CPSA 2017

May 31, 3:45-5:15 PM, VIC-106 (Victoria Building)

Panel: Post-9/11 Interventions and Inventions

Muslims of Interest: Practices of Racialization in the Context of the War on Terror

Danielle Blab

McMaster University

Abstract:

This paper reflects on the findings of my doctoral thesis; defence in April 2017. My dissertation analyzes and codes all Muslim characters in programs that featured Muslims as main and recurring characters in American dramas and comedies from 2001 to 2015, according to an intersectional framework that is interested in race, gender, class, and sexual orientation. This large corpus of study – 18 television programs and 277 Muslim characters – reveals important trends in the tropes or stereotypes according to which ―Muslim-ness‖ is performed. Muslims are represented according to four major tropes: the villain/terrorist; the ―Good‖ (patriotic) Muslim; the Friendly Cultural Stereotype; and the Muslim victim. While villains/terrorists and other ―negative‖ representations account for about half of this corpus, only 10 per cent of the total are considered ―positive‖ portrayals that also defy stereotypes to instead present Muslims as complex individuals who are as nuanced or developed as their non-Muslim counterparts.

In a context in which Islamophobia and hate crimes against Muslims are on the rise in Canada and elsewhere, and in which it is possible for an American presidential nominee to propose banning Muslims from entering the United States – representations of Muslims matter. As per the assumptions of Popular Culture and World Politics, pop culture is taken as both reflecting and reinforcing foreign policies and broader political and societal attitudes. This paper also looks at portrayals of Muslims in American television programs in 2016 – including ABC’s Quantico – to reflect on continuity or changes in very recent portrayals of Muslims.

Introduction: Dissertation Findings

A major contribution of my dissertation (Blab 2017) was the empirical contribution of studying performances of ―Muslim-ness‖ in American television programs (dramas and comedies) in a very large corpus: covering a fifteen year time period (2001-2015) and nearly 300 individual characters. Taken as a whole, representations of Muslims in American television programs are very gendered and racialized: 90% of Muslim characters are of (often ambiguous or fictional) ―Middle Eastern‖ providence, and the

1 majority of these (70%) are ―Middle Eastern‖ males.1 These demographics are despite the fact that, in reality, the demographic make-up of the global population of Muslims is much more varied, including the largest national population in Indonesia, along with large Muslim populations in India, and various parts of Asia and Africa, not to mention large convert and diasporic populations all over the world, which means that a ―Muslim‖ can be of any background and appearance. Despite this, ―reel‖2 Muslims tend to reflect racialized assumptions including ―Brown‖ skin; real or implied ―Middle Eastern‖ provenance; the use of the Arabic language; and other tropes in costuming decisions, set dressing, and so on.

―Negative‖ portrayals remain consistently prominent throughout this period, reflecting half of the corpus: 41% are portrayed as terrorists and other kinds of villains, along with another 9% that are variously ―negative‖ characterizations. Terrorists/villains are overwhelmingly characterized along gendered and racialized lines, as 86% are men and 87% are of ―Middle Eastern‖ origin. In a few cases, the latter group of ―Miscellaneous – Negative‖ characters (9% of the total) transcend stereotypes in a meaningful way, including complex, nuanced that are as developed and no more or less flawed than their non-Muslim counterparts (e.g. Brother Mouzone on The Wire).

The ―Good‖ patriotic Muslim, meanwhile, is an unambiguously ―positive‖ portrayal. The ―Good‖ Muslim almost always identifies as Muslim-American and is usually a counter-terror agent. The ―Good‖ Muslim is defined by their rejection of terrorism – particularly terrorism justified on religious grounds – and their loyalty to and love for ―America‖. However, despite their ―goodness‖, the ―Good‖ Muslim’s motivations remain no more developed than those of the Muslim terrorist and they remain flat characters. Because the ―Good‖ Muslim retains unalterable ―otherness‖ on the basis of their ―Muslim-ness‖, they remain trapped in a loyalty paradox: the ―Good‖ Muslim condemns terrorism and is solely defined by their loyalty to ―America‖, and yet this loyalty is the one thing about them that can never be trusted. As such, the ―good‖ Muslim is vulnerable to racial profiling and accusations of supporting terrorism, and occupies an uneasy liminal space as having a dual identity according to which they can neither truly belong as either a ―Muslim‖ or an ―American‖.

Performances of Muslim-ness are gendered and racialized in a number of ways. Muslim women of ―Middle Eastern‖ origin are most likely to be portrayed as victims, and particularly victims of ―bad‖ Muslim men, many of whom are portrayed as terrorists. Muslim men who perform the trope of victimhood are more likely to be victims of racial profiling or Western discrimination, whereas women are comparatively under-represented

1 ―Middle-Eastern‖ is a deliberately broad and problematic term used because, as discussed at greater length in the dissertation, most of the programs racialize Muslims according to a constructed ―Middle Eastern‖ identity that collapses everywhere from Morocco to Pakistan as of fairly homogenous ―Middle-Eastern‖ provenance. This often includes fictional countries, which may be stand-ins for real countries, or composites thereof. Furthermore, ―Middle- Eastern‖ characters are often played by actors of any background, most often of South Asian descent, who are deemed to fit the expectations of racially profiling Muslims. As such, because most programs do not distinguish between ―brown‖-skinned Muslims of varying origins and collapse them into the same group, it is not useful to try to distinguish the different origins here, especially because the origins of Muslim characters are sometimes unspecified and/or fictional. 2 To borrow Shaheen’s (2009/2001) term – he contrasts ―reel‖ (i.e. cinematic) Arabs with ―real‖ Arabs.

