
She applied the “Page 99 Test” to her new book, The Poetics of Incivility: Satire and Subversion in Modern Arab Culture, and reported the following:
From page 99:Learn more about The Poetics of Incivility at the Cornell University Press website.The authors, critics, and institutions that contribute to the definition of adab and thaqāfa [culture] increasingly formed their aesthetic opinions within the framework of the promotion of national culture. As Faisal Darraj observes, “What was the role of literature, as focused on by the schools, if not the discovery of an originary national spirit?” This national question looms over the creation of a literary canon…. Popular culture, even as it was reimagined according to the prerogatives of cultural decolonization and iltizām [commitment], holds this tension between the celebration of national culture and the condemnation of premodern forms as unsuitable for Arab modernity.This is a relatively good test. My one reservation concerns where page 99 falls: in the weeds, as it were, of a surrounding cultural and literary debate instead of showcasing one of the forms of incivility discussed in the book.
Page 99 occurs in the middle of Chapter 3, which explores the values associated with literature in mid-twentieth century Egypt. The chapter analyzes a play by Yusuf Idris, al-Farāfīr, as a case study to examine theater, questions of cultural decolonization and authenticity, and political critique at the height of Gamal Abdel Nasser’s power. The central device I employ in relation to al-Farāfīr is qillat adab, which carries a threefold meaning: a lack of adab (adab as mannerliness or civility); nonliterariness (adab as literature); and physical comedy related to farce and slapstick, often incorporating vulgarity. In Arabic, adab refers not only to literature, but to manners and decorum. Adab is akin to civility, gained through formal and informal instruction and encoded in the literature studied in school curricula. Adab teaches people how to be good civil subjects, how to perform appropriate gender roles, and how to be a citizen. In the quote, Darraj points to this intersection of literature and education aimed at cultivating idealized values for citizens in the new nation-state.
I discuss the tension between literature aligned with this aim—“high” culture—and popular forms of entertainment, or “low” culture. In al-Farāfīr, Idris adapts a premodern theatrical form associated with village life. He seeks to craft a distinctly Egyptian theater, but doing so entails a rejection of the Western dramatic form. Is it thus unliterary? Contemporary comparisons between Idris’ aesthetics and the Theater of the Absurd offered a means of insisting upon literary merit, though Idris disclaimed any influence. His play is certainly unmannerly, with the slapstick title character challenging and mocking his ostensibly serious counterparts, the Master and the Author. Humor, farce, and the reimagined dramatic form become means by which Idris not only contests a modern canon heavily indebted to Western literary models, but also through which Idris issues a pointed critique of political and social restrictions on individual freedom.
--Marshal Zeringue









