lot of these men are living double lives. Take Ahmad for example. From the beginning of the book he doesn't allow his family to see what he's really up to at times and does a pretty good job at hiding it from them. He goes out and sleeps with various women who aren't his wife and still claims to be a devout muslim. Finally, Yasin catches him in the act cheating on his wife, but instead of Yasin seeing the error of his father's ways he decided to emulate him. He decides that it's okay to live a life where he sleeps with various women, goes out and spends his money and drinks, all because his father does it. We've seen Yasin since the beginning of the book as someone who has admired his father so much, and it's inevitable that he'd want to be like him in every way possible. But, when Fahmy began lying about who he was and also leading a double life, it's apparent that this must be something that their family does. Ahmad wants Fahmy to stop participating in demonstrations dealing with the English, but Fahmy is so involved with doing this that he ends up disobeying his father , which will eventually lead to his death.
The passage that showed me that they really live this kind of life is found on page 424, when Fahmy shows us just how much this family doesn't mind lying about what they need to in order to get away with certain things. Fahmy thinks, “Lying was not considered contemptible or shameful in this household. Living in their father's shadow, none of them would have been able to enjoy any peace without the protection of a lie...None of the had scruples about it...” Fahmy talks about how many things that their family has done they've lied to Ahmad about it and they don't feel any remorse about it. But, my concern is why don't they? They consider themselves to be devout, faithful muslims, yet from most of the men in the book, we see them living lives that are contrary to what they should be doing as well-practicing muslims. I did research on the way that muslims view lying to see if they were actually living the way they should. I found a website written by a man named Dr. M. Amir Ali who was a man who came to the United States to spread the word of Islam to rid people of their pre-conceived notions and stereotypes of the religion. He wrote many articles on Islamic values and did a specific section for the views of falsehood. He writes, “Allah's messenger did not hate anything as strongly as he hated falsehood. If he received information that a particular man told a lie, he used to throw away that man's respect and honor from his heart...” So if Allah's own messenger did not tolerate lies, why would a good muslim truly want to do something like that.
Works Cited
1. Mahfouz, Naguib. Palace Walk (Cairo Trilogy). New York: Anchor, 1990. Print.
2."Falsehood." The Article Collection of M. Amir Ali, Ph.D. Web. 25 Mar. 2010. .

Disobedient

Picture taken by Gilzee

Fahmy has been the most responsible of Ahmad’s children. “He was the only one in the family to adopt a skeptical attitude toward incantations, charms, amulets, and the amazing deeds performed by saints” (411). Being the most educated of the family, after Ahmad, Fahmy continues to pursue his beliefs until his life is taken away from him.

Fahmy had never failed to disobey his father’s orders until his patriotism took over him. At different occasions Fahmy tried to seek companionship with his family members, but always failed. He usually tried to share his beliefs and convey his message to his family members during the coffee hour, but his family wasn’t enthusiastic enough. They all believed that the war was important, but their minds were busy with other things. Yasin was busy thinking about women, Kamal with his soldier friends, and his mother trying to figure out what was really going on. Since there was nobody at home to share his thoughts, Fahmy was forced to look elsewhere. He discovered that his classmates were all he had. Fahmy wanted to be with them more than he wanted to be with his own family because he could pursue his faith without being judged.

After being confronted by his father and being told to stop distributing handbills, Fahmy continues to pursue his beliefs at his own will. There was no way he was going to give up what he had started with his classmates and easily give up and please his father by swearing on the Qur’an. Fahmy was never able to discover where he obtained the courage to reply to his father with determination and enthusiasm; “We are all ready to sacrifice ourselves for our country” (422). Amazed by his ability to confront his father, Fahmy gains more courage to continue fighting for what the freedom of his country. He sets danger aside and continues his transformation to a disobedient child. Fahmy ends the confrontation he has with his father by telling him:

“Forgive me, Papa. I’ll obey every command of yours more than willingly, but I can’t do this. I can’t. We work like a single hand. I can’t accept shrinking back and abandoning my brothers, and I don’t think you would like me to. There’s no way that life would be bearable if I did. There’s no danger in what we’re doing. Others have more exalted tasks like participating in the demonstrations in which many of them have been martyred. I’m no better than those who have been killed. There are funeral processions for the nation. Even the families of the victims shout slogans instead of weeping. What is my life worth? … What is the life of any man worth? Don’t be angry, Papa. Think about what I’m saying…. I assure you that there’s no danger in our little, nonviolent job” (426).