2 in these sub-categories of victimhood. ―Middle-Eastern‖ women are also frequently portrayed as victims of sexual and/or spousal violence. White women who are converts to Islam, meanwhile, are predominantly portrayed as terrorists: although this is a negative rather than sympathetic portrayal (as compared with the portrayals of Muslim women as victims), White Muslim women who are terrorists show considerably more agency and tend to have more prominent roles in television programs than their victim counterparts.

Another trope is that of the ―Friendly Cultural Stereotype‖, which is predominantly male and exclusively composed of persons of colour. Television programs depicting the ―Friendly Cultural Stereotype‖ poke fun at American/Western ignorance about Islam and Muslim cultures, and tend to be ―buddy comedies‖ that make jokes based on superficial cultural differences such as clothing, but reveal that beneath these differences the characters share the common condition of humanity and learn to appreciate what they have in common rather than focusing on their differences. Although these tend to be ―positive‖ and well-meaning portrayals, characters performing this trope tend to be under-developed and little more than cultural caricatures.

Approximately 10% of Muslim characters in the programs studied are ―positive‖ portrayals that also transcend stereotypes (classified in the research as ―Miscellaneous – Positive‖3). These characters represent meaningful resistance to stereotypes and reductionist assumptions about Muslims. These characters are not necessarily ―positive‖ portrayals in the sense that they are always ―good‖ or ―moral‖ characters, but rather they are nuanced and often flawed characters that are no less complex or even problematic than their non-Muslim counterpoints, and whose characterization is not primarily negative. For example, Lost’s Sayid is an important example of a non-stereotypical Muslim: although he has a dark and violent past as an Iraqi torturer for the Republican Guard, other characters on the show have similarly problematic histories, and Sayid’s character is more strongly defined by his courage, compassion, kindness, and natural leadership capabilities. Community’s Abed is another well-known example of a character who defies stereotypes of Muslim-ness because, although his character is explicitly revealed to be a Muslim of Palestinian and Polish parentage, his main character features (i.e. his obsession with popular culture and difficulty relating to others) are independent of and not reducible to his Muslim-ness.

The dissertation studied all American programs (dramas and comedies) that aired between 2001 and 2015 that featured Muslims as main and/or recurring characters. The programs included in the corpus were the following:

3 The classification of ―Miscellaneous – Negative‖, as noted above, is used for characters that do not perform stereotypes, but who are difficult to consider as ―positive‖ representations. ―Miscellaneous – Minor‖, meanwhile, refers to characters who do not perform stereotypes, but whose characters are so minor and/or underdeveloped that they do not clearly distinguish themselves in any way, either as a stereotype or as a ―positive‖ or ―negative‖ portrayal.

3

24 (The) Grid Sleeper Cell Aliens in America Homeland (The) Sopranos American Crime Lilyhammer Tyrant (The) Blacklist Lost (The) War at Home Bones Mr. Robot Whoopi Community Shameless (The) Wire

The breakdown of Muslim characters across these programs is indicated in the table below; characters are coded according to the tropes they perform, as well as gender and ―race‖. Some characters are cross-listed as they perform more than one trope; as such the total number of tropes performed is greater than the number of unique characters.

Total Characters4: 277

Trope Total % of ―Middle- ―Middle White White Other Other total Eastern‖ Eastern‖ men women men women men Women Villains 119 41% 91 12 6 5 5 0 Misc. – 25 9% 23 0 0 0 2 0 Negative ―Good‖ 35 12% 29 4 0 0 2 0 Muslims Friendly 7 2% 5 2 0 0 0 0 Cultural Stereotype Victims 58 20% 30 26 1 1 0 0 Misc. – 28 10% 11 11 0 1 2 3 Positive Misc. – Minor 16 6% 11 3 2 0 0 0 TOTALS 2885 100% 200 58 9 7 11 3 % of total 70% 20% 3% 2% 4% 1%

These proportions are also illustrated in the chart below:

4 Total number of unique characters. Numbers in the chart add up to a great number because some characters are cross-listed; the chart below reflects the number of tropes performed. 5 This number is higher than the total number of individual characters listed above the table because a small number of characters are cross-listed across more than one category.

4

Tropes of Muslim-ness

Villains Misc. Negative "Good" Muslims Friendly Cultural Stereotype Victims Misc. Positive Misc. Minor

This paper provided an opportunity not only to reflect on the above findings of the dissertation, but also to explore programs that fell just outside of the time frame of the dissertation, which only covered seasons that had finished airing by the end of 2016. As such, this paper looks at the third and final season of Tyrant; the eleventh season of Bones; third season of The Blacklist; and the first season of Quantico.

