Regarding The Son of the Sheik: Essay Excerpts

Question: How did audiences receive this movie in the 1920s?

A Big Tent Movie

•Many claim that producers intended The Son of the Sheik for a predominately female audience. But those who make that claim, pointing primarily to Valentino, ignore Banky, who was box office magic, too. About her, the Los Angeles Times wrote on September 20, 1925: “Miss Banky is possessed of a radiant refinement and loveliness. She may indeed be hailed as a truly notable screen ‘find.’ She has a charm of presence and a spiritual beauty that is both charming and captivating.” Whatever 1920s audiences felt, seen today, both Valentino and Banky are capable of appealing to strongly diverse contemporary audiences and would likely have done so in the 1920s too. Valentino may well have appealed to female viewers, but he likely appealed to gay men, too. We tend to

1 forget that urban gays played active roles in movies and in life during the half decade preceding World War Two. That The Son of the Sheik appealed solely to female viewers is nothing but an overblown myth. (Jillian Carlock)

A Colony and Empire Age Movie

Like The Thief of Bagdad, The Son of the Sheik manifests the 1920s preoccupation with a dreamlike, “oriental” middle east. In The Thief of Bagdad, bazaars and markets crowd with people poor and rich wearing fantastical costumes, crowd with princes and imams. In “Son of the Sheik, ” a sheik in the desert saves a damsel in distress. Substitute Stetson hats for burnooses and The Son of the Sheik could pass for a cowboy film. Humans will always be captivated by what is foreign, what is unaccustomed. The new socioeconomic landscape that 20th century colonialism created enabled average people to experience, however vicariously, unfamiliar settings. Movies like The Thief of Bagdad and The Son of the Sheik and other works of the 1920s reflect this. However misinformed those movies were, they demonstrate the fundamental tendency of the human imagination to enter new worlds informed by a perspective shaped in the old. (Quinn Guarino)

Question: What of the human psyche does The Son of the Sheik unleash?

Lust And the Unknown

The Son of the Sheik expresses and triggers the human lust for the unknown. That lust is nothing new. It pervades romantic fiction from The Sheik to Fifty Shades of Grey. Like The Son of The Sheik, Fifty Shades features danger in its plot. Whatever censorious people profess to say, works like these are intensely popular, particularly with middle- aged women…who lust for the unknown. The Son of the Sheik features elements that typically inspire this lust: fiction mixed with non-fiction, real world danger in which the female protagonist is suddenly kidnapped by a man with only sexual intentions; a “mysterious” culture where norms and practices are unfamiliar, a stereotypical “Arabia” where Arabs are represented as brutish and uncivilized; and a brooding, hardy, and dangerous, but sexy, male captor with a veil of intrigue surrounding him.

Why does this package resonate with middle-aged women? Perhaps they desire to break out of the mundane, average life many of them lead. In that case, the unknown danger that these works portray is just what the doctor ordered. The desert location perfectly suits such a story: a remote, lonely location where danger abounds for someone far away from home. The effect just wouldn’t be the same in a forest, for example. E.F. Hull spawned the genre, “the desert romance,” not mean to demean or depict women but rather to enjoy the fantasy as writer and reader.

And then there was Rudolph Valentino. “I am merely the canvas on which women paint their dreams,” Valentino is reported to have said. The film foregrounds Valentino. The

2 narrative treats the journey of Yasmin, but the spotlight lands on Valentinio. And what Valentino ignited in 1926 continues today to smolder. (David Oneacre)

Father and son theme

•There is a strong tension between the [father and son characters, both characters played by Valentino] because they are both strong willed and stubborn. When they fight one another, there is no possible outcome and agreement. We see their father and son relationship becomes stronger when Ahmed goes out to the dessert storm to go after Yasmin because he realized it was a complete misunderstanding. The Sheik worries about his son’s safety, realizing he was going back the town that he created much trouble in, so he decided to go after him. As any father would, the sheik goes in right in the middle of the fight in order to protect his son. The father risked his own life by entering though the storm and into the battle to help his son, who, the father now realizes, shares his mindset.

The outcome is touching. We see them fighting the bad men together and shielding each other from harm in one of the scenes. It must have been the moment when they both realized that they cared deeply for one another and it was better that they worked together then being on opposing sides. (Manny Siyavong)

Kabuki before the silent movie camera

•The facial expressions, the emotion filled acting and body language of Valentino and Banky made me believe that the emotions they enacted on screen were real and genuine. On-screen, the chemistry between Valentino and Banky is absolutely superb. For example, when we see their moonlight encounter at the ruins, Ahmed (Valentino) starts to embrace Yasmin (Banky), but she takes his hands and prevents him from doing so. Undeterred, he lifts her hand and kisses it on the front and back - then her fingers - and from there he places quick kisses all over her face. His over acting, showering her with kisses and tenderly holding her face in his palm, greatly emphasizes his desires and evokes a wild romanticism.

Watch the dance of gestures as they play this scene. Yasmin is obviously taken by him, but we sense something is not quite right as she tries to push away from Ahmed’s embrace, and is hesitant to kiss him. Ahmed, not understanding what could be causing the hesitancy, asks if she were afraid he would fail her. She looks away, then into his eyes - saying nothing. "Why fear me, dearest?" he says. "Love such as mine can do no harm." Again she looks away, but he gently takes her chin in his hand and turns her face back to his, close, and she closes her eyes momentarily delighting in his touch. He tenderly kisses her, and she kisses him willingly, then pulls away. He again turns her face toward his and replies, "I am he who loves you. Is that not name enough?" He kisses her lightly, twice on the lips. She smiles signifying the apprehension has departed. He lifts her in his arms and carries her to a part of the ruins where they can sit and talk of their love.

3 The play of emotions between these two stars in this scene exemplifies what makes The Son of the Sheik so good. In a single scene, the lovers run through passion, apprehension, doubt, tender caring, reassurance, romance and even eroticism. Finally, they are all smiles delighting in each other's company. Through body language, Valentino and Banky convey these emotions to the audience. (Alexandra Urbina)

Question: Is this a "feminist" film?

A Feminist Film

•The Son of the Sheik allowed women of all kinds to express their sexuality and fantasies while still holding true to the idea that they could be strong, and independent. Through the characters of Yasmin, and Ahmed the film is able to perfectly capture the mindset of the 1920’s woman who “wanted it all.” Ultimately The Son of the Sheik helped 1920’s feminist in their struggle to become independent women by showing that a woman could be both sexual, and strong with or without a man by her side.

Viewers saw Yasmin as a female empowerment symbol, a poster child for what the feminist movement of the 20’s was coming to be about. When feminist looked to Banky’s character, they saw themselves. Vilma Banky takes the 2-dimensional female character of silent film and pumps life and meaning into it. Banky essentially created a mix of old and new - combining the appeal of the female character mixed with the braveness and guts of what a male character had. While yes, Yasmin ultimately relies on and falls for the Valentino’ character Ahmed in the end to save her from her kidnappers, she does not do so without fighting with and opposing him throughout the entirety of the film. The importance of opposing men in the film is what makes it a feminist piece, especially for the 1920’s. Yasmin not only opposes Ahmed, but almost all of the men who encounter her in the film such as her fathers bandits, who later kidnap her. Even in those moments of danger, Yasmin is strong-willed and fights back against these men expressing her feelings. Vilma Banky’s interpretation of Yasmin is an important, youthful take on how the feminist movement and women in general were becoming aware, and validating their own sexualities, strengths, and emotions with no shame.