It is very hard for Ahmad to forgive his son and not to do anything about it because of his principles. He mentions that “[his] heart [wishes] to forgive him, but [he is] afraid he’ll think then that it’s okay to disobey [him]” (486). Ahmad is a typical father who forces his entire family to be submissive to him. He is strict to the point where he manipulates the way his wife and children act. The reason why Ahmad doesn’t show affection towards his own family is because he believes that if he does then they will take advantage of him. Every Muslim could understand Ahmad’s behavior because they all believe in what the Prophet (alayhis-salam) once told them: “Each of you is a shepherd and each of you shall be asked about his flock”. If Muslim fathers don’t man up then their children will do as they wish, just as Fahmy did.

Fahmy’s disobedience is very important in the novel because it shows that emotions have no limits. Not even the most responsible of Ahmad’s children is able to control his emotions to please his highly praised father. Just like Marcell previously wrote: “Fahmy is known to control his emotions and yet … he lets his emotions take control”. Stepping up and confronting his father made Fahmy a disobedient son, but at least he got the opportunity to participate in something that he believed to be the very important. Unfortunately his life got taken away from him before his father could forgive him.

Work cited:

Mahfouz, Naguib. Palace Walk. New York: Anchor, 1990

Yahya. "Why Muslim Fathers Have to Man Up." Web Log post. Muslim Fathers. 12 Feb. 2010. Web. 24 Mar. 2010. .

Fahmy's struggle

On page 424 the first major paragraph shows the struggle that Fahmy is having with trying to listen to his father and doing what he wants. Does it feel like to you that Fahmy is struggling between trying to be that good kid that his father would want him to be and the person he wants to be? I feel like he is struggling but at the same time trying to rebel against his father and the person that his father wants to make him be. In the paragraph he talks about how he wants to protest against the British but the hardest part would be telling his father that he has become a protester. It seems that Fahmy also gets a thrill form being out there with the rest of the people. But i feel like he is doing what all teenagers do when their parents are to strict on him. I don't really feel like he is protesting because he is committed to the cause and because he really believes that that is what he is supposed to be doing, I think that he is more likely doing it because he knows that his father would disapprove of his actions and that he will be seen as a rebel in his fathers eyes. He is trying to break free of his fathers commands just like every child at some point in their life tries to do. And just like a child he also struggles with his rebellion because of his father. He may not agree with what his father does all the time, but he does respect him because of the fact that he is a dignified and well respected man out in the rest of the world. I'm still not sure on why Fahmy is so afraid of his fathers opinion and what he will say when he finds out that Fahmy is protesting. I think it still has to deal with the fact that children always want to rebel but they never want to fall to out of favor with their parents. They want to reach a certain limit where they make their point, but not go to far as to where their parents give up on them.

The Point of No Return

When does a boy become a man? And when does a parent's rein over their children end? Throughout Naguib Mahfouz's Palace Walk, we get a since of Ahmad playing the fatherly role and raising his family. From my teachings as a Christian, which I'm pretty sure is the case in all religions, a father is to, as a spiritual leader, bring his children up in the way in which they should go. The bible talks about children reaching a certain age when they are to make their own decisions and lead their own lives. But what is that age in Islam or if not what is the age, when does a person reach a level of maturity that allows them to handle themselves and their actions?
Taking a look at this novel, Ahmad is seen as a strict and demanding father that does his best to raise his children in the way that they should go. But after raising his children, are they then allowed to think for themselves or are they prisoners to their father's desires? After choosing to indulge in demonstrations and is exposed as a Freedom Fighter, the author paints a picture of Fahmy's maturity, stating:

He started to bite his lips to suppress his tears. He felt ashamed at being so weak. When he was finally able to speak, he launched into a rambling plea, because he was deeply moved and wished to conceal his embarrassment: “Forgive me, Papa. I’ll obey every command of yours more than willingly, but I can’t do this. I can’t…I can’t accept shrinking back and abandoning my brothers, and I don’t think you would like me to. There’s no way life would be bearable if I did…What is my life worth?...What is the life of any man worth? Don’t be angry, Papa. Think about what I’m saying….I assure you that there’s no danger in our little, nonviolent job(426).
Does Ahmad want his sons to be men or does he want them to, like a subservient woman, follow his every wish and command without flaw. When looking at this passage, we see Fahmy, as seen in Marcell Johnson's Out With the Old, struggle for independence, though in this instance, he fights within himself and with his father rather than for his people. In this passage the word can't strikes me as extreme. When people claims that they can't, it implies that they are physically incapable of executing a task, and as a man, it seems that Fahmy is incapable of terminating his activity in demonstrations. Ahmad's intention was to raise his sons to be their own men and think for themselves, but how is that possible when he constantly shoves his views down their throats.
After reading an article called Islam 101 about the relationship between children and their parents, it is apparent that a father's duty to his sons is protection, feed, and care for until adulthood. As an adult, I believe that Fahmy should have the final say in the things in which he is associated and active in. Or should he? After reading What Makes a Man, a response written by Tianna Bruno, an authoritative reader and researcher of this novel, it has come apparent that what really makes a man a man is his career or job, and seeing that Fahmy isn't raking in big buck, he is no man.

Work Cited
Ishiguro , Kazuo. An Artist of the Floating World. New York: Vintage International, 1989.
http://www.islam101.com/sociology/parchild.htm

Out with the Old

“ Fahmy listened to the speech with rapt attention. His eyes were fixed o nthe speaker, and his heart was beating rapidly. He would have liked to climb up there too and pour out the contents of his raging heart, but he did not have a background in public speaking. He was content for someone else to repeat the outburst of his own heart. He listened to the speaker attentively and enthusiastically until the first pause. Them Fahmy shouted along with all his comrades at the same time, ‘Independence!’” (357).
Desire and emotions reached an all time high in a few characters and in the nation. Fahmy in particular reflects the desire in the nation to be independent. This is important because Fahmy is known to control his emotions and yet in this passage he lets his emotions take control with no restraint except for public speaking. His father also longs for independence and is touched by politics but not as extreme as Fahmy. Ahmad is so touched by Sa’d’s exile that he and his company can’t enjoy their usual drinking and banter. Ahmad and Fahmy, the men of the family with the most control over their emotions, are most effected emotionally by political movement for freedom. Why does Fahmy gets so worked up about independence of Egypt? Fahmy tells his mother, “A people ruled by foreigners has no life” (347). A people dominated by strangers drains away culture and nationalism. Foreigners aren’t going to care or do anything about the people’s problems and adversities. In order for things to change there must be a revolution. For a long time Egypt has put up with the indirect rule of the British but now their presence and repression was felt. “The upheaval had been necessary to relieve the pressure in the nation’s breast and in his own” (357).
This situation of revolution seems to relate to marriage especially Yasin and Zaynab’s. Yasin is suppose to be a protector for his wife like Egypt was a protectorate of Britain (Gascoigne) and he does this for a while until he gets bored. Britain in the beginning invested in Egypt and performed financial and political reforms. Then Yasin learns from his father, “Only men could ruin woman, and not every man is capable of being a guardian for them” (315). When Yasin begins to abandon his wife for his thirst for pleasure and entertainment and attempts to rape the maid, he hurts and worries his wife. Britain in a way begins to rape the nation. For example, “European Cairo was a madhouse because of the British and their self-indulgences …The prices began to rise steeply in Cairo while the British soldiers were enjoying things that they had never had before. The people in the countryside began to suffer greatly from poverty and malnutrition” (Egypt: History - British Occupation Period). In a protest to Yasin’s behavior like the protest to Britain control, Zaynab leaves Yasin. She goes on strike like the people in Cairo.
Sa’d inspires hope within Egypt for freedom and his exile sparked a revolution fueled by the desire for independence. Fahmy mumbles to himself “ It’s all the same whether I live or die, faith is stronger than death, and death is nobler than ignominy. Lets enjoy the hope, compared to which life seems unimportant. Welcome to this new mourning of freedom.” Freedom is the key word here. His passion for independence is so great that life is just another sacrifice for freedom in this most extreme case. Through out the novel, characters exercise or strive for their freedoms. . In a way independence can be related to divorce or a child growing up to rely on its own.
Why is Fahmy so ready to rid of British when he lived with them his whole life? The hope Sa’d inspired gave the people of Egypt a glimpse of freedom and the people were not going to let that go just because he was exiled.
Work Cited
"Egypt: History - British Occupation Period." Egypt Travel, Tours, Vacations, Ancient Egypt from Tour Egypt. Web. 05 Mar. 2010. .

