Rachel Collins
Jeannina Perez
WST3015
5 April 2010
I read through much of Riverbend’s blog, most of it because of my own interest rather than for this assignment, since the entry that I chose to focus on appears near the beginning of the blog, dated August 28th, 2003. The theme that I focused on within this entry recurs throughout the years on the blog, and that theme is of the American misperception of what Iraqi people and life are like. We have constructed a myth about what life must be like in an “underdeveloped” country, in addition to myths about followers of Islam, and myths about the condition of women in such a society. In Women’s Lives, Multicultural Perspectives the authors detail the biased manner of thinking that many use when formulating opinions about countries that are deemed “underdeveloped” (375). It is often assumed that this process is natural, linear, a foregone conclusion- how could any country’s people want to be anything BUT developed? What about progress, technology, and freedom!? What we tend to disregard is the idea that economic and technological progress are not the only things that are valued in many societies. All nations and cultures, whether developed or undeveloped, hold a vast store of historical, cultural, and traditional knowledge- the worth of which is not subordinate to western ideals of progress. We can see the friction of these ideas played out in Riverbend’s writings. In the entry that I focused on, she writes that the myth of Iraqi people as backward, ignorant and primitive is a blatant untruth- Iraqi’s have electricity, running water, computers, VCR’s, bridges, universities, schools- all the trappings of “developed” nations such as ours. WLMP quotes Vandana Shiva, an environmentalist writer and scientist, in calling less wealthy nations “devastated” instead of “underdeveloped, to reflect that fact that much of the wealth of richer countries actually comes from dominating less wealthy ones (376). This idea, too, is demonstrated in this entry on the blog. Riverbend writes about the fact that after the destruction of American bombing, Iraqi contractors were not the ones to rebuild. Instead, American contractors, namely Halliburton, were given most of the work of reconstruction, and often at prices much inflated from the ones that Iraqi engineers like Riverbend’s cousin estimated. This dichotomy between violent conflict and the industrial sector is also discussed in WLMP, which states that “nation-states, militaries, and corporations are increasingly intertwined” (509). Riverbend emphasizes that the words "rebuild" and "reconstruct" necessarily imply that something existed before- an idea that firmly contradicts the commonly believed myths about Iraq and other middle-eastern countries. Riverbend’s blog transcends the false boundaries between the personal, political and educational: it is all three, and a great example of each. Her personal, like ours, is directly affected by the political, and vice versa, and her blog is clearly educational because it is a great tool for debunking the myths that surround this issue.
Works Cited:
Kirk, Gwyn, and Margo Okazawa-Rey. Women's Lives: Multicultural Perspectives. New
York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 2010. Print.
Riverbend. "The Promise and the Threat." Web log post. Baghdad Burning. Blogspot, 28 Aug. 2003.
Web. 5 Apr. 2010.
It's interesting that so many people used this entry but I completely agree with you. This entry too was the perfect example of how Riverbend's blog combines the political and personal to educate her readers.
ReplyDeleteOne of my closest friends is from Pakistan and the majority of her family lives in Iraq. When I read this blog she was the only person I could think of. We are so similar in character and outlooks that it still dumbfounds me how as an entire nation we are able to accept that "those people" are something so different and so scary that we need to imprison them. I totally agree with the idea that we need to do a lot more the break the myth that we are holding so closely to our morals.
ReplyDeleteThe use of "underdeveloped" and "devastated" remind me of "victim" and "survivor" and how one always seems to be the "lesser of two evils" of sorts. I feel like Iraq is far more developed in terms of politics empowering women than here in the U.S. Riverbend even states in one of her blogs that women have equal rights. Does that not seem like a "developed" country? The Americans that have criticized Riverbend for not appreciate what she has don't seem to have ever stopped and realized the numerous similarities there are between the two countries, and much less how much more Iraq has to offer women there. Granted there is a patriarchal rule still hovering over them, but who doesn't have this still?
ReplyDeleteYou made several really interesting points here. I especially enjoyed your mention of our inconsistency in using the words "reconstruct" and "rebuild." It's an issue with this situation that I had never considered, but it's probably one of the most important. Our language in discussing this suggests that we are consciously aware of a preexisting culture, infrastructure, government, and way of life in Iraq, so why are we so quick to dismiss it? We value our own culture so much that we forget, I think, that our way of life is not the only one, and certainly not the best; what's dangerous is when we also forget that ignoring those facts can easily have devastating consequences, as Riverbend's blog makes clear.
ReplyDelete