Pious criminality

Last week, a relatively unknown Dutch film maker was murdered in Amsterdam by a Morrocan immigrant who claimed he was doing it 'in the name of Islam'.

Theo van Gogh (a descendent of the famous artist, Vincent Van Gogh) had made a film about 'Islamic culture' described as 'controversial'. The film, called Submission, shows a Muslim woman forced into an arranged marriage, abused by her husband and then raped by her uncle. In the end her whipped and battered body is shown with "Qur'anic script" daubed all over it. A man described as an 'Islamist' has already been arrested for the murder.

Needless to say, violent recriminations against Holland's Muslim minority have already started. The name of Pim Fortuyn, maverick politician known for his anti-Muslim (under the guise of anti-immigration) views, has been constantly mentioned in the wake of this murder, even though Fortuyn was murdered by an animal rights activist. Any criticisms of 'the secular' will now thrown back in the face of Muslims (or even other religious groups): this man's murder is evidence that our critiques are flawed and lay the ground for intolerance. Celebrity apostates will now write more books wagging their fingers. More guff will be written in newspapers, on websites, and in weblogs by 'experts' on 'Islam'. Of course, when a Muslim does not commit murder, or does some 'good', these same newspapers and websites fail to class this under the rubric of 'Islam does this or that'.

I do not even need to discuss that people will use this man's murder by an extreme zealot -- one who deserves no leniency by the law -- to spread their own hate and bigotry. This says more for them than anything else. (I now await Fay Weldon to re-appear on Channel Four...)

Some points to consider for Muslims. As has been mentioned by some Muslim bloggers, Holland is not a shari'ah state, where Muslim sensibilities are defended in "public" life. Muslims in Europe, like others, will have to face criticisms and ridicule just as other people, of all religious and political persuasions do. This is not to say we take something we find hurtful lying down. We too can respond by all legal means possible. We need to be more creative in our responses, rather than all fire and brimstone. It will never be easy, but then being a Muslim was never meant to be easy.  As citizens of the state we are implicitly accepting of the obligations and rights in this 'contract'. If we believe living in such a state constitutes a violation of our faith, and do not like this 'contract', then we are required to make preparations leave, for 'God's earth is a vast place'.

Further, what are we objecting to in this film? That Muslim women are not forced into arranged marriages, and do not suffer abuse in Muslim families? Here is what one website, created not by self-flagellating "Progressives", but by Muslim women who commit themselves to the Islamic tradition, says about the issue of abuse:

"Her sexuality is not protected. The sexual abuse of Muslim women and girls is our dirty little secret. Often times, the guilty party will murder the woman or girl to cover up his rape or molestation, rather than risk her talking. Women and girls who are sexually abused have little to no recourse, and no opportunities for counseling and healing [...] To deny women their rights is to deny what Allah and His Messenger have made permissible." (bold in original piece)

I have not seen this film. I do not speak Dutch. I know of no one else, Muslim or otherwise, who has seen this film. The news reports say "Qur'anic script" was written on her body. What is "Qur'anic script"? Arabic written, saying anything, to resemble "Qur'anic script"? (Arabic comes in many different scripts; and the Qur'an is written in different scripts of Arabic.) Though we often say that verifying news is an important act to be performed by a Muslim, the fact is that Muslims are the first to take to half-truths, conspiracy theories and wild accusations when it comes to something we perceive as "offensive" to us.

And what has been achieved by this Muslim who, in his pious delusion, murdered Theo van Gogh? Nothing. (I wouldn't be surprised if he genuinely believes he was doing something worthy of Divine pleasure.)

We are meant to be 'people who think' (as opposed to animals, devoid of the rational faculty); 'people of faith' (faith, an organic, intutitive concept, as opposed to blind belief); people of sober contemplation (as opposed to fanatics who act like drunkards). For years Muslims have been portrayed as wide-eyed extremists who revel in bloodshed. It seems we moderns, inheritors of the Grand Tradition, have learned to mimic this fiction.

Update (14 Nov 2004): Speoy has seen the film, and provides his own thoughts (1, 2). Apparently verses of the Qur'an are shown on the naked body of one of the characters. Does this mean Van Gogh should have been killed? No.

Vaara at Stilt, an American in Holland, has interesting an post regarding the reaction of some 'right-wing' American internet outlets to the murder. Many people will use this as a way of plastering Muslims as the new untermenchen. Americans got angry at a British newspaper trying to "interefere" with the American presidential election. As a citizen of Europe, I am telling these American "journalists" to stop using the hate and violence for their own pathetic political ends.

Dutch extremists use violence against mosques and other Muslim buildings (1, 2, 3); Muslim extremists use violence against churches. I have the feeling this is being blown out of all proportions by the media frenzy. I can only hope I am right.