Through The Son of the Sheik, Vilma Banky taught what women could be, while Rudolph Valentino taught what women could have, and it was through these teachings that feminism progressed forward into what we know it as today. Rudolph Valentino was introduced to the American public at a pivotal time, especially for women who were aged after years of oppression from their white male counterparts. Sexism and abuse to women was commonplace in America. Valentino was a breath of fresh air for these feminist women, and had shown them the ways they could be treated— passionately, and in love. It was through films such as The Son of the Sheik that feminism grew to be more about accepting women as human beings who have sexual, and emotional needs, just as men did. It was a validation for women, especially in the 20’s that they were to no longer be seen as mere objects of sexualization, but rather to embrace their sexuality and to use it to fight oppression and gain freedom within society.

4

Vilma Banky’s character Yasmin was seen as a poster child for these feminist women, often flappers. She was fierce, brave, passionate, but also soft, fragile, and in love. She became what so many women wanted to be; strong and independent, but also loved. Banky taught women through the film that they truly were capable of “having it all,” to be able to stand up for yourself in tough times, but to also be soft and loving in tender moments.

The Son of the Sheik was a progressive feminist film. (Jenny Andress)

Rips Reveal The Anti-Feminism of Son of the Sheik

•Costume creates mood and telegraphs what filmmakers intend viewers to feel about characters, places, and the worlds they represent. The Son of the Sheik expresses its anti- feminist lack of respect for women through its use of fabrics and dress. In the opening scene, for instance, the male bandits wear multi-layered outfits, primarily striped. Inherently solid, stripes suggest masculinity. They are clearly dynamic, suggesting some sort of strength and violence. Their costumes initially depict these men as stronger and more aggressive than women and suggest that they will remain so.

The male-strong female-weak language of fabric speaks most floridly in the costumes of Yasmin and Ahmed. When we first encounter female Yasmin, she dances in a skirt that twirls when she spins. Not only are this costume and Yasmin’s motion feminine and soft, the skirt’s tatters convey to the viewer that Yasmin is weak. Taters on Yasmin may make her motion more visually exciting while she dances, but more deeply, they convey that women are weak, since the torn fabric only partially covers the body. In contrast, while Ahmed is being tortured, his ripped white shirt exposes his chest, revealing not his weakness but rather his musculature. His clean, strong white shirt gives him a somewhat savagely masculine feel.

These two moments exemplify how even the way a fabric rips can shape a scene and express an attitude—in this case, the film's anti-feminism. When the costumer designer rips Yasmin’s skirt into strips, he does so to highlight her dancing and to show the delicacy of her skin. He seeks the opposite effect with Valentino’s male shirt. The ripping makes Valentino appear more aggressive, violent, and strong. The two ripped garments convey a clear and strict binary: the male is to be seen as strong, the female is be submissively weak. (Austen Shumway)

A Problematic Movie

•The most prominent memory of The Son of the Sheik I will have, unfortunately, is the almost instantaneous upset I felt upon realizing that I would be watching a film starring exclusively a collection of white actors and actresses in brown face. This emotion then passes into the disgust I felt with the film’s apparent expectation that women, in this film and in life, will and should overlook the abuse to which they are subjected to in order to maintain the perfect image of happiness and the idea that love prevails all, even abuse.

5 Watching this film was a revelation for me, definitely provoking some deep thinking on my part about the influence of cinema on people of the world.

Reluctantly, I acknowledge that I did enjoy some aspects of the movie. I thought that the cinematography was much more advanced than much of the other silent films of the time. It was smooth, had some pretty cool effects, and the music was quite entertaining. The performances of the actors, however inappropriate, were funny and charming and spoke to their personality as well as their skill. So the experience for me was not a totally negative one, and while I have definitely enjoyed the other films we have viewed much more than I enjoyed this one, I would be lying if I said that I didn’t recognize some of the film’s more redeeming qualities. It is a classic for a reason. But would I say that the cinematography in The Son of the Sheik outweighs the extremely problematic values that this movie evinces? No, I would not. (Michaela MacPherson)

Objectified for the Male Gaze

•The Son of the Sheik is no amazing, mind-blowing movie. It is far from something never to be seen again. Themes, characters, and plot devices in this film prefigure many films to follow, whether silent or not. As subsequent movies so often do, The Son of the Sheik portrays female characters as an archetype. As contemporary movies still do, the film objectifies women for the male gaze. Unrealistic, sexualized characters with only the thought of men on their minds (such as Yasmin) then influence real women to perpetuate these fantasies, believing that, as Yasmin acts, so should they. Society then circulates these ideas, afflicting women. The Son of the Sheik is one of the films that inaugurated this trend. The movie even objectifies some men while objectifies women. (Paige Monte)

An Offensive Movie

•Where The Son of the Sheik aimed to offer sexually charged fantasy rather than narrative is where this film is most offensive. The movie and the E.M. Hull source novel were meant to turn women on, as modern erotic novels and romance movies seek to do. Advertisement focused heavily on Valentino because advertisers were smart enough to assume many more women than men would watch the movie. To appeal to this audience segment, director George Fitzmaurice filmed from the viewpoint of the “straight female gaze”— that is, what straight female women want to see. Such viewers could picture themselves as Yasmin. While this goal in itself could be considered extraordinarily feminist for the time period, the specific content of the film turns this potential on its head and makes it into something destructive. The filmmakers must have assumed that everything in the movie, even implied rape, would be sexually attractive in one way or another. The film showed that while women can be somewhat independent, eventually they should be submissive to men.

The sad thing is that this stratagem completely worked. Women were obsessed with the film in very large part due to the forbidden sexuality the film depicted. Writing the source novel, E.M. Hull herself was imagining that a handsome prince would carry her off, and the abusive nature of that prince was undoubtedly part of her fantasy. Of course, it is

6 people’s right to express whatever sexual preferences they want, not excluding dominance and submission. Where that expression becomes a problem is when the submissive aspect of the fantasy is glorified to such an extent. The film, it should be noted, originally appeared in a time period when the subjugation of women by men was a serious social issue to begin with. (Andrew Burgess)

A Cartoon Movie

•The Son of the Sheik resembles an old cartoon: the old sheik and his wife talk about the old days when they met and in a flashback you see that the man brutally kidnapped the woman and you watch as she slowly develops Stockholm syndrome. Because it is pure fantasy, the movie depicts these two older characters as deeply in love, as an almost perfectly understanding couple, when in reality, were they actual people, they would never behave that way. Their relationship would be built on these large falsehoods that would inevitably break down. They serve in The Son of the Sheik to suggest, by precedent, that Ahmed and his captive would similarly evolve from conflict to love. But life doesn’t work that way; fantasy does.

The Son of the Sheik is really Beauty and the Beast version one. Ahmed is this rugged ruthless man, but deep down he just wants love. Beast that he is, he use extreme force and dominance to force affection from an uninterested partner. Valentino’s character doesn’t seem remotely real…. but then, in this movie, except for Yasmin, no one does. (Christopher Lundquist)

Question: What does an individual character or actor or group of characters contribute to this film?

The Character of Yasmin

•Yasmin epitomizes a man’s love and sexual interest. She is beautiful and sweet, innocent yet seductive. Her dancing career is a way for her character to tease not only the other male characters in the film, but men who view the film as well. Ahmed’s immediate infatuation with Yasmin is clearly initiated by her beauty and dancing. Though his friends and colleagues tell Ahmed not to fall for her because of her provocative nature, Ahmed does fall in love with her. When he is tortured and told Yasmin’s love was a trick, he was quick to believe that claim. This temporary hiatus in their love in the narrative ultimately heightens the female audience’s awareness of the danger in the Yasmin-Ahmed romance.