Gascoigne, Bamber. "History of EGYPT." HistoryWorld - History and Timelines. Web. 05 Mar. 2010. .

Love, Lust, and Custom

Author Naguib Mahfouz introduces a new perspective in how we view love and lust in his novel, Palace Walk. What makes this particular vantage point of the dealings of lust and love so different from those we are accustomed to hearing about is that the customs of the characters’ culture hinder them at times; their customs influence their decisions when both lust and love present themselves. We see this occurrence become more pronounced in this section of the book (chapters 14 through 29) when almost all of the main characters in the novel are conflicted in their desires and their realities. True, love seems to be of a delicate subject for some whereas lust seems to come naturally to others, but no matter what it may be labeled, all of the characters are forced to take their cultural customs into consideration before any act on their desires.

When Ahmad goes to Madam Zubayda’s residence in hopes of an evening’s entertainment, he becomes conflicted when he begins flirting with her. When he is pursuing her in her home, she teasingly rejects his advances. In one instance, she claims that she must repeat her ritual ablutions. Ahmad, in return, discloses that he hopes they may pray together. In his head, however, is where conflict begins. “He privately asked God’s forgiveness as soon as he had made this joke. Although there were no limits to his impudence when he was intoxicated by his sense of humor, his heart was always troubled and uneasy until he secretly and sincerely asked God’s forgiveness for the humorous excesses of his tongue” (93). Although Ahmad demonstrates the lust that comes with being a sexual being in this scene, he does feel some remorse for abusing God in the process.

Fahmy has fallen for the neighbor girl, Maryam and wishes to ask for her engagement, but his father protests. His father does not understand why Fahmy would request this when he has not even seen her. When he asks Amina if Fahmy has laid eyes on Maryam, she replies, “Of coarse not sir. My son doesn’t lift his eyes to look at a neighbor girl or anyone else,” to which Ahmad returns by saying, “How can he want to get engaged to her if he hasn’t seen her? I didn’t know I had sons who were sneaking looks at the respectable women of our neighbors” (129). This is one of the factors that effects Ahmad’s decision in declining Fahmy’s request to marry Maryam. He is concerned that people will jump to the same conclusion as he did about his son viewing Mayam and that it would taint his family’s name. When Fahmy receives this news, he is upset that his father will not allow him to marry whom he wants whenever he sees fit, but as it is custom to obey the head of house, Fahmy complies.

Another character who has fallen victim to customs concerning the head of house that denies her love is Aisha. Everyday, an officer passes by her window and they look at one another and Aisha feels her heart fill with affection for this man. When her sister, Khadija, catches them glancing at one another she reprimands her sister. She says, “Nothing remains a secret forever, no matter how long it may be concealed. Imagine the situation for all of us if someone on the street or one of our neighbors noticed you. You know very well how people talk. Imagine what would happen if the news reached Daddy. God help us!” (141). Aisha decides to put the officer in the back of her mind as not to risk the family’s honor. When the young man requests her engagement, her father becomes furious and, like his son Fahmy, forbids it. Aisha is sure she loves the officer, but custom holds her from speaking her mind. “There was not a thing she could do about it. This was her father’s will and she could not criticize it. All she could do was submit and obey. In fact, she had to be happy and content. To be despondent would be an unforgivable offense. To protest would be a sin her conscience and sense of etiquette could not allow” (159).

Mahfouz is able to portray the thoughts and feeling of every character in a light that makes us feel like we are the ones who are conflicted. In this section of the novel, we are able to learn a lesson in Muslim culture and customs and we are able to see how these characters’ love and desires must be suppressed for the sake of the love and respect they feel for their own culture. During the talk of Aisha’s possible engagement, Yasin says. “Marriage is the fate of every living creature. Anyone not getting married today will marry tomorrow” (152). Love is something all of these characters aspire to feel, but they all understand that marriage is the custom of their culture, and submit regardless of their feelings.

