Academic tourists?

This opinion piece by AUC sociology professor Mona Abaza raises some interesting and uncomfortable questions about the inequalities between local and foreign academics who study the Middle East -- especially now, as the Arab Spring has made the region the object of increased scholarly interest: 

Without sounding xenophobic, which is a growing concern that personally worries me more than ever, there is much to say about the ongoing international academic division of labour whereby the divide between the so called “theoreticians” of the North and the “informants” who are also “objects of study” in the South continues to grow.

I am indeed speaking of frustrations because “we” as “locals” have been experiencing a situation, time and again, of being reduced to becoming at best “service providers” for visiting scholars, a term I borrowed from my colleague, political scientist Emad Shahin, at worst like the French would put it, as the “indigène de service”, for ironically the right cause of the revolution. To rather cater for the service of our Western expert colleagues who typically make out of no more than a week's stay in Cairo, a few shots and a tour around Tahrir, the ticket to tag themselves with the legitimacy and expertise of first hand knowledge.

I cover higher education in the Middle East and I know there are a lot of academics and students of the Arab world who read the blog, and I'd welcome your reactions. Have you experienced these kinds of frustrations -- or misgivings? In the rush to assert one's professional credentials on the Arab Spring leading to superficial work? Is this just sour grapes or is there a power imbalance between visiting foreign scholars and their local colleagues? How could it be addressed? 

Comments

[roda]

Mona can try and rehash Orientalism for the millionth time but Egypt's next generation of thinkers have already surpassed the pre-Arab Spring generation.

[Issandr El Amrani]

The classic on the matter, I think, published on these pages a few years ago:

http://www.arabist.net/blog/2007/2/28/on-freeloaders.html

[Kevin]

I worry about this topic quite a bit from the opposite angle. I am a (white) PhD candidate in History at the University of Michigan working on modern Iraq. From an academic/theoretical standpoint, I have really benefited from the work of Dipesh Chakrabarty in "Provincializing Europe" on this topic. For my part, I see a couple of options for American/European academics working on the Middle East:

(1) Reject the practice of organizing your bibliography around the three categories of archival sources, Arabic/Persian/Turkish sources, and secondary sources in European languages. Arabic sources should not all be lumped together - the primary sources of Arab 'subjects' should be listed alongside those of European subjects and the secondary/theoretical writing of Arabs should be listed alongside that of Europeans and Americans, not in its own special category.

(2) Take Arabs seriously as not only 'informants' but also 'theoreticians.' As Chakrabarty said, Indians feel compelled to site the authority of Western theorists (Marx, Gramsci, etc.) while Westerners writing on India never feel the need to site Indians AS theorists. For my part, I've learned a great deal by seriously reading the work of Iraqi historians and thinking about what their insights can add to the historiography in English and French. (I've been particularly struck by the significance of poetry as an historical source and the poet as an historical agent - something totally elided by white men and women.)

I think that this is a project that can greatly benefit from the work of Arabs who write in English and French as well, but its obviously a long term aim. I'm not sure what to say to those dealing with the short term struggle.

[DeMarquis]

The first step in this process, clearly, is for academics of Egypt and the Middle East to cite each other as sources of theory. Is that done to any degree?

[Veronica Kassatly]

A possible siver lining...? If enough White-y Whites come (read the 2007 blog, it is hysterical) perhaps academia & academics will begin to be treated with due respect and appropriate salaries in the Arab world? And no, I don't want to buy an air conditioner thank you columbia sportswear.

[Warigia Bowman]

Dear Ursula

I think this is an important point. I think that citing each other is very valuable. I also think co-authoring is valuable. I am African/African-American. I believe that I have insights to bring to the region, and vice versa. I am trying to help my students to develop the tools to become the top notch researchers in the region. I have felt frustrated by this phenomenon in Kenya. For example, the book "Our turn to eat" by Michelle wrong gets alot of the ethnic politics wrong because she is a "drive-by" journalist. I am sure this occurs in the egyptian, mena context as well.

Thanks, Rigia

[Sam]

It sounds like she's sort of wanting a job somewhere in the West and frustrated she's not getting the generous grants that people are Princeton are. I understand the frustration that "overnight experts" are trying to learn quickly about the Arab Spring and taking advantage of AUC research assistance, but what would she rather? That those people not come to Egypt and instead opine about it (as many are) from the comforts of DC thinktanks? It seems a better strategy for her would be that rather than theorizing about the sociological implications of such people coming to bother her by asking her help in understanding the Arab Spring would be to publish more in papers read outside Egypt (i.e., not Ahram) and actively put herself forward as an alternate voice and source directly to the audiences of the Western scholars she's frustrated by.