Compared to Ahmed, Yasmin is the weaker character in a physical way and in a political sense, and women will either relate to these qualities or sympathize with her. But Yasmin also represents the powerful effect women can have on men in a dangerous way. That Yasmin has the power to do that to Ahmed interests women. Yasmin and Ahmed have comparable power and capacity to affect the other. Their sexual conflict moves the film along and keeps the viewers engaged in the fantasy adventure…. As a consequence,

7 female viewers fall themselves in love with Ahmed, or more likely Rudolph Valentino. They fall in love with Ahmed and Yasmin’s love as well. They dislike the antagonists. They enjoy and are on edge with the fighting and action. They even are allotted comic relief from the somewhat seriousness of the film. These elements of the satisfy women’s need for excitement and risk and their equal need to avoid real life danger. Witnessing Yasmin’s actions, women needn’t themselves do them. Viewing The Son of the Sheik, women viewers experience vicarious danger and romance. (Cassandra Gossett)

Yasmin Dancing

•The desert setting does it and the character names do it and the storybook street life does it, but most of all, Yasmin dancing evokes the Orientalizing exotic at the heart of this film. With delicate and graceful movements, Yasmin swings her arms and entire body in swift circular movements. As she gracefully waves large, web-like sheets of fabric around her body, the dazzling, dangly jewelry and wispy clothing that she wears parallel her movements. (These aren’t belly dances or tribal dances or any nameable genre of dance: they recall the Loie Fuller-style serpentine dances that evoked the exotic in 1890s movies.) In each Yasmin dance, viewers could encounter the beautiful exotic. Dancing establishes Yasmin as an exotic character. Dancing distinguished her from the viewers in Detroit. Dancing characterizes her a woman of fantasy. The dances and parades and the desert together convey that the characters are fantasy and story, fantastical. (Abigail Lacey)

The eternal “Ahmed”

•The Son of the Sheik is timeless, largely because Valentino is timeless. In this film, Valentino set the standard for commanding lead actors. Lingering shots on his face and body emphasize his raw eroticism. What Valentino really excelled at was commanding his viewers’ gaze. This movie could be set at anytime anywhere and audiences everywhere could fall in love with it all over again. One can imagine the Valentino character, Ahmed, walking away from a club [in some other movie] with gunshots and explosions in the background. Valentino is forever the rich, good-looking son who has the world and any lady he wants at his feet. In The Son of the Sheik, he foreshadows Gable in Gone With the Wind, where Gable, drunk and hateful, picks Vivien Leigh up and heads for the bedroom. Valentino is forever Ahmed, the forbidden and foreign lover. (Eva Maskalenko)

The Original Latin Lover

•Valentino’s passionate acting in the first iconic scene of The Son of the Sheik embodies everything that made him so wildly popular. His face in that scene telegraphs emotion, and his macho flirtation pervades the love-in-the-ruin scene. As Ahmed and Yasmin meet, they caress. Valentino conveys with gesture and faint smile that Yasmin infatuates

8 him, and he sweetly rubs her face with his. He does so repeatedly throughout the film, perfectly embodying the “lover.” His emotional gazes communicate masculine strength on screen. Women could imagine themselves Yasmin and, vicariously, feel romantic passion. Valentino’s commercial success inspired other “sex symbol” movie stars. In his version of Ahmed, Valentino encapsulates the mores of the 1920s at the moment they supplanted the Victorian past. He was Hollywood’s first passionate Latin lover. (Alexa Gustafson)

Eloquent Acting

•When they return to his desert tent, Ahmed believes Yasmin has deceived him. He feels outrage and upset. In her love and devotion to Ahmed, Yasmin feels confusion and desperation, unsure of what she has done. Valentino’s eyebrow lifts and falls. His eyes widen in hopefulness that she loves him, and then they fall, as he remembers that she has deceived him and toyed with his heart. Confused by this subtle expression, Yasmin leans away from him in fear. She cowers like prey to a hungry, vengeful predator. She has no clue what she has done wrong; in truth, she is innocent. But the power of love surges between them—Ahmed’s infused with anger, lust, and vengefulness, Yasmin’s diluted by confusion and desperation to understand. Ahmed presents to Yasmin his scars, the physical symbol of the pain he endured and now carries. But it is not the physical whip scars that Ahmed truly cares about, it is how Yasmin has scarred his heart.

Intertitles generally contribute little throughout most of this movie; through acting, Valentino and Banky convey the characters’ feelings. But in this scene, something very interesting occurs with the intertitles: Valentino speaks, but only after he speaks does an intertitle suggest what Ahmed says. Yasmin pleads and yells, but no intertitle conveys what she says. This may be because Ahmed doesn’t care then about what she has to say. At that moment, none of her words matter to him. None of her pleading or explaining can reach him, and he doesn’t want to understand. The viewer senses what she is saying, how she has remained faithful and that she loves him. But in the heat of the moment Ahmed doesn’t care. He is only able to hear the side of the story he believes, because he has been emotionally hurt. He is so engulfed with his own feelings and his misunderstanding of what has transpired that he wants to be ignorant to the truth. He doesn’t want to listen. Lust, sadness, anger, and revenge drive him. As Ahmed refuses to understand, Yasmin realizes she just can’t make him listen. Both characters, the missing intertitles suggest, have now become blinded by their emotions and their pain.

The scene in the tent fades out, and we, too, are left in the dark. When we return to the tent, both Yasmin and Ahmed are fully clothed. Time has seemingly stood still, though the elder Sheik and his men are approaching the camp. Now it is Yasmin who has been betrayed, and in perhaps the worst way possible. Like the scars on Ahmed’s chest, Yasmin now carries a scar on her body. Neither of the visible scars matters to either of them; what matter are only the scars that cannot be seen. Ahmed, smiling, thinks he has succeeded in his revenge, but he has not. He has only deepened the emotional scars they share. Yasmin reaches for a dagger in which she attempts to stab Ahmed, to inflict a physical scar so that she may also reach her revenge, but Ahmed overpowers him. This is

9 the same dagger which Yasmin later slides to Ahmed’s messenger, freeing him, so that he may bring the truth back to Ahmed.

The action plays intimately on screen as it could never have played on stage. This moment in the movie marks a turning point storytelling. A typical, predictable, familiar story such as The Son of the Sheik tells becomes a groundbreaking, exceptional and groundbreaking human experience. Portrayed this way, the moment feels raw and human. It becomes a truly emotionally relatable experience. In glance, grimace, and gesture, Rudolph Valentino and Vilma Banky convey all that. (Melanie Long)

Weak Women’s Roles

•The unethical depiction of females in The Son of Sheik is a feminist’s nightmare. A feminist stands for the equal rights of women. But this silent film diminished the roles of women when the only women in this film have stereotypical feminine jobs. The women are also incapable of making their own decisions and have weak will power. For instance, Yasmin’s job is to be a dancer. Being a dancer, she takes pride only in her beauty and ability to move and flaunt herself. Her job does not take much effort or intelligence as she just spins around and interacts with men. She is given this task to get money that would support her father’s gambling hobby. Similarly, Diana, the wife of Sheik, is a housewife. She is always seen in the setting of her house. She does not do much but sit around and stare at the photo of the women her husband chose for his son to marry. Yasmin and Diana are not allowed to exercise their intelligence or find their own jobs because they are under the power of men. The men treat these women as glorified objects to look at. Yasmin is a dancing ornament; men pay to see her dance. Diana is a trophy wife; she no longer has kids to take care of so she has nothing to do. All of the house keeping is taken care of by their many servants.