The research questions guiding this paper were: In what ways are the portrayals of Muslims in these programs consistent with or divergent from the trends explored in the dissertation? For programs of which earlier seasons were studied in the dissertation (The Blacklist, Tyrant, Bones), in what ways do character portrayals remain consistent or evolve in the 2016 season? As a new program, does Quantico resist and/or reinforce existing tropes? The rest of the paper is devoted to a discussion of each of these programs.

Tyrant, Season 3

The first two seasons of Tyrant were included in the dissertation’s corpus, but the third season, which aired in 2016, fell out of its range. This third and final season (the program was cancelled; its storytelling is left unresolved) adds some very interesting dynamics to the program and its portrayals of Muslim characters.

Tyrant is a rather unique program among American television series that portray Muslims because, not only is it set outside of the United States, in the fictional Middle Eastern country of Abuddin, the majority of its characters are Arab Muslims. Tyrant performs many problematic tropes of ―Arab-ness‖ and ―Muslim-ness‖ – such as with the swarthy, violent, sexual predator and titular ―tyrant‖ Jamal Al-Fayeed who is the primary antagonist for the first two seasons. However, Tyrant also opens opportunities for complex portrayals of Arab Muslim characters due to their prominence in the storytelling. The third and final season of Tyrant is a particularly meaningful addition to the initial (2001-2015) corpus of television series because it complicates and even reverses a number of the character portrayals in the first two seasons.

First and foremost, the main character Bassam ―Barry‖ Al-Fayeed evolves in a dramatic way. In the first two seasons, Barry performs the trope of the ―Good‖ Muslim: although a Muslim Arab from Abuddin, Barry had lived in exile in the United States for

5 the twenty years preceding the start of the series. Not only is he culturally Americanized, he is physically distinguished from his counterparts – particularly his brother Jamal – in Abuddin: while many men such as Jamal are darker-skinned, swarthy, and hairy, Barry is fair-skinned, handsome, blue-eyed, and hairless (and is in fact played by White actor Adam Rayner). Throughout most of the series, Barry represents ―Western values‖ and sensibilities: he counsels restraint instead of violence; democracy instead of authoritarianism. He also treats women with affection and respect, in contrast with his violent brother, who is, among other things, a serial rapist.

In the third season, Barry’s narrative arc shows how power can corrupt even the most ―moral‖ of individuals. Barry is a reluctant leader who becomes the interim president of Abuddin with the support of thousands of protesters who see him as the face of their revolution and hope for a democratic future in Abuddin. He asserts that he has no desire to remain president of Abuddin and calls an election in a six-month timeframe, and works towards a sustainable democracy by initiating at Truth and Dignity Commission in an effort to heal the country from the violence and corruption of its past. In a rather contrived storyline, Barry’s daughter is murdered by a villain and member of the ―Caliphate‖, Ihab Rashid, to whom Barry had previously shown mercy and saved his life when Ihab was gravely injured. From this point onward, Barry is primarily driven by revenge and starts ignoring the advice and democratic ideals of his friends and supporters. Reflecting the tropes of many American counter-terror programs, the ―bottom line‖ and his primary objective becomes fighting Islamic extremists: the ―Caliphate‖, the program’s stand in for ISIS/Daesh (as prompted by the murder of his daughter). This character development is also reminiscent of other cases that show that even ―Good‖ Muslims can go bad: perhaps the best example of an altruistic ―Good‖ Muslim is Sleeper Cell’s Darwyn Al-Sayeed, whose arc concludes with a revenge plot to punish those responsible for murdering his girlfriend. In both cases, ―Good‖ Muslim men are driven to rage and violence by the death of a woman they loved. By the end of the third season, it becomes clear that Barry is the now the Tyrant of Abuddin, despite his initially good intentions.

As Barry increasingly shirks the role of democratic leader, his best friend and fellow ―Good‖ Muslim archetype Fauzi Nadal carries on this mantle and shoulders the moral burden that he and Barry used to share. Fauzi is initially favoured by both Barry and Daliyah (discussed below) to be the progressive and secular candidate in the upcoming election. As he is seen to carry on Barry’s legacy and benefit from the momentum of the revolution in Abuddin, he is widely favoured as the front-runner in the election. However, as Barry increasingly favours authoritarian methods to maintain stability in the country and to fight the ―Caliphate‖ in order to serve his revenge mission, he and Fauzi increasingly clash. Fauzi remains true to his ―Good‖ Muslim character and openly defies Barry and challenges him for betraying the democratic ideals for which Barry had previously fought. Fauzi remains steadfast and moral and speaks truth to power – even when the one in power is his best friend.

In the third season, Daliyah Al-Yazbek increasingly becomes, along with Fauzi, the moral compass of the show. Throughout the second season Daliyah primarily performed the (gendered) trope of the Muslim victim: the second wife of a poor Bedouin man, she is nearly killed and then kidnapped and (nearly) raped by Caliphate leader Abu

6

Omar. She is eventually rescued from her imprisonment by Barry. Largely through her association with Barry and having escaped her sensational captivity at the hands of the Caliphate, Daliyah becomes a popular hero and is called the ―Mother of the Revolution‖.6 Due to Daliyah’s popularity and respect among the people, as well as Barry’s affection and romantic feelings for her, he appoints her as head of the Truth and Dignity Commission. There are some notable class dynamics at play here, as powerful women such as Leila Al-Fayeed – the wife of the previous ―tyrant‖ Jamal and now aspiring presidential candidate – and Barry’s wife Molly Al-Fayeed question Daliyah’s suitability for such a role on the grounds that she is an uneducated woman from a poor Bedouin village.

