How does Mahfouz illustrate how fate is a major determiner of one’s happiness in life?

How does Mahfouz illustrate how fate is a major determiner of one’s happiness in life?

Throughout , or more so in the earlier stages of the novel, we see a conflict between Said's fate and his free will. Perhaps, one may argue that Said had many fates, such as his fate to live with Nur or to live a spiritual life, but he chose the fate for violence and revenge by free will. However, when see from Said's stance, the other two options were pointless in a way that it did not fit into his definition of the ideal world that has been set by being Rauf's companion in theft; when he was betrayed by his closest friends and was sent away to jail, he equipped the lens of hatred and vengeance with which he viewed the world after being free from prison. Hence, with such lens, he was predetermined to his fate. 

We can also closely link to one's upbringing and his/her fate. Said, when he was young, lost his dad from a mysterious death and saw his mom get kicked out from a hospital; he, from young age, experienced loss and ill-treatment by others, which later influences his fate and hinders him to pursue a happier life such as the path of love and spirituality. Therefore, Mahfouz is trying to address the importance of circumstance of birth as well as relationship with others in relation to one's fate and the pursuit of happiness. 

The Thief and The Dogs Text Analysis

                

_Yes, these words will glitter; they'll be crowned with a not-guilty verdict. You are sure of what you say. And apart from that, they will believe, deep down, that your profession is lawful, a profession of gentlemen at all times and everywhere, that the truly false values--yes!-are those that value your life in pennies and your death at a thousand pounds. The judge over on the left is winking at you; cheer up!_  

_"I will always seek the head of Rauf Ilwan, even as a last request from the hangman, even before seeing my daughter. I am forced not to count my life in days. A hunted man only feeds on new excitements, which pour down upon him in the span of his solitude like rain."_ 

 The verdict will be no more cruel than Sana's cold shyness towards you. She killed you before the hangman could. And even the sympathy of the millions for you is voiceless, impotent, like the longings of the dead. Will they not forgive the gun its error, when it is their most elevated master?  

"Whoever kills me will be killing the millions. I am the hope and the dream, the redemption of cowards; I am good principles, consolation, the tears that recall the weeper to humility. And the declaration that I'm mad must encompass all who are loving. Examine the causes of this insane occasion, then reach your judgement however you wish!" 

 His dizziness increased.  

Then the verdict came down: that he was a great man, truly great in every sense of the word. His greatness might be momentarily shrouded in black, from a community of sympathy with all those graves out there, but the glory of his greatness would live on, even after death. Its fury was blessed by the force that flowed through the roots of plants, the cells of animals and the hearts of men.  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ANALYSIS

               This text uncovers Said’s delusional characteristic which is not only evidence of his hamartia but also his hubris, foreshadowing Said’s later downfall. This part of the novel is situated right after he finds out that he had failed to assassinate Rauf and murdered an innocent man instead, becoming drunk in despair and disappointment of his failure to kill Rauf.  Being drunk, said dreams and talks to himself, thus the text is intentionally italicized to draw a clear distinction between the third-person omniscient view and internal monologues, or in other words, the employment of stream of consciousness. Through this co-existence of both narratives, we as readers are presented with two perspectives, one from the eyes of the publicity of Egypt and the other from the eyes of Said.

               This text, in particular, consists of internal monologues which allow readers to have a glance at Said’s candid mindset. In this case, we see Said’s fervor for vengeance against those who betrayed him and his blindness to realize his wrongdoings; this goes as far as to being overconfidence about himself believing that the public will praise him like a hero. We see him assign heroic archetypes to himself throughout the text when equates his death to the death of the millions, ‘the hope’, ‘the dream’, ‘good principles’, and ‘consolation’.  However, this escalates to be his hubris as exemplified where he calls the peasants as cowards.

               In addition to attributing heroic archetypes to himself to provide justification of his killing of an innocent man, Said appeals to his losses resulting from the betrayal of his wife, mentor, and the society as a whole. Said describes himself as a ‘hunted man’ in ‘Solitude’ and implies that he has been a lone prey to all his enemies. He further adds that he ‘only feeds on new excitements’; the word, excitement, connotes the meaning of bloodthirst to kill and avenge. Said references to ‘Sana’s cold shyness’ and how even a death sentence cannot outweigh the pain, delivering an underlying statement that any consequence of killing is not enough to stop him from beheading his foes.

               The text closes with Said being vindicated and acquiring the title of ‘a great man’ whom all  living organisms-plants, animals, and humans-glorify his greatness. However, we as readers are aware of the asymmetry between Said’s delusions and the corrupt reality of Egypt. By this time of the novel, the readers have observed the “gradual downfall” or precisely, recurring peripeteia, and foresee the death of Said; the only question they have left is whether his death is larger than what he actually deserves. 