Work Cited

Mahfouz, Naguib. Palace Walk. Toronto: First American Edition, 1991. Print.

What Makes a Man

“'You're the oldest brother. In addition to that, you're an employee-- in other words, you're really a man. You're the best one suited for this mission.”... “I, for my part, am no longer a boy. I have become a man and an employee, as you pointed out.”... “Fahmy...you're our man!”(215)

As I read this passage in Palace Walk by Naguib Mahfouz, I though what is it that qualifies a male person in the Muslim culture to become a man. If Yasin and Fahmy are men, what qualifies them to be considered this? I thought maybe Khadija tells them that they are the men for the job because she just want to butter them up to it. But we see that she does not seriously call Kamal a man, and earlier in the novel, Yasin considers himself a boy when he asks his mother did all the deeds that he considered appalling. Thus, I questioned at what point will Kamal be considered a man in their culture and at what point did Yasin become a man from the naiive boy that he was. Is there a rite a passage in the Muslim culture?
After doing some research, I was given the answer that there is no ritual in the Muslim culture as a rite of passage. This means that there is not actual physical ceremony that a young man has to go through in order for him to officially be a man. But I did find out that in the Muslim culture there are different religious expectations of a boy than a man. As a child, boys are not required to pray and commit to all the five pillars. This is because it is felt that they really don't understand what they are saying. They would just be speaking words and doing actions that they were told to do.(Erfani) Children in the Islamic religion start getting taught to read at the age of five. As they grow into teenagers, they are expected to become a more devout Muslim.(Ahmad)
Although this seemed like it applied in the book, especially with Kamal having that class that taught him about the Quran, there seemed like there was much more in the book to being a man. There is an emphasis on being employed, as mentioned in the passage, and having finished your schooling. This sort of right of passage seemed more practical than religious because it seems that one has to be considered a responsible adult with their life planned out. If this is the case, then Fahmy may not be as much of a man as Yasin because he is not employed, but he is still going to school. But he is well on his way because he is finishing up in law school.
There is not that much of a difference in the transition from childhood to manhood in the book and in the culture that we are used to. You are a man when you are considered a responsible and respectable adult. But in the Muslim culture it is a little bit more because you are expected to be a dedicated Muslim, which is part of being respectable since the religion is such a big part in the culture.


References
1. Erfani, Ali. "Muslim rituals marking the transition from childhood to adulthood - by Ali Erfani - Helium." Helium - Where Knowledge Rules. Web. 25 Feb. 2010. .

2. Ahmad, Zainib. "Muslim rituals marking the transition from childhood to adulthood - by Zainib Ahmad - Helium." Helium - Where Knowledge Rules. Web. 25 Feb. 2010. .

Serious

On page 127 a woman comes and talks to Amad about Famhy and how well and outstanding he has become. She says, "Fahmy, sir, is a fine young man. He has gained favor with you through his seriousness, success in school, and good manners, may God protect him from the evil eye. Perhaps he has entrusted his request to me hoping that his status with his father will be an argument on his behalf". (pg 127) The part that caught my eye the most in this passage is how she begins to describe Fahmy. Instead of saying something like he has an outstanding career path going, she tells him about his c and I wonder why the first thing to be mentioned is how serious Famhy has become? Why is it important at all that he has become serious? Since we have been going through the book I have come up with a great theory of my own. I believe that the reason everyone else mentions his seriousness is because they know that that is what his father praises the most in a young man, and that he feels if a man is not more serious as he gets older then he is not a man. Like the rest of the quote said by telling Amad that his son is more serious has earned him a hire standing with his father. Now instead of treating him like a child who knows nothing Famhy can now be seen as a man in front of his father. But it is wired because in our culture we like to see that a child has matured a great deal, but for them to be completely serious is not what our parents require that we become in order for us to gain a higher standing with them. When people talk about me they never mention how serious I am, they always praise that I am a talented athlete or that I have grown so much, but they have never just told my parents that her seriousness has increased. That's why it is shocking to me that the first thing this lady wants to say to Amad is that his son has more seriousness.

Self-Control

“They were still for a time, looking at each other, united by a single thought, knowing instinctively that they understood each other perfectly. It was not hard for them to read each other's thoughts. Then Fahmy expressed what was preoccupying them: “Now we need to think about who ought to raise the topic with him....”(123).