In a feminist version of this story, Yasmin would not be a dancer but rather an equal gang member. She would fall in love with the son of Sheik after they get to know each other. If he were to kidnap her, she would successfully fend herself with the knowledge she gained from traveling with the gang members. Their conflicts would be settled with fights, not rape. Yasmin would be sneaky and dominant and not persuaded by Ahmed’s ring, clothes, and handsomeness. For her part, Diana would be an equal spouse. Instead of waiting at home for her husband to return she would travel with him. When they needed to take to the son of Sheik about his bad behavior, she would hop on a horse and discipline him herself as a strong mother-leader figure. (Dee Tran)

Yasmin, the Bitcoin

In The Son of the Sheik, almost all the male characters monetize Yasmin, exchanging her between herself as a virtual form of currency. Meeting Yasmin for the first time, Ahmed intuitively treats her as a currency equivalent—in return for her favor, he offers her money. When he realizes his goal cannot be achieve through money, he tries his charm.

10 One could argue that Ahmed's feeling towards Yasmin is love at first sight, but for Ahmed, in fact, Yasmin symbolizes a trophy he'd like to own similar to the way his father the Great Sheik claims his mother. Later in the film, after the old sheik leaves, an exchange of money occurs between Ahmed and Ramadan intended to compensate Yasmin. While Ramadan shows disbelief in the amount of gold Ahmed gives to dismiss Yasmin, he completes his task and appropriates Yasmin’s parting fee when she refuses to take it. The treatment Yasmin receives from all male characters identifies her as an inert object of pleasure that can be exchange with wealth. She does not develop or grow as the movie progress. The film is therefore ironic: ostensibly valorizing love, The Son of the Sheik reduces all feeling to money and money equivalents. (Peter Luo)

Pincher, The Double

•Ahmed and Yasmin develop in a clear arc by engaging with every character they encounter. Because he is a minor character, Pincher the Mountebank doesn’t. He is who he is. He is meant to be a funny character, and at first glance, he seems to be in the film only for comic relief. From start to finish, every time he is on screen, Pincher is either creating or becoming the butt of a joke. Right at the film's opening he is seen gambling with other members of the gypsy band, and is laughing and making jokes with them. This continues: he gets a pot smashed on his head, gets flirtatious with a girl at the cafe, and eventually ends up captured, where he pinches the man he's tied to.

What then, without growing, can a minor character like Pincher reveal about Ahmed?

The answer is curious. Many of the predicaments Pincher gets himself into almost seem to mirror the predicaments of Ahmed. When Ahmed is captured, for instance, he is strung up against the wall, unable to move. When Ahmed's companion Ramadan arrives and frees Ahmed, only Pincher is there to try and stop the escape. Pincher attempts to do this in a zany fashion, but he ends up strung up himself and unable to move himself, as Ahmed was. Later, when Ahmed crushes Yasmin's flower, Pincher has an entire flowerpot broken over his head. Pincher’s broken flowerpot seems to symbolize, literally, the emotions that Ahmed feels at the time.

Ahmed and Pincher are both involved in the battle that takes place at the end, where their fates mirror one another. Ahmed, who was before kind and generous, is free from the betrayal and deceit and is now free to do as he pleases. Pincher, though, who throughout the tale has been a comedic gambler and swindler, now finds himself the captive of another. Pincher may be Ahmed’s comic double. (Daniel White)

A Baby Throwing a Fit

•While Valentino and Banky star in The Son of the Sheik, Mountebank #2, played by Bynunsky Hyman, steals the show. His character is entertaining and the main source of comic relief. Without Hyman’s antics, the movie would be dry and dull. When other

11 bandits heave knives at him, for instance, he quivers at the thought that it could have hit him. His whole body trembles while he pleads with the other men to stop. The way the men were throwing and aiming the knives imply that they were not trying to kill him, rather they were messing with him. The audience is able to pick this point up, but all the character knows is that there are knives being thrown at his head. When he attempts to steal coins, the bandit next to him says, “I’ll send your remains home. What’s your wife’s name?” Hyman replies, “I don’t know her name. When I want her, I whistle.” His snarky remarks and his body language make him the most comical character in the film.

When others violently flog Ahmed, Hyman mischievously pinches and poking him. This is comical for two reasons. The first is that whipping is much worse than pinching and poking. Is that really the best he could do? The second is due to Hyman’s physical stature. The other men are large and well built. It makes sense that they would be in charge of inflicting more pain and torture to their hostage. But Hyman is petite. His size limits the damage he is able to cause to Ahmed, which is a miniscule amount.

A little later on in the same scene, Ahmed’s men finally come to rescue him. Hyman was on watch duty and fell asleep. The men saving Ahmed wake him up. In an attempt to escape the situation, he eventually gets caught by one of Ahmed’s men. Instead of killing him, which would have been easy for him to do, they hung him by his clothes from a tree branch, maybe to mimic the way Ahmed was hung against the wall. What really makes this scene funny is the way Hyman reacts to being picked up and placed on the tree. As he did in the opening scene, he shakes his whole body as an infant would as he attempts to get down. This also helps the audience understand how he is feeling since there are no spoken words. After some time another mountebank comes to the rescue and lowers him down. His rescuer is rightfully mad at him due to the fact that he let their hostage get away. Once again being the source of comic relief, he dodges a punch thrown at him by the mountebank and runs into the desert. He gets chased by the other guy and tackled to the ground. This whole incident adds much needed humor to an otherwise serious and plot altering scene. And so he proceeds throughout the film.

As Hyman plays him, his character is a funny witty person but that cannot be all that he is. Every time he gets singled out or put into situations he does not like he opens and closes his hands very quickly forming fists. Did something happen to him to cause him to behave like that? At times his mannerisms were similar to those of a baby throwing a temper tantrum. Imagine Ahmed acting like Mountebank #2. It does not fit him at all and he would look like a fool in the process. Similarly, it is hard to imagine Mountebank #2 copying the mannerisms of Ahmed. Ahmed is someone who is stoic and people look to him for guidance. But Mountebank #2 is incapable of remaining serious for more than a couple of minutes because it goes against his character. By nature he is a funny person incessantly immersed in strange situations, which is what makes him so likable. The little man carries the plot and adds to the story in ways the other characters could not. While he is not the most intelligent or good-looking character, I would say that his role in the movie is just as important as Ahmed or Yasmin. (Erin Cahill)

12 The Clowns

•Characters playing secondary and supporting roles infuse comedy into The Son of the Sheik. They aren’t present to express the tragedy of human consciousness. They’re there to make us laugh. Around the opening campfire, for instance, an unnamed character makes a joke, and his companions torture him for their amusement. Ramadan, the leader of the villains, throws knives at the dwarf’s head, barely missing him but pinning him to a post on either side.

The dwarf, an exaggerated character, consistently jeers and eggs on the other secondary characters. He serves as jester in this movie. His expressions are extreme, he laughs with his whole body, and he jumps up and down and claps with glee when misfortune bedevils another character. Throughout the film, he provides comic relief through slapstick. He is chased, thrown, pushed into water, hung from pegs. He’s a troublemaker. His exaggerated features and small stature make him a target for the other characters’ rage and misfortune. His antics are classics of comedy, such as throwing a banana peel to make someone slip, or having knives thrown at, but missing, a character’s head. There is a scene in which the performers are bringing a circus through town.