Nevertheless, not only does Daliyah rise to the occasion and competently perform her role as head of the commission, like Fauzi she refuses to sacrifice her ideals and challenges Barry on his anti-democratic behaviour – first privately, and eventually publicly. Although it was Barry himself who gave her the platform to be seen as a moral authority on politics and power, he ultimately regrets her ability to speak against him and, at his wife’s urging, has her arrested. Daliyah remains strong and goes on a hunger strike in order to continue to protest Barry’s abuse of power. However, Daliyah also avoids the trap of the trope of the ―Good‖ Muslim because she is not solely defined by her selfless commitment to democracy and liberal values: her plot arc also involves her affair with Barry, as well as her guilt and conflicted feelings about having an affair with a married man (who is the president, no less). Daliyah’s development in the third season is notable for her transition from performing the trope of Muslim victimhood towards being a more fully developed character whose portrayal goes beyond reductionist stereotypes (and thus is now also coded as ―Miscellaneous – Positive‖).

The character of Leila Al-Fayeed7 also develops as a more complex character. In the original corpus based on the first two seasons, Leila is classified as a villain: she is the wife of the titular ―tyrant‖ and, although she loathes her husband, her top priority is maintaining and increasing her own power and position of privilege for herself and her son Ahmed. In the third season, she is humanized through her affair with American General Cogswell, a relationship which shows a softer and more vulnerable side to this Iron Lady. Although she still seeks power and joins the race to become President of Abuddin, she increasingly appears more compassionate and less ruthless. She remains pragmatic, most notably in forming an alliance with religio-political leader Sheikh Al-Qadi.

Skeikh Al-Qadi is an addition to the cast in season 3; this character is the leader of an Islamist political party which appears to represent the Muslim Brotherhood. Al-Qadi’s portrayal is refreshing as a Muslim cleric who is not a terrorist and who appears to be committed to a democratic process, as well as a political version of Islam. In most of the programs studied, there is little room for Muslim characters to be politically engaged

6 This is strongly reminiscent of the real life Tawokkal Karman, a Yemini human rights activist, journalist, and politician who became known in Yemen as the ―Mother of the Revolution‖ and won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2011 for her role in the ―Arab Spring‖ uprisings in Yemen in 2011. 7 The character of Leila is reminiscent of real-life wives of dictators, most notably Leila Trabelsi, wife of deposed Tunisian dictator Ben Ali, who was much criticized for her family’s role in corrupt Tunisian politics, as well as for her lavish lifestyle.

7 outside of the two opposite ends of the (apparent) political spectrum: either as violent terrorists, or as staunchly secular embracers of ―Western‖ liberal values. Al-Qadi, meanwhile, is a religio-political leader who largely appears to be an even-handed good man. In his political speeches, he preaches non-violence and resistance against corrupt political processes. In his personal life, he is a loving husband and father; he even forgives his wife after she nearly poisons him (as she, herself, takes a more radical position and allies herself with the Caliphate terrorists who want him killed for refusing to join him). Al-Qadi is also pragmatic and forms a political alliance with Leila Al-Fayeed.

The above discussion focused on the most prominent characters that were developed in the third and final season of Tyrant; however, this is not an exhaustive list, and additional work on the program will benefit from further study of other characters, including the previously established stereotype-breaking character of Halima, a political activist who is gradually disillusioned with Barry as a political leader, and who struggles against the gender norms of her society. This season of Tyrant also provides an opportunity to expand in greater depth on the program’s portrayal of queer Muslims through the introduction of Professor Haitham Al-Amin, who becomes the lover of Sammy Al-Fayeed (the son of protagonist and President Barry Al-Fayeed). It also introduces additional stereotypical villains who reinforce common stereotypes, such as Caliphate leader Sheikh Abdullah. Overall, Tyrant provides various examples of both resistance to reductionist stereotypes of Muslims and problematic reinforcing of such stereotypes.

Bones: Arastoo Vaziri

Bones’s Arastoo is perhaps the longest-running Muslim character on American television. He first appeared in the show’s fourth season and stayed on as a recurring character until the show’s twelfth and final season, which aired in early 2017. The dissertation corpus included up to the 10th season, and the updated corpus adds the eleventh. Throughout the first several seasons of Arastoo’s appearances, he largely performs the trope of the ―Friendly Cultural Stereotype‖: he is initially treated with hostility and, at best, bemusement, by his colleagues for his Muslim-ness. He is mocked for his religious beliefs which his colleagues presume to be incompatible with his profession as a scientist (S05E04), and is treated with derision and annoyance for his practice of praying multiple times a day, including while he is at work (e.g. S04E17). He is initially presumed to be homophobic and conservative (S04E17), and even accused of supporting terrorism (S04E24). Arastoo initially even fakes a ―foreign‖ accent because he has found that people tend to question his religious beliefs less if he appears to be a recent immigrant to the United States (S05E04).

