Saturday, July 5, 2008
Our friend Joel Pollak has a piece in today's Washington Post describing an example of the use of what should be a straightforward language study -- basic Arabic class -- to propagandize. It's utterly predictable. Any language class is going to use the corresponding culture to draw literature and themes for study, otherwise all you have is vocabulary memorization. And how can you avoid themes of grievance, anger, resentment and Jew-hatred that so run through Arab culture? It's another example of why people are so concerned about efforts like the Khalil Jibran School in New York, or the Saudi funding of educational initiatives everywhere.
Teaching Arabic and Propaganda
...Since Sept. 11, 2001, the number of Americans studying Arabic has more than doubled. Nearly 24,000 U.S. students enrolled in Arabic classes in the fall of 2006, the Modern Language Association reported in November. In 2002, 264 colleges offered Arabic; as of the 2006-07 academic year, 466 did.
Young, ambitious Americans are responding constructively to our country's new challenges by demanding Arabic classes. But there are not enough teachers to meet this demand, and the available textbooks are suffused with the stale prejudices and preoccupations of the pre-Sept. 11 Middle East.
To study Arabic in America today is to be inducted into a world of longing, abandonment and regret. And that's before you even touch the political issues.
Most maps of the Middle East in "Al-Kitaab" [the TV drama used for Arabic language instruction] do not include Israel, though a substantial minority of Israelis, both Jews and Arabs, are native Arabic speakers. Alongside simple Arabic poems, students read about anti-Western heroes such as Gamal Abdel Nasser.
The DVD that comes with "Al-Kitaab" includes footage of Nasser's mass rallies in Cairo -- including slogans in Arabic and French such as "Brother Nations in Struggle, We Are By Your Side." These scenes of totalitarian rage are fondly described by the narrator as "dreams of his youth."
The accompanying lesson describes the highlights of Nasser's career, including the nationalization of the Suez Canal and the formation of the United Arab Republic. No mention is made of Egypt's defeat in the Six-Day War or of Nasser's brutal, repressive rule. In my class, we were asked to recite a passage about Nasser to practice our vocalization. (I refused.)
The last lesson in the book -- which we skipped -- features Maha's mother speaking wistfully of her childhood in Palestine: "My childhood was taken from me!" Over mournful music on the DVD, she talks about returning to Jerusalem, as if she were a refugee, but the images suggest that she left voluntarily after the Six-Day War, when Israel offered citizenship to the Arab residents of East Jerusalem. The fact that Israel also claims Jerusalem as its capital is ignored...
Pfft. That's Harvard for you. Yale would never tolerate such non-sense (we're far too busy having a love-in with the Chinese).
I took an introductory Arabic class. The political indoctrination and dreary Maha were a problem, but the worst aspect of the "Al-Kitaab" books was their teaching method. For months, students learn the alphabet and nothing else. We learned how to pronounce words, but they weren't spelled out or defined. Our teacher went over some basic phrases, but for whatever reason, the book is designed to prevent people from learning usable Arabic. At the end of a many-month long course, none of the students could put a sentence together.
The language itself is not so hard, but Arabic is classified as being 'difficult'. I have to guess that it's difficult because of incompetent texts like Al Kitaab.
I think most universities use the al Kitaab series, and the propaganda doesn't stop with politics. Later stages of Arabic study require some readings from the Koran.
The US Army wisely avoids the Al Kitaab books and uses Rosetta Stone.