A scene with a strongman is typical. The strongman struggles to lift weights, and the dwarf picks one up to hand to him with no effort, showing the strongman is a fraud. In another scene, when Ahmed’s friends free Ahmed from his prison in the ruins, they pick up the dwarf and hang him from his jacket on a branch, where he hangs stuck until the villainous performers find him. When the dwarf gains release, his companions are angry that he failed to stand guard and they chase after him into the desert. The chase scene is sped up, and is very comical. The characters run after each other in circles until they catch the dwarf and throw him into the sand.

Goofy secondary characters such as the dwarf keep the story light and keep the audience laughing while engaging with what, treated otherwise, would be an anguish-inducing story of scorned and misunderstood love. Bouncing in and out of the story, the secondary characters offset the romance with moments of relief and humor. (Margot Keil)

Question: Film craft: what do setting, costume, music, cinematography and genre contribute?

What the desert means

•The most symbolic place within the setting of The Son of the Sheik is the vast desert in which many of the high intensity scenes take place. The audience is first introduced to the desert in the first scene when the performers are sitting around gambling their earnings away. The symbolic quality of the desert is highlighted immediately by the comparison between the emotional emptiness the performers are trying to fill by drinking and gambling and the emptiness of the vast desert in which they are camping.

13 The desert also becomes an important symbol of the intensity of the passion and lust Yasmin and Ahmed feel for each other. After Yasmin and Ahmed meet, Ahmed makes the journey through the desert in order to see Yasmin in private. This act of traveling through the desert expresses both the depth of Ahmed’s immediate interest in Yasmin and the emotional distance between their lives. Ahmed and Yasmin live very different lives. The desert represents the vast unknown aspects of new love. Once Ahmed is told that Yasmin only lured him in for his money, he immediately tempers his love and with hate for Yasmin.

The eerie feeling the desert creates also lends suspense to certain scenes. For example, when Ahmed is caught meeting with Yasmin and is taken by Ramadan and the others they hang him and whip him until he is almost unconscious. Transpiring in a seemingly abandoned and extremely vast desert, this action feels suspenseful: the viewer does not know how long it will take in order for someone to come to his rescue. The vast and desolate nature of the desert also complicates Yasmin’s situation with her father. She is essentially forced to dance in order to make money for her father, despite the fact that it is not what she wants. The desert and the tent in which Yasmin spends most of her time while in the desert are her figurative prison.

Beyond the vastness and desolate nature of the desert, the unpredictability of the desert also plays a large role in the film. During the scene in which Ahmed is told that Yasmin did not use him for his money, and that she really did love him, a sand storm starts. This unpredictability and craziness of the sand and desert complements the emotions of the scene. Ahmed is shocked and overcome with a multitude of emotions, which, for a moment, send him into shock. Once he processes the news he takes off with great speed to go to his love. The changing desert expresses the changing relationship of Yasmin and Ahmed. (Courtney Tanner)

Score

•Just as the score for The Son of the Sheik contextualizes character action, it helps interpret camera motion, too—for instance at 26:38 where the camera performs an amazing pan out revealing Yasmin dancing amongst a crowd. Here her body is gracefully spinning around as she swings cloth about while the score utilizes fast paced stings to give her motion even more character. The score here also complements the camera movement: two fast paced elements, the dancing and the score, harmonize with the smoothly and clearly moving camera. There are many other moments throughout The Son of the Sheik where the score and the camera move together, but this scene is one of the strongest examples.

The score for The Son of the Sheik can also counterpoint on-screen action. There are quite a few moments where I felt almost tricked in terms of how I was supposed to be feeling—for instance, at 33:20. Here Yasmin is clearly in distress and in many ways there is much sexual tension as well flat out desperation. Despite the content of the scene, the score here is soothing. This juxtaposition left me feeling quite confused given how straightforward the music to content relationship is in other scenes. I feel this

14 was done deliberately with intentions of pleasing a certain type of demographic: the female viewer seeking “scandalous” affairs with men. Not very often are we given the opportunity watch a film that shines light on fantasies at least some women may experience. In my opinion, the composer scores very cleverly here. By having soothing music play over this scandalous scene, viewers are induced to regard the situation as less serious than it is. The score behind the whipping scene is similar. At the whipping scene we are told how intense of a beating it is, but during this scene of abuse and deportation we hear a theme suggestive of forbidden love. As complement and counterpoint, the score influences the viewer's experience. (Scott Brawn)

Moonlight

Science fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke's third law states, "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” The same can be said for good filmmaking. No single aspect of The Son of the Sheik is the sole source of its wonder, although the actors' performances do much of the work. There is no formula to what makes a good film. But Fitzmaurice certainly had something going for him with his combination of classic storytelling, strong romantic acting, and beautiful cinematography. The charm of The Son of the Sheik comes not from folklore or fantasy, but from magical moments, such as moonlight dancing atop our lovers' heads as they embrace. They gaze upon each other in prolonged embrace. They kiss with passion at the ruins, before they even know each other's names. "I am he who loves you, is that not enough?" The viewer can almost tangibly feel their love. Seeing them, you feel not the tedium of your life in Saskatoon or Albuquerque. You feel fulfillment and joy. (Jake Peckar)

Narrative Structure

•Love stories do and can exist on their own but, without elements of another genre, very rarely are love stories popular and successful. The Son of The Sheik blends genres, starting with the bad guys, a group of criminals who operate an entertainment service. The first scene shows them playing cards, violently throwing their cards down and fighting over the game with each other. They are reckless with knives. They are immediately very physical with one another. They grab each other, yelling and screaming, proceeding to a knife throwing game in which swords are thrown at one of them. But there is no sense of danger from these potentially dangerous characters. Instead, they are rather amusing and funny in their action. Only after the criminals perform does Yasmin, the dancer girl, enter. When the son of the sheik eventually encounters her, he loves her at first sight. The film thus juxtaposes comedy and romance. It opens as action comedy and then proceeds to romance. Without the comedy, the romance wouldn’t work half as well as it does. Movies of any genre must include aspects of other genres to be successful. Even the darkest include comedy. Light movies include sad and dramatic moments. Combining genres keeps viewers involved. (Dylan Gigure)

• This Movie As A Narrative Structure

The Son of the Sheik structures traditional romance elements into the three-act format that typifies movie narrative. In Act One, Ahmed and Yasmin meet each other and

15 develop a liking for each other. In Act Two, they become estranged when the bandits poison Ahmed’s mind with false stories of Yasmin’s perfidy. In Act Three, the climax, Ahmed learns that Yasmin did not betray him at all, marshals the will to fight for his love, and aggressively re--wins her. A beautiful silent film, The Son of the Sheik is demonstrably a damsel-in-distress romance film enriched with elements of melodrama. Ahmed is protagonist. The bandit gang is antagonist. The shortest member of the gang contributes laughter. Beginning leads to the middle conflict and ultimately to the conclusion of the story. The film demonstrates all stages of classic movie narrative. (Dynnaro You)

The Never Ending Story

•My favorite moments in this archetypal film were the desert shots, with the characters riding on horseback through the sands (my personal favorite frame being the final frame of Ahmed and Yasmin on horseback). These shots took my breath away because of the sensational landscape that went on for miles. There were no huge elaborate castle sets or computer-generated cityscapes. All that was needed was a desert. These frames subtly influenced future epic films. From The Son of the Sheik derives the scenery, costumes, and tone of 1962 desert epic Lawrence of Arabia.