Despite this initially hostile work environment, Arastoo proves himself to be the very soul of kindness and generosity. He educates his colleagues about his religion. Like other characters who perform the trope of the ―Friendly Cultural Stereotype‖ such as Raja on Aliens in America, Arastoo’s character arc largely involves being first treated with hostility; then with curiosity; and ultimately learning that despite his cultural difference with the other American characters, they’re ultimately ―not so different‖ and have more in common than there are differences between them. Arastoo bonds with his most hostile

8 colleague (and eventual close friend) through his ability to perform acceptable ―American‖ masculinity by proving that he is an avid baseball fan and athlete (S05E19). He regularly affirms that his ―Muslim-ness‖ is of a sort that is progressive and compatible with ―American‖ values: although the program has little to do with the ―War on Terror‖, on multiple occasions Arastoo condemns terrorism (e.g. S08E06) and affirms his love for the United States (e.g. S10E06). In the show’s 10th season, Arastoo returns to his native Iran and appears particularly liberal and open-minded through being contrasted with other conservative and rather ―backwards‖ Iranian Muslims (S10E19).

However, Arastoo also increasingly has storylines that have little or nothing to do with his Muslim-ness. For example, it is revealed that he writes poetry in Farsi on themes of ―love, freedom, democracy, sex‖, and much of which is deeply romantic and erotic (S08E07). He has storylines that centre on the fact that he is an ambitious scientist in the early stages of his career, and thus seeks to become a published author in scientific journals (S07E09) and sometimes has to make difficult decisions between his career and his personal life (S11E02). Arastoo is increasingly portrayed as a well-rounded character defined by much more than his Muslim-ness due to his romantic involvement with Camille Saroyan, a series regular, which begins in season 8. This relationship creates opportunities for development of Arastoo’s personality and background (including his family) in ways that include but are not limited to his Muslim-ness. In season 10, Arastoo begins to express his desire to be a husband and a father, and by the end of the 11th season of Bones, Arastoo and Cam become engaged.

The extension of the corpus to include the 11th season of Bones, which aired in 2015-16, shows a continued development of the character of Arastoo. Notably, this has resulted in Arastoo’s cross-listing as a character that transcends tropes of Muslim-ness (Positive – Miscellaneous), in addition to performing the trope of the ―Friendly Cultural Stereotype‖.

Quantico, Season 1

Quantico’s first season aired in 2015-16 and as such was not included in the dissertation’s corpus. This update includes the first season; a second season aired in 2016- 17 and the series has been renewed for a third season. These additional seasons will be useful for future research and updates, but the following discussion is limited to the first season.

Quantico’s main cast includes twins Nimah and Raina Amin who are training for very special missions: the twins are to go into the field posing as a single person. This has the strategic benefit of being able to constantly have an agent in the field, while the twins can swap in and out and thus provide regular updates to their handlers. This also adds challenges to their training as they have to master all of the same skills as their colleagues, but also match each other in every way. The twins are originally from Lebanon and their family settled in Dearborn, Michigan, which is well-known in the United States for having a particularly large Muslim population. Their family is Muslim, although the twins express different levels of religiosity. Raina is very devout: she wears a hijab, performs the five

9 daily prayers, and does not consume alcohol. Nimah, meanwhile, is not very religious, prefers to not wear a hijab and consumes alcohol.

These portrayals and particularly the differences between the twins are a promising addition to the landscape of American television which tends to reinforce various stereotypes about Muslim and Arab women. Firstly, there are common misconceptions that Muslim women are inherently oppressed by their cultures and religion and that veiling, including but not limited to wearing a hijab, is a sign of oppression (e.g. see Abu- Lughod 2013). For some viewers, the detail that Raina prefers to wear a hijab, while her sister Nimah prefers not to, may be surprising and is a topic that is rarely addressed on American television programs.

However, Quantico also reflects some negative and reductionist stereotypes about Muslims, particularly when it is revealed that Raina – the more religious sister – has become sympathetic to the terrorists whose cell they have infiltrated. Although (at least within the first season) neither twin appears to be actually involved with terrorism and have not flipped from counter-terror agents to the other side, it is problematic that the devout Muslim character becomes sympathetic to and even falls in love with the cell leader (S01E10). Despite this disappointing turn of events, Nimah and Raina Amin are notable examples of Muslim women who are prominent and much more developed than most female Muslim characters. It is particularly important that they are complex characters with varied interests and character flaws, but who do not perform any of the common tropes associated with Muslim characters. Although they are government agents who work in counter-terrorism, they are not under-developed ―Good‖ Muslims who are unproblematically motivated by love for ―America‖: instead, they are flawed individuals who have doubts about their work and the institutions and superiors they serve. Despite Raina’s sympathies for terrorist leader Hamza, neither twin embraces simplistic ideologies or participates in terrorism. As such, although there is room for critique, the characters of Nimah and Raina Amin on Quantico are notable examples of resistance to stereotypes of Muslims in American pop culture.