When I read this passage from Palace Walk by Naguib Mahfouz, I thought this instinctive understanding was there because of the mother/son relationship. The understanding through the silence was because of the fear that the father, Ahmad, had instilled in the son and his wife. It was part of the secret alliance that the family had that did not include their father. They had a common feeling against their father so they automatic fear and resistance.
But as I thought about this quote, “read each other's thoughts”(123) I was reminded of all the other times this phenomenon is referred to in the novel, namely, when Yasin visited his mother and when Fahmy was speaking with his mother, Amina, about his marriage arrangement. After making this discovery, I realized that these types of connections are common throughout this section and among the characters in the book.
The question is raised, “Why is it so important for them to have this relationship where they can communicate without speaking? Why did Mahfouz put it in this novel?”
They need these types of connections because their cultures frowns upon a woman or a man openly communicating their inner emotions obnoxiously. The novel shows that self-control is very well looked upon in their culture. In chapter 21, the narrator tells us, the readers, that, “Only Fahmy was exemplary in his self control”(131) and “Fahmy was known for his self-control”(131). His father and his offspring, besides Fahmy, were prone to exploding. Mahfouz often says that certain characters almost “lost themselves” while becoming angry or excited in their conversation. He is saying that they were about to lose control of themselves. They have to stop themselves because, in their culture, one can't have outburst that show that one cannot control their behavior and conduct. With the conversation between Yasin and his mother, we see that Yasin has to deliberate in his mind what he will say before he actually says it. This shows that he is at least attempting to have self control. The characters have all sorts of wild thoughts, but they can't express them all, especially the women. When Yasin's mother becomes distraught because of the words that Yasin say to her, she cannot scream at him and force him out of her house. She softly expresses her feelings towards Yasin.
This passage, as well as many other excerpts from the novel show that self-control is expected among the members of the culture in this novel.

A Million Possibilities

In his novel, Palace Walk, Naguib Mahfouz writes in a descriptive but un-revealing manner, which leaves things up for numerous, strange, interpretations. Of course, if the reader is following the book, it isn't very hard to interpret. If the reader sets the novel down and later continues reading from where he left off, he might be a little disoriented by what he is reading. Even though this appears to take away from the novel's meaning, the reader can enjoy this experience and actually grasp the author's point.

One such passage where the reader can step into a world not related to the book's meaning is in chapter ten when Mahfouz writes,

Fahmy watched her appear and disappear until no clothes were left to separate them. She faced him, her small hands rising and falling, her fingers slowly and deliberately grasping and releasing what she held, as though she was dragging out her work on purpose. His heart guessed it was on purpose, although he was torn between doubt and hope. He did not fight his feeling of being liberated to the farthest horizons by his happiness. He was conscious of nothing but dancing melodies. Although she did not glance up at him, her demeanor, the blush on her cheeks, and her avoidance of looking at him all betrayed how intensely conscious she was of his presence, or the impact he had made on her feelings. (59)

What he is describing is Maryam doing laundry. But for the reader that set down the novel, went grocery shopping, and then once again engaged in reading, this could mean a ton of things.
The first thought that comes to mind is that Maryam is doing magic. With her disappearance and reappearance, she reminds the reader of a Harry Houdini, and with the grasping and releasing of objects, she reminds the reader of Carrot Top. And even though it is far fetched because of his age, Fahmy could really be enjoying this magic show. Another thought that can go through the reader's mind is that Maryam was in the fitting room trying on dresses. This is less of the possibility especially once the time period and location are taken into account. But when the reader is discombobulated, anything can happen. And even though the list goes on and on, the most obvious one is sexual intercourse (I won't go into details).

This possibility makes the most sense and it is so plausible, that it can be the hidden message. The statement previous to this passage says, “No fear is able to spoil love's development or keep it from dreaming of its appointed hour.” (59) This says that love has no barriers and no matter what is in the way, love, especially young love, will always prevail. How can you jump from love, or making love, to doing the laundry? Mahfouz, intentionally included this sexual allusion to keep the reader on his toes and ready for what lies ahead.

This goes to show that not just this passage but every other in this novel, and in every other novel, can have a double meaning, you just have to be distracted enough to catch it.