The Son of the Sheik made me realize something. Story arcs recycle. They have recycled for centuries. They will continue to recycle until the world is through telling stories. The Son of the Sheik narrative foreshadows the storyline of hundreds of films made after it. It reflects hundreds made before it. People love stories, no matter how familiar they may be. People do not mind that the hero might always end up with the girl or the bad guy loses in the end. They like the battle sequences. They like the romantic tension. They always will. These tropes are timeless. Whatever media storytellers use in the future, their stories will continue to derive from the ancient stories. The Son of the Sheik influenced Lawrence of Arabia, Lawrence of Arabia influenced Titanic, and Titanic influenced Pearl Harbor, (among many others). Creativity cycles. Art begets art. The Son of the Sheik is a gear in the clock of cinematic storytelling. (Matt Dorado)

The Romance Movie Formula

•The Son of the Sheik and Pretty Woman are movies of two very distant generations that convey a similar message of romance and what it means to find true love, even if the journey is controversial. In The Son of the Sheik as in Pretty Woman, the wealthy male protagonist fights, the wealthy male protagonist wins, and in the end, he saves the formerly promiscuous girl and inevitably saves himself. Each man looses what he loves before he gains it back, learning thereby how important the woman of his dreams really is. In each, a physical scrimmage ends with an emotional one. The silent movie romance of Ahmed and Yasmin set the pattern for romance films like Pretty Woman in decade to come. The two movies are variants on the same story, a story that can be told a million

16 different ways and still strike a glisten of hope in the eyes of the audience. At the center of each is the dream that the heroines live—the dream of falling in love with someone who is way out of your league and getting the life you deserve after working harder than anyone could imagine. (Vyctoria Oliveira)

The Romance Movie Invented

•The Son of the Sheik established the use of “sex objects” in a romantic film.

A romantic film is made up of a few key components. The first component is two people in love. For The Son of the Sheik, casting directors chose wisely by picking two of Hollywood’s most glamorous stars. In Valentino, the casting directors sold good looks and a notoriously promiscuous screen persona. Filming him in good lighting, highlighting his well defined body and emphasizing his masculinity, the camera and the film in general gave the audience what they were asking for - sex appeal. Highlighting all of these things, the film establishes Valentino’s character as a sex object. Yasmin loves him, but the audience loves him, too. Valentino was then well known and his fame derived from the fact that he was good looking and charming. Cast as the handsome prince who would steal the heart of a girl, Valentino was given the opportunity to show off how strong, powerful and convincing of a lover he could be. His sexual presence made this movie what it was and what it is today: a success.

Paired with Valentino was Vilma Banky as Yasmin. Blonde and beautiful, Banky won the hearts of audiences everywhere. The camera treats her as it treats Valentino: high key shots, blatantly sexualized camera angles that exaggerate their respective masculinity and femininity. Banky plays Yasmin, an exotic dancer who travels with a group of thieves. She dances for money and, the bandits falsely tell Ahmed, lures men into traps such as the one she accidentally leads him into. The film depicts her as a ‘sex object:’ men lust for her, trade her and kidnap her. They see her as an expression of pure sexuality.

Eventually, both characters transcend their sexuality. Though she may not always be successful, for instance, Yasmin claws her way out of numerous sticky situations and redefines herself. These moments where Yasmin fights back help the audience recognize her humanity and realness. Ahmed, too, has moments of change and asexual authenticity. When he behaves, temporarily, villainously towards Yasmin after kidnapping her, he is darkened and deepened. As he becomes more dangerous, he becomes more individual. Hate for each other offsetting love for each other, the desert prince and the dancing girl become more human.

A good love story just takes two good, real-seeming people. A really fantastic love story includes two beautiful and well-known people, intrinsically flawed, who have to fight against not only societal pressures but also each other. That is precisely what happens in The Son of the Sheik. Two pop culture sex objects become believable people. The Son of the Sheik is the mold for countless subsequent romantic movies. (Maggie Mahoney)

17

Question: What does this movie say about Islam?

Islam In The Son of the Sheik

•The film opens with a rough group of men sitting around and playing cards and pushing each other around. One man threatens the small man saying that he’ll chop him up and send him to his wife. The action depicts savagery. The small man’s response to a question about his wife’s name is: “I don’t know her name. When I want her, I whistle.” This line depicts the misogyny that is often thought of by people who are not familiar with Muslim culture. The thieves then put the smaller man against the wall and proceed to throw knives at him.

It is a very comical scene. Although I found the line about the name to be quite funny, modern audience might response worse as women’s oppression is actually a big problem in the Islamic religion. Hollywood films have not changed much since this scene from 1926. In many films that involve the Middle East and Muslims, middle easterners are often depicted as dangerous savages and misogynistic. Being a huge supporter of the film industry, I am not looking at this as a bad thing; I am merely saying that this is still prevalent today.

Now not everything that is being depicted about the Islamic culture is negative in this film. Although the Valentino character is not actually an Arab, he plays a very heroic and powerful character that we are rooting for throughout the entire film. He’s passionate, strong, smart, and pretty likeable (besides that one rape scene). He is a character that we know and see in every generation of filmmaking: a strong male who saves the day and the woman. But something that we see in this film as opposed to contemporary films is that Ahmed, who is the offspring of a Christian Englishman and a Christian Spanish woman, may practice Islam. Looking back to this year's mainstream films, we do not have really any main heroic characters who are Muslim. And this could be because there is not a large relatable audience in the U.S., or unfortunately because of all the anti- Muslim movements we are seeing in this country right now. But one thing is for sure: the writers and director could have done a similar story using any other culture but, commendably, they chose this one instead.

Although many aspects of Hollywood have changed, there are still many similarities in The Son of the Sheik’s depiction of Islamic culture and contemporary depictions of it. We still see depictions of savagery and misogyny used in many films involving Muslims, just on a more extreme scale. Hollywood still casts actors in roles that should probably be played by someone of the correct religion or race that they are trying to portray. To someone like me, this is not that important, but I know to a lot of others it is a big deal and it is still not being addressed properly. It is important to recognize that the Yasmin character, a woman in an Islamic culture, can still be powerful in The Son of the Sheik

18 even if the culture oppresses women. Yasmin is a very influential female character of the 1920’s. Although many aspects of the Islamic religion are not accurately represented, there are still some very positive aspects of the culture that the film does represent. (Ben Grant)

A Whitewashed Movie

•When first viewing The Son of the Sheik and The Thief of Bagdad, I found myself captivated, like most others, by the story and the way the characters were interacting, by the scenes and sets, and by the emotions the actors and actress were able to silently. However, the "whitewashing" of some of the characters, stereotypes, and slight inaccuracies in how the movies depicted culture and religion reminded me of how Islam and Middle Eastern countries are depicted in media today—frequently in a negative light, or rarely in a positive one.

Take a closer look at The Son of the Sheik (1926), directed by George Fitzmaurice. The story is exciting and emotional, however, some things about the characters in this film rubbed me the wrong way. Our main character Ahmed, is of Arab descent but is played by Rudolph Valentino, who is an Italian born actor. Although Valentino is not necessarily a Caucasian actor, he is still playing a character of Arab descent, when the director could have probably hired someone who was Arab or from a surrounding country. Yasmin, the dancing girl and love interest, is part of a group of Arab thieves, yet she is portrayed by Vilma Banky, a Hungarian-American actress. Is the presence of any foreign actor or actress as strong as a real person from the part of the world depicted in the film? The answer depends, in part, on who the actor is, but I believe casting Arabs in Arab roles would have added another dimension to the movie, such as most likely being the first to depict real Arabs in a silent film, not just “white wannabes.”