The Blacklist, Season 3

The first two seasons of The Blacklist were included in the dissertation’s corpus. As such, the corpus includes the character Dembe Zuma. Dembe is classified as ―Miscellaneous – Negative‖: this character does not perform stereotypes associated with ―Muslim-ness‖ and is an important example of resistance in that sense, despite the fact that it is difficult to code him as a ―positive‖ representation because he works closely with a notorious and violent criminal. Dembe himself is described as a ―good‖ man who is loyal to infamous criminal Raymond ―Red‖ Reddington because Dembe owes him a life debt: after Dembe was a victim of human trafficking and forced into prostitution as a child, Red saved him and saw to his education and welfare (S02E06). Dembe resists violence for the sake of revenge (S02E06), but through his work for Red does regularly kill people (typically other violent criminals) and is involved with the drug trade (e.g. S01E20) and other harmful criminal industries.

10

The third season adds a bit more detail to Dembe’s character: we learn that Dembe has a daughter and granddaughter when his daughter’s baby is kidnapped by individuals who want to capture Dembe as part of a larger plan to get to Reddington (S03E01). As the kidnappers expected, Dembe is ―a man of [his] word‖ and turns himself over in order to ensure the return of his granddaughter and the safety of his family (S03E01). As previously established, the fact that Dembe’s loyalty to Red is matched by Red’s affection for Dembe is further reinforced by Red’s concern for Dembe when he learns that Dembe is missing: ―Dembe is more than an associate to me. Please find him‖ (S03E04). FBI Agent and protagonist (along with Reddington) Elizabeth Keen is also shown to be very fond of Dembe, such as when she invites him to her wedding (S03E17), in a gesture that is accepted and appreciated by Dembe. Otherwise, Dembe’s role continues to primarily consist in quiet and reliable assistance to Red. Although Dembe is very stoic and a man of few words, he does speak his mind to Red and challenges Red if he feels that he is making a mistake; however, he does not push the issue when Red (politely, but firmly) rejects Dembe’s intervention into a matter (e.g. S03E16).

Meanwhile, Samar Navabi’s religious identity is ambiguous throughout the series: she is from Balochistan, a predominantly Muslim area in Iran, but she is also a Mossad agent, and a Jewish identity would have made her a more obvious target for recruitment. An oft-quoted exchange in the series is the following one with Aram Mojtabai, another character whose personal religious identity also remains ambiguous:

Samar: Where I come from, fear is the only deterrent.

Aram: I’m from Delaware. No, I’m just saying. I’m actually half Jewish. Well, a quarter, really. Half-Muslim too, so... But...who’s counting? (S02E03)

Particularly as Aram refers to both Jewish-ness and Muslim-ness, it appears that he is primarily referring to his ethnic background, and it is unclear with which religious identity he identifies, if any. Additionally, it is unclear if the common ground he is trying to establish with Samar – on whom he has a crush, which often causes him to babble in her presence, as in the above exchange – is based on a shared Jewish identity, Muslim identity, or both. In one episode, Samar quotes a verse of the Qur’an in Arabic to a captor to encourage him to be merciful and not to kill her and her colleagues (S02E09). While this could stem from a Muslim identity, it could also be explained by her Iranian origins and her training as a Mossad agent, as well as a pragmatic motivation to appeal to her captor’s humanity. In another episode, Samar displays deep knowledge of (Christian) Bible verses as well (S03E05), so it is clear that she is well-versed in various religious texts and traditions.

Season 3 certainly expands Samar’s character and sheds more light on her background. In one episode (S03E07), we see a flashback to Samar and her brother Shahin as children in Tehran in 1992 when they found their parents murdered; Samar appears to be wearing a hijab, which tends to imply Muslim-ness, although is not definitive as, not only do various non-Muslim groups also cover their heads, but head covering is enforced in Iran. Her brother is revealed to be a major (Islamic) terrorist leader, so it is likely that their family was already Muslim before he was radicalized, but it is also possible that he

11 was originally of a different faith before he became involved with terrorism. Samar and Shahin have the following exchange:

Samar: There’s nothing noble about what you’re doing, Shahin. Our parents would be ashamed.

Shahin: Our parents had no shame. They were cowards.

Samar: How can you say that? They died for speaking the truth.

Shahin: You’ve been fooled. You turned your back on Iran, joined Mossad.

Samar: Shahin, they killed our parents.

Shahin: Our parents brought death upon themselves. And we suffered for it. They betrayed us. Betrayed our country. (S03E07)

Unfortunately, the audience is not given further detail on why their parents died and what ―truth‖ they spoke. It is certainly implied that they were critical of the regime in Iran, but it is difficult to be sure of the exact context of their resistance, including whether the family was religious and Muslim; secular (and perhaps Muslim); or of another religious group (Jewish or otherwise). In another episode, Samar describes herself as ―A Jewish mother. Part of my Mossad training‖ (S03E13); the context of this quip is a colleague’s bemusement when Samar is eager to throw a baby shower, which seems to be dramatically out of character for Samar, whose main characterization depicts her as a hardened, no-nonsense Mossad agent. The prospective baby shower allows us to see a softer and more maternal side of Samar, although she appears to be speaking figuratively as, as far the audience knows, she does not have children. As such, her quip about being a ―Jewish mother‖ could refer to her cultural context of having spent many years in the Mossad as much as it could refer to her religious identity. As such, Samar’s religious identity remains ambiguous and she is not formally included in the corpus of explicitly Muslim characters.8 However, her portrayal is certainly a noteworthy and nuanced portrayal of a Middle Eastern and specifically Iranian character on American television.