The Thief and the Dog: Stream of Consciousness

Stream of consciousness is a narrative technique that depicts the different emotional, physiological, and subconscious states to form one's awareness. In effect, the readers are exposed to the mind of the character without any restrictions. This technique is usually shown in the form of internal monologues.

Within the novel, Mahfouz makes use of both third-person omniscient view and internal monologues of said, making the readers understand Said's harsh circumstances such as betrayal of his wife and mentor, Rauf. This technique is especially evident in chapter 11 where Said finds out that it was not Rauf he had shot but it was Rauf's body guard and following this, Nur leaves Said. This chain of externalities is depicted thoroughly and candidly through the third omniscient view, but the readers are exposed to the emotional breakdown of Said through the italicized internal monologues. Thus, marking Said's peripeteia, a change in fortune, and Said's later death is foreshadowed through the death imagery elucidated by diction like 'graveyard'. Because the readers become aware of his unfortunate fate when Said himself cannot, this increase the tension required for a crime thriller.

Furthermore, Said becomes blur in his decisions and becomes irrational as shown by internal monologues and especially when he falls asleep and has a dream that is completely contradictory of the actual situation. In the dream, he imagines himself being vindicated by the common people for being an undercover hero working towards the equal distribution within Egypt. However, this is not the case, as the publicity stands against him; there are news and headlines about Said's crime. This clear disparity highlights his irrationality. Such heroic and competent characterization stands in clear contrast with Said’s failure to rob Rauf’s house, his murder on two innocent people and his eventual downfall. It is important to take note of the combination of both omniscient third-person narration and stream of consciousness narration feeding to the characterization of Said’s dual perspective of justice and revenge.

It is also important to take the context of production into account. As learnt in class, it was after the post-revolution of Egypt, and with this in mind, Mahfouz employs the stream of consciousness style in a deliberate and precise fashion to express his ideologies through the protagonist Said who is constantly characterized as a tragic hero experiencing a contextual movement under Nasser. In chapter 1, for example, as soon as Said is released from prison, the readers are exposed to Said's spiteful monologue regarding his revenge against Ilish and Nabawiyya. This is explicitly shown in the quote: "Nabawiyya. Ilish. Your two names merge in my mind...You'll be watching now, but I won't fall into the trap. At the right moment, instead, I'll strike like Fate.” When the readers are presented with this quote, they are presented with a sudden exposition which they believe to be the driving force of the whole plot. Right away, this motive imbues excitement and suspense they expect from the crime thriller novel. Adding on, this novel has been the pioneering novel of Modernism in Arab canon. At the same time, Mahfouz opens a new realm of psychological realism which allows authors to elicit complexities. 

In comparison to Chinua Achebe's Things fall apart, they clearly use different narrative styles: One using a circumlocutory style and the other using a stream of consciousness. Each is used deliberately by each authors in accordance with the historical, political and cultural contexts. 

Blog Post

Your task is to write a response that evaluates the study of literature in translation. Your response should demonstrate an awareness of specific benefits and challenges through references to today’s readings, as well as making tangible connections to the learning outcome from Part 3 of the course. 

It is quite easy to access literature in translation nowadays and not many people can tell the difference between English-translated literature and English-written literature. The reason is that translators put endless effort and time to preserve the authenticity of the original piece. To do this, they take the context in which the original piece was written; understanding of the context influences the connotation and symbolism every word stands for.

Unfortunately, it is not as easy as it sounds. Translators often misunderstand the context and translate in terms of the denotation rather than the connotation, hence, there is now a loss of authenticity and the author's intention. Conversely, even though the translators did understand the context, difficulties lie in the nature of languages; every language has its own characteristics and is distinct to all other languages. Due to this nature, translators have to make sacrifices when translating, as there may be some words in one language that are untranslatable in other languages or may be words that lose their symbolic connotation when they are translated. In conjunction to this, translators may unintentionally or, at times, intentionally add new meanings within the text by misinterpreting the original.

Despite the limitations, there are more benefits of translating literature. The foremost benefit is the promotion of global integration through cultural unification resulting from languages traveling across national borders. When languages cross borders, the cultures and traditions do so as well, as they are deliberately and precisely embedded in literature. Furthermore, this leads to enrichment of languages, as there unique expressions are shared.

All in all, translating literature and publishing in other nations do have limitations, but these could be prevented by the translator; the benefits, on the other hand, are immense.