Although Valentino and Banky do a beautiful job becoming these fictional characters, who are undeniably in love and are eventually believably hurt by the other's actions, why didn’t actual Arabs play those roles? Caucasian actors and actresses also portray the other characters in the film as well. If the premise of your film treats a romantic fantasy among Arabs, wouldn’t it make sense to hire Arab actors to add another layer of authenticity to the film narrative?

Similarly, why did the characters so frequently resort to violence? Was it because of their “Arab” values? Was it because Ahmed and the thieves, as males, regard women as mere objects? The answer, I think, is a mix of several things. Ahmed and Yasmin really did love each other at first sight, but as soon as Ahmed believed he was being deceived, he resorted to attacking the bandits, kidnapping Yasmin, and raping her. It’s as if the director and writer, I think, wanted Arabs and other Middle Easterners to come off as violent, savage beasts. And regardless of anyone’s intention, the film can definitely be read in that manner.

Despite the whitewashed characters and the stereotypical depictions, I enjoyed to the fullest both The Son of The Sheik and The Thief of Bagdad (which treats Islam better)

19 and would definitely re-watch them in the near future. I just wished there was more representation of our people, meaning Afghans, Arabs, Iraqi, Iranians and so forth, in film, actor-wise, and maybe even director-wise. Casting a non-native to dress and speak like a Middle Easterner, in my opinion, is unsatisfactory. (Sarina Sherzai)

Editor’s note: Ahmed is not Arab. Yasmin is not Arab. Ahmed is European. In Hull’s novel and in The Sheik, the precursor to The Son of the Sheik, Ahmed’s father is the offspring of an English noble and a Spanish woman. Ahmed’s father was abandoned in the desert and raised by an Arab chieftain. In The Sheik, this character marries the English woman, the Agnes Ayers character who, in The Son of the Sheik, is Ahmed’s mother. Ahmed may or may not practice Islam. Yasmin’s father is André, the Frenchman who leads the bandits. Yasmin is therefore at least partially European. (Her mother is not identified). Yasmin may or may not practice Islam. Frances Marion, the woman who wrote the scenario, does not settle that question.)

Question: What do contemporary viewers make of this film? What should they make of it?

A Profound Movie

•Rudolph Valentino and Vilma Banky star in one of the greatest silent films portraying the depth of love between such polar opposite individuals. A beautiful young dancer named Yasmin falls for a man she knows little about. His sanguine character and successful attempts at romance captivate the woman. The story however is multi-faceted. As a relationship develops between the mysterious son of the sheik and the dancer, events draw them apart. A member of the entertainment party Yasmin travels with decides to capture the young man and torture him endlessly. When the young sheik’s freedom is regained, he is falsely led to believe that the woman he loved betrayed him for her own means. A repugnant man, who was promised Yasmin’s hand in marriage, became enraged at her affair with another man and sought to end their romance. Yasmin’s father, who also happened to be the leader of the group of entertainers, forbade his daughter to pursue relations with the mysterious man she loved. As a result of the miscommunication, chaos ensued. Solely with her expressions, Yasmin conveys the strongest feelings. No words are needed to voice the rage and confusion she feels. The son of the Sheik makes the decision to kidnap the dancer and hold her hostage as a form of revenge. His intentions are misguided by his anger and his judgment clouded by the falsities fed to him. The son of the Sheik plans to keep Yasmin in his household as a personal slave. His thirst for revenge and desire to see the dancer suffer are of paramount importance to him.

As a woman, my heart went out to Yasmin. I wanted a resolution for her. Her face conveyed despair at the realization that her one true love had become her one true enemy. With the understanding that she would no longer be loved or believed, she tried to cope as best she could and do whatever was necessary to ensure her safety in his presence. In a missing five minutes Ahmed presumably physically assaults Yasmin in sexual manner.

20 When the scene resumes, the actor is seen feeling ashamed at his actions, but proud of his ability get his way and cause great displeasure on Yasmin’s part. Yasmin acts as a sensible woman would. She cries, lashes out at his existence and tries to regain the strength the compose herself. When I saw this scene in particular, a certain string in my heart was pulled. I felt a sorrow that good had not overcome evil and poor Yasmin was left to suffer and be at continual unrest with her thoughts. Any viewer should reasonably be angered at the boldness of the actor’s character, but more importantly, should be disgusted that a love so powerful should be crushed by a simple lack of communication.

As a whole, The Son of the Sheik represents the unfathomable hardships of love and the length at which individuals will go to restore unity. The film uses emotional reference to guide viewers through the scenes and navigate the storyline. The characters of Rudolph Valentino and Vilma Banky stimulate a level of emotional anxiety and complexity that is unparalleled by any other film in the history of movie making. Their intense over dramatizing way of acting convey the most meaningful but unspoken dialogue. The film establishes the symmetry of hate and love.

Ultimately, the Sheik and Yasmin’s characters demonstrate profundity. They approve each other. Aloud or silently, the audience cheers the outcome. The film captures and displays an amazing narrative that successfully brings to the surface the problems faced by people of every race, class, and gender at all points in history. (Noelle Canha)

A Racist, Sexist Film

The Son of the Sheik has several major weaknesses. It inaccurately and harmfully stereotypes Arab cultures. It centers around a rather unrealistic romance featuring rape. It therefore perpetuates attitudes that are both racist and sexist by today’s standards.

Consider how racist is the film’s representation of Arabs. The Arab characters are portrayed as brutish, violent crooks throughout the film, not, apparently, because they happen to be that way as individuals, but because that is how, the film represents, people in their culture are. The movie grossly generalizes about an entire subset of people. The Arab characters are mostly either members of a band of traveling criminals, or working under the sheik, who is actually an English man. The members of the troupe of vagabonds kidnap the Sheik’s son, Ahmed, for ransom, whip him, and lie to him, saying that Yasmin, the daughter of one of the members of the troupe and the girl Ahmed fancies, only said she had feelings for him as bait. These characters serve mainly as antagonists. They are sometimes comical characters but more often foolish or otherwise incompetent. The Arab characters aren’t even played by actual Arab actors: white people who’ve made their skin look darker play them. This casting decision grossly misrepresents an entire group of people, rendering invisible the real people who are actually part of Arab culture. The film essentially uses this group of people as entertainment. It appropriates their culture.

Consider how sexist is the film’s representation of gender. The film is the sequel to The Sheik, another film based on the best selling romance novel by E. M. Hull. The original

21 novel might be regarded as a progressive piece for its time period in some ways, as it was a novel by a woman, with a strong-willed female character who has her own goals as the main protagonist and a plot surrounding her sexual and romantic feelings towards the sheik. Hull’s novel was widely popular among female readers of its time for these reasons. But The Son of the Sheik film differs importantly from Hull’s novel: in the film, the act of rape means something quite different from what it means in the novel. In the novel, the female lead and her inner struggle to realize her feelings for her captor are the focus (this isn’t an accurate portrayal of a healthy romance, but she is the focus nonetheless). In the film, however, the female lead, Yasmin, struggles little with her feelings for Ahmed. She immediately falls in love with him, only falling out of love with him when he mistreats her because he believes she has wronged him. She takes him back as soon as she learns he has been deceived, even though he has grossly mistreated her. The focus of the film is not at all the female protagonist. The focus of the film is Ahmed, the male aggressor, who has to save the poor dancing girl from those she works for (the brutish troupe of Arab criminals). Essentially, the film takes the small part of the book’s plot that makes the story almost progressive for its time and gets rid of it.