Meanwhile, Samar’s brother Shahin, a.k.a. Zal bin Hassan, is revealed to be a ―Lieutenant in the Quds force of the army of the Islamic Republic of Iran‖, and a perpetrator of terrorism, rather than an innocent (deceased) victim of a terrorist attack, as Samar has previously believed. As is the case with most portrayals of Muslim terrorists, Shahin’s motives are never made very clear, although he is known to be an ―enemy of Israel‖ and is responsible for killing more Mossad (Israel’s national intelligence agency) agents than anyone in history (S03E07). Shahin turns out to be an infamous terrorist who is responsible for attacks such as a bombing of a synagogue in Buenos Aires four years previous, as well as the attack in Pishin, Iran, in which Samar believed her brother had perished (S03E07). Although Shahin speaks generally about his devotion to his country,

8 Referring to the first three seasons. It remains possible that future episodes may resolve the question of whether or not Samar should be counted in a corpus of portrayals of ―Muslims‖ on American television.

12 his justification for engaging bombing civilians – apparently primarily targeting not only Mossad agents but Jewish civilians – remains unexplained.

The third season of The Blacklist includes an episode (S03E04) focused on an Iranian Muslim family that touches on a number of tropes associated with Muslims and the Middle East, most notably on the theme of homophobia. In this episode, the ―Djinn‖ is a criminal who enables their client’s darkest fantasies, including to ultimately seek their own revenge on their father: ―Allah teaches us forgiveness, but some things are unforgivable‖ (S03E04). The plot revolves around Nasim – a hijab-wearing woman9 – torturing their father, Bahram Bakhash, for having forced them to undergo a sex change operation: Nasim was born as Nasir, and identified as a gay man. Nasim also harbours resentment for having been denied their birthright to succeed their father in the leadership of his company; Nasim’s brother Hamid notes that it was Nasim, rather than himself, who deserved this role: ―It should have been you running the company. The bias. The prejudice. He should have seen past it‖ (S03E04).

It is series protagonist Raymond Reddington who reveals that Nasir (now Nasim) was ―a perfectly healthy boy‖ and calls Bahram a homophobe for rejecting a gay son, and a ―Butcher‖ for cutting off his penis to have a daughter instead. Bahram grounds his homophobia – but acceptance of transgendered identities – in religious beliefs:

Bahram: Clerics accept…people can get trapped in the body of the wrong sex. The law says—

Nasim: I wasn’t trapped. I liked my body. I liked men.

Bahram: I wanted to protect you, Nasim. They could have killed you.

Red: For being gay. They’re so homophobic that being gay is a hideous crime, but chopping off a man’s penis isn’t? Honestly, is it just me, or is the human race, armed with religion, poisoned by prejudice and absolutely frantic with hatred and fear, galloping pêle-mêle back to the Dark Ages? Who on Earth is hurt by a little girl going to school or a child being gay? Let’s be frank, Bahram. You didn’t change your son to protect him. You changed him because he disgusted you.

Nasim: You violated my body without my consent. You sliced out my identity and discarded it as waste. You cursed me to live the rest of my life as a second-class citizen, despite being a first born son. (S03E07)

There are a number of notable and problematic elements in this scene. Beyond the heavy-handedness of the dialogue, it is curious that it is Reddington – an outsider who is not part of the family, and himself a criminal that sees himself as having a strong moral

9 The program’s use of pronouns and gender attributed to Nasir/Nasim are rather problematic; in present day, Nasim is referred to as a ―woman‖ and with the use of the female pronoun, including by Reddington, who is the one who reveals that Nasim was born a man and identified as a man, who was forced to undergo a sex change operation to turn their body into one read as female. Nasim dresses in ways that are coded as ―female‖ (including wearing a hijab), but affirms that they identified as a man and was happy in a man’s body. Since it is not confirmed which pronoun the character prefers, this paper favours the gender neutral ―they/them‖.

13 code – who makes the primary intervention in condemning homophobia. Although Red’s speech against sexism and homophobia is meant to be universal and not limited to Iran, the Middle East, or Islam, the link he draws between religion and prejudice strongly evokes narratives of homophobia as a key feature of Islam. When he says ―they’re so homophobic…‖ it is not clear exactly to whom ―they‖ refers: Religious clerics in Iran? Iranian society? All Muslims? It is important to note that there is no intention here to deny that violent homophobia is an important element of politics and society in Iran and elsewhere, but that sexism and homophobia are certainly not exclusive to Muslim cultures and countries.10 Discourses emphasizing ―their‖ sexism and homophobia are also implicated in constructing the ―West‖, and particularly the United States, as a bastion of equality, whereas there are also problems of sexism, homophobia, and transphobia – along with many other forms of hatred and discrimination – in the United States and elsewhere.

The dialogue also touches on sexism in Iran and other Middle-Eastern countries as part of Nasim’s tragedy is not only the forced sex change, but going from a position of privilege – ―a first born son‖ – to a position of subordination, of being a ―second-class citizen‖: a woman. This episode appears to seek to challenge sexism and particularly homophobia, but also problematically relies on tropes or short-hands about Muslims in order to make this possible: homophobia, as grounded in religion, is largely taken for granted, with sexism as a related feature of a society so clearly condemned as ―backwards‖.