Worse yet, the film also portrays deeply unhealthy and unrealistic relationships as romantic and loving. In the middle of the film Ahmed rapes Yasmin. Later on, after he finds out she didn’t deceive him and then goes on to rescue her from her employers, it is as if this never happened, and he never mistreated her. Some may argue that it may not have happened, as it took place off-screen and isn’t outright addressed, but as it unambiguously occurred in the source material and is pretty heavily implied to have happened, it seems distortive to suggest it may not have happened. The film then fails to thoroughly address the rape, and in doing so essentially excuses it.

Just because Yasmin still loves Ahmed in the end doesn’t make his action OK. The film’s failure to address this feeds into unhealthy beliefs that rape may be excusable under certain circumstances, leading people who may have been raped to potentially feel as though the violation of their bodily autonomy was okay, that it was their fault, that they ought to just accept it and stay with their abusers, and vice versa. Ahmed raped Yasmin once, and, realistically, once they're married there would be little stopping him from doing it again if he was upset with her once more. Yet in the film their relationship is played as loving and romantic. That portrayal perpetuates unhealthy views of how healthy relationships are. Ahmed and Yasmin’s relationship cannot be healthy.

As responsible twenty-first century viewers, we must acknowledge and discuss these problems within The Son of the Sheik so that we can create new media that doesn’t give voice to so many harmful ideas in the future. The film The Son of the Sheik is not a socially conscious and healthy film. (Laura Vautrinot)

Contemporary Reception

•Those who would deplore [The Son of the Sheik] today will be those who do not see a fantasy but, just a nightmare… Those people would see Ahmed … as just a monster who kidnaped someone, not a suave Latin lover as he was seen in 20s. Others who are

22 against this film would say that his action are barbaric and should not be the example that men look at when they watch the film, since that behavior may influence people to act the same as Ahmed, which could lead to even worse problems. Not only would people respond to the romantic and sexual fantasy, but they would also deplore how the movie portrayed culture, race and gender. The film suggest that men should be tough and ruthless while woman are just damsels in distress. Contemporary people do not think that for the most part and I believe some would be out raged with how the characters portrayed gender in the film.

When The Son of the Sheik first came out, the world was very tiny place. For actors there was not a lot of diversity, it was difficult to go to other places to understand their culture and attitudes about gender and race. In the 20s Hollywood would use blackface, so that they could have an excuse not to hire a person of color in their films. The Son of the Sheik seems no to be no different. They used primary a white cast, like they did with most film. Even today Hollywood is still doing that with movies like Exodus and God of Egypt. If The Son of the Sheik were made today would it [not] be as successful as it was in the 20s if they were to do the same with the casting. I believe that people would reject it because both movies previously mentioned were flops in part because the cast was “white washed.” (Natalie MacK)

“My task …is… to make you feel--it is, before all, to make you see.” [Conrad]

•The point of film is to connect and to feel. Connecting to a romantic film is magical, and is why so many people love films. Precisely because they are silent, romantically inclined silent are often open to a lot of interpretation. You are able to see what you need to see in the characters and the story. You can connect no matter when the film was made, because love will always be forever and a fantasy will always be fantastical. The Son of the Sheik tapped into the ideals of a woman’s fantasy by creating characters that were relatable but at the same time out of reach and impressive to the viewer’s mind. With the use of on screen chemistry, wonderful actors, and a story that was well thought out, the film was very successful in creating the danger and romanticism of a fantastical love story.

I see a lot of myself in Yasmin, not that I am a struggling dancer or that my life is being controlled by men, but that I have given so much of my heart to someone, and I understood Yasmin’s hurt when the man that she thought loved her back betrayed her. Seeing Ahmed come back for her made me think about how magical it would be if the man that I lost suddenly showed up and wanted nothing more in life that to simply be with me. (Katherine Newman)

A Feeling for Which People Live

•I think this movie is beautiful and engaging and I can’t wait to read the book. It is a classic love-at-first-sight love story that appeals to many, including me. Lovers meet in ancient ruins as Romeo and Juliet do. You can feel the chemistry in the scene. Yasmin feels that she doesn’t deserve love. As Yasmin and Ahmed kiss in the moonlight, thieves lurk around the corner, menacing them. This is the stuff dreams are made of.

23

I praise The Son of the Sheik while acknowledging numerous features of the film that bother me. Characters—for instance, the bandits—behave and talk in sexist ways. Yasmin is that shopworn thing—a damsel in distress. She eventually excuses even her own abject abuse. She begs Ahmed to forgive her, in essence, for nothing, for something she did not do. The film condones even rape (when committed as an act of mistaken revenge).

But, more importantly, this movie shows a type of romance that I think all women strive for in their life, romance that is full of passion and excitement. I love that you can feel instantly when you know you’ve met the right person it hits you like a bolt of lightning. The Son of the Sheik lives because it ignites a feeling for which people live. (Kalynn Denton)

Boy Meets Girl

•In classic romance style, Ahmed and Yasmin—achieve in the end what they ardently desire. But in the 2009 film 500 Days of Summer, the lover fail to achieve happiness, and viewing that film, I felt more. The Son of the Sheik takes a very traditional approach, while 500 Days of Summer constitutes a much more modern (and pessimistic) take on an innocent “boy meets girl” type of love story. The modern approach works better for me. (Nicole Granat)

Woman, Eternally Betrayed

•In The Son of The Sheik (1926) as in Saul Dibb’s The Duchess (2008), a female protagonist experiences love and betrayal. In both films, the woman is a victim. In The Son of The Sheik, Yasmin’s father uses her as bait to lure men and eventually rob them. In The Duchess, the Duke uses Georgiana to bear him sons. Both women are treated poorly. Each is raped. Each is intrigued by a man with power, only to soon to realize that these men aren’t what they seem to be. Both are stripped of their freedom and contained by men they thought they loved. Both women experience betrayal by someone they cared for, but each eventually learns to deal with it. If one film takes place in North Africa and the other in the late 18th century Britain, the female protagonist in each meets an identical fate. (Student 1)

“That” Scene

•I am assuming the scene that was cut out from the original movie was a rape scene. Is rape ever appropriate to show in movies? Were silent movies more permissive—or less permissive—than movies are today?

I believe that depictions of rape do not belong in a film of any period. In The Son of the Sheik, the male takes it upon himself to rape the leading lady character because he was angry with her. We do not actually see the entire scene. There are questions as to what exactly transpires in that room. It could be a number of things from an argument to abuse

24 to rape. My mind went through everything. But ultimately I concluded that it was in reality a rape scene.

Why must a movie as good as The Son of The Sheik includes a rape scene? A rape scene in a romance fantasy movie such as this is quite surprising. An extremely heated argument might have sufficed. I wonder, therefore, about how controversial this film was when it first came out in the 1920’s. Did 1920s people express anger about the rape scene? Were strong female characters less important or popular in the 20s than they are today? Did the director, or writer, want to dumb down the strong female presence in the film?

Moviegoers and critics today might shun this movie. Sexual abuse is definitely something talked about in contemporary movies but filmmakers now generally resolve it. But in The Son of The Sheik, Yasmin, our leading lady simply forgives Ahmed when they find out the truth behind why they were turned against one another. Disturbingly for me, Ahmed faces no consequences for his action. In movies today, rapists do face consequences. Without consequence to him, Ahmed demeans Yasmin, demeans her character, and demeans every other woman (or man) out in the world. His action might inspire others to act as he does.

The Son of the Sheik was a very well put together movie. Absent the sexual politics of that scene, I would have enjoyed it a lot more than I did. For a film of the 20s, it has a very modern feeling. No one overacted. Minus the scene in which Ahmed rapes Yasmin, The Son of the Sheik was a wonderful love story. (Jordan Goodman)

25