Conclusion

This paper presented an opportunity to study programs that fell just outside of the timeframe of my dissertation. It was useful to look at the third and final season of Tyrant, particularly as the program continued its general trend of both reinforcing certain problematic stereotypes, but also resisting these stereotypes – often in contradictory ways. In particular, the characterizations of Bassam ―Barry‖ Al-Fayeed, Leila Al-Fayeed, and Daliyah Al-Yazbek evolved in noteworthy ways that diverged considerably from how their characters were portrayed in the preceding season(s). It will be interesting to expand on this program in greater depth in future research.

On Bones, the character of Arastoo is so well established that the inclusion of additional season did not create any sudden divergence, but it did help to confirm that although the character long performed the trope of the ―Friendly Cultural Stereotype‖, Arastoo has also evolved into a more complex character that also transcends limiting stereotypes.

On The Blacklist, the characterization of Dembe remained stable and the character of Samar Navabi remained ambiguous as to her religious identity and thus whether or not

10 As discussed at greater length in the dissertation, contrasting how ―they‖ treat ―their‖ women, as well as their ―gays‖ is a key feature in sustaining discourses that assume civilizational differences between the ―West‖ and the ―Muslim‖ world, as famously evoked by Huntington’s theory about a ―clash of civilizations‖ (1993). For more information on Us/Them distinctions, see Said (1979; 1993; 1997/1981); for discussion on the use of gender in such narratives see Abu-Lughod (2013); for discussion on homonationalism and discourses that frame the ―West‖ as civilized and the ―East‖ as barbaric based on gay marriage and other indicators of LGBTQ+ rights, see Puar (2007).

14 she should be included in this corpus. The third season also provided two episodes that focused primarily on Muslim characters in plots that problematically reinforce certain tropes about Muslims without providing much nuance to these issues: first, the story of Nasim/Nasir Bakhash that revolved around their father’s homophobia that lead to a forced sex change surgery (S03E04); and secondly, the story of Samar’s brother Shahin Navabi, who is a terrorist with unexplained motivations that are apparently taken for granted due to his commitment to the ―Islamic Revolution of Iran‖ (S03E07).

Quantico is a new program (which began in 2015-16) that has certain problematic elements, but is also encouraging as a site of resistance to tropes about Muslim-ness in its portrayal of complex Muslim characters. Nevertheless, Quantico’s ability to challenge tropes about Muslims remains constrained by its embeddedness in the War on Terror and its relation to Islamic terrorism, which is the reason for which the twins are seen as such valuable assets to the FBI. Quantico does well to illustrate how Muslim women can differ dramatically in terms of their religiosity, mode of dress, consumption of alcohol, personality and interests, and so on. However, it remains tied to positioning Muslims in terms of either terrorists or counter-terror agents, and thus does not contribute to an important gap in popular culture: the portrayal of Muslims as ―regular‖ people outside of the context of (counter)terrorism.

The addition of television programs that aired in 2016 (or 2015-16) provided some additional insights and examples of both reinforcing and resisting stereotypical representations of Muslims – often within the same programs and in contradicting ways. It will be interesting to continue to expand this corpus further. In addition to including the 2016-17 seasons of Bones, The Blacklist, and Quantico, a study of the programs that aired in 2017 should be quite interesting as there was an unprecedented plethora of programs focusing on or featuring Islamic terrorism. Since 9/11, there has typically been one major program focusing on counter-terrorism that heavily, although not exclusively, features Muslim terrorists: 24’s initial run was from 2001 to 2010 (and it returned for a mini-series in 2014). Homeland, meanwhile, premiered in 2011 (unofficially filling the space vacated by 24) and has been renewed up to an eighth season; as the sixth season aired in early 2017, Homeland will likely remain on the air until at least 2019. Although the timeline of 24’s run was occasionally punctuated by mini-series such as Sleeper Cell and The Grid, in 2017 Homeland was joined by multiple primetime television programs featuring counter- terrorism and/or Muslim terrorists, including the second season of Quantico; a spin-off of 24 called 24: Redemption; and a revival of Prison Break, which is set in the context of the current civil war in Yemen, and heavily focuses on the role of Islamic terrorist groups such as ISIS in this conflict. In future work, an exploration of these simultaneously- running counter-terror thrillers is expected to yield valuable insights.

15

Works Cited

Abu-Lughod, L. (2013). Do Muslim Women Need Saving? Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Blab, D. (2017). Muslims of Interest: Practices of Racialization in the Context of the War on Terror (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). McMaster University.

Huntington, S. P. (1993). The clash of civilizations? Foreign Affairs, 72(3), 22-49.

Puar, Jasbir. (2007). Terrorist Assemblages: Homonationalism in Queer Times. Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press.

Said, E. W. (1979). Orientalism. New York: Vintage Books.

Said, E. W. (1993). Culture and imperialism. New York: Vintage Books.

Said, E. W. (1997/1981). Covering Islam: How the media and the experts determine how we see the rest of the world. New York: Vintage Books.

Shaheen, J. G. (2009/2001). Reel bad Arabs: How Hollywood vilifies a people (updated edition). Northampton: Olive Branch Press.

16