"

Unveiling the Cultural Body

Bianca Bulley
Honours

Contemporary Aesthetic Debates
KVP400
Andrew McNamara




A charm invests a face
Imperfectly beheld.
The lady dare not lift her veil
For fear it be dispelled.

But peers beyond her mesh,
And wishes and denies,
'Lest interview annul a want
That image satisfies.

"A Charm Invests a Face." Emily Dickinson (1830-1888).

#
In 2011 France enforced a national ban on the wearing of face covering items of
clothing in public, a political move in direct opposition to the wearing of the
Islamic veil commonly known as the burqa. This decision has since sparked
heated debates and controversy, especially considering the small minority of
French Islamic women who actually wear the burqa. On the one hand, French
leaders argue that its use goes against French ideals of womens rights, equality,
and freedom, on the other hand Islamic leaders argue that a ban discriminates
against the Islamic religion and women who wish to wear the burqa. In this
paper I will explore the burqa as the site of an intensely ideological dispute. As I
will show, this dispute intersects across questions of national, cultural, gender
and religious identity. I will begin by presenting a brief historical overview of the
veil that highlights its symbolic value across various cultural and geographical
contexts. In the second half of the paper I will draw on cultural theories put forth
by Leszek Kolakowski, Gyorgy Markus and Slavoj Zizek to argue that the
banning of the burqa in France is driven by a culturally normative value
judgement, however I will also show the defence of this judgement is prone to
paradoxes. For the purpose of exploring the constructs of European liberalism I
will specifically look at cultural normative value, or as philosopher Gyorgy
Markus (1994, 17) defines it as, [a] normatively valid, internally binding claim.
In light of this I will also look at Zizeks identification of Eurocentric value
judgements within the actions surrounding the burqa ban and finally
Kolakowskis argument for maintaining cultural identity. Through my analysis I
will show that the cause of European liberalism is itself one that relies on a series
of cultural veilings and that the politics of dress is alive and well in contemporary
France.

Artefacts and statues have allowed anthropologists to trace the use of veils
through the history of Europe back to 2500B.C.E. (Whitman, 2011, 28-30). While
the veil has a well-established utilitarian value throughout history, it has also
been the bearer of diverse symbolic meanings. These have included purity,
social status and specific religious divisions. The veil is often used to mark
gender as well. The earliest known written mention of the veil is an Assyrian text
$
from 1300 B.C.E. that restricted the veil to the female nobility. The text states:
"Women, whether married or [widows] or [Assyrians] who go out into a (public)
street [must not have] their heads [uncovered]. Ladies by birth . . . whether (it is)
a veil or robe or [mantle?], must be veiled; [they must not have] their heads
[uncovered]" (in Ricks and Ricks, 2011). Certainly, this text demonstrates that
even at this early period the use of the veil was involved in the demarcation of
gender, and status within these societies.

Even so, the veils symbolic use as an indicator of status or gender was not
universal to every civilisation. The veil was not a part of Islamic culture until the
fifteenth century C.E. at which time it was adopted from cultures that had been
conquered. The introduction of the veil into Islamic culture was a slow process
centralized mainly around urban cities where, like the cultures it had conquered,
it was used as a symbol of status and wealth (Zahedi, 2008). However, by the
late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries the relevance of the veil to Islamic
culture began to be challenged. As extended travel exposed Islamic civilisations
(such as Turkey and Iran) to the Modern European world, it revealed their socio-
economic and technological advances. Sociologist Ashraf Zahedi (2008) explains
that Islamic reformists, impressed by European modernity and the modern
attitudes of their unveiled women, called for reform in Islamic states (in this case
Iran). Consequently, in the twentieth century both male and female activists
started to demand reform in marriage laws, education and forced veiling. The
stance of the reformists clearly indicates that at this time, the veil was
normatively associated with womens oppression and seclusion, a prevailing
Western perception reflected by Islamic campaigners.

In the period just after World War I due to a change in political leadership, Iran
moved from a Caliphate ruled state, to one turned towards integrating into
European modern nation-states. However, the realities of these modernising
reforms conflicted with Islamic traditionalist culture and especially in the case of
the veil, were radical and did little for womens rights. While the educated
middle class embraced the government sanctioned unveiling, Islamic women
%
who were not yet ready to unveil often faced violent force and public exclusion.
At the same time, conservative religious factions in Iran, who believed that
female moral character was linked to modesty and veiling, started violent
protests and took their daughters out of education, undermining attempts of
educational reform. Public opinion against the reform eventually led to the 1979
Iranian revolution and a return to Islamic traditionalist ideologies. And in the
1980s Islamic fundamentalists once again implemented compulsory veiling in
Iran (Zahedi, 2008, 250-265). However, Islamic society was irrefragably
influenced by the attempts at modernisation and, whilst overthrown, the reform
created a foundation on which social change has since occurred.

Therefore as explained, the reintroduction of the veil in the 1980s in Iran (and
similarly aligned traditionalist Islamic states) brought unexpected changes for
Islamic women. Veiled women were once again free to study and attend jobs,
the unveiled however were now the ones being harassed and publicly excluded.
Moreover, the strict re-veiling laws drove many women who didnt wish to use
the veil out of the country. The veiled had virtually swapped places with that of
the unveiled. Arts journalist, Jennifer Heath (2008, 319) contends that the veil is
just a distracting banner of the ideological battle with gender apartheid. The veil
in this case, is a way in which male authorities have asserted power over women
and their freedom of choice. She continues that the shifting changes in Islamic
society are transferred to the bodies of women, For generations, forced veiling
and unveiling has been relentless in the interests of colonialization or of
decolonialization (Heath, 2008, 319). In the face of the tug of war between
Western and Islamic belief systems, the veil has become an object imbued with
political allegory. While the veil is routinely understood by the west as a matter
of faith, it is clear that the disparities and degrees of Muslim veiling are, in most
cases, unrelated to the Islamic religion; they are instead dependent upon which
political party is currently in rule (see Smith-Hefner, 2007; Zahedi, 2008). It is
interesting to note for example that Muslim countries with different political
positions (such as Malaysia who has the highest population of Muslims in the
world) have little to no problems with veiling, women can openly choose to
&
wear the veil (or not) without any problems. Their culture allows for diversity and
tolerance within the practice of wearing the veil.

To return to the example cited at the beginning of this essay namely the French
banning of the full-face veil, it is important to point out that in the West the veil
is often seen as an item of dress that defies contemporary ideals of modernity and
secular enlightenment (Heath, 2008, 319). Certainly the French expressed the
banning in very political terms that aligned an adherence to religiously related
dress codes, against the notion of modernity, freedom and individuality in dress
espoused by both politics and fashion alike. American reporter, editor and art
critic Dinah Zeiger suggests, veiled women today signify tyranny, and lifting the
veil has become a metaphor for freedom and democracy(Zeiger, 2008, 266).
However, Zeiger contends that the while the veil itself is seen as the embodiment
and symbol of oppression, what many Westerners fail to understand is that it is
not the veil alone but the way geographic, economic and social relationships
intertwine that leads to the oppression of women (Zeiger, 2008, 272). Of course
that is not to say that the veil hasnt been used as a strategy of oppression.
However, the ability to realise that the veil is a complex item of traditional dress
that wrestles with its modern identity both within Islamic cultures and in the
West, is central to beginning to understand that the issue is clearly not a simple
dichotomy that turns on the assumed opposition between the freedom of
unveiling and the oppression of covering up.

However, the idea of covering does play a specific role within Western dress and
fashion aesthetics. Within Western ideology (an ideology that is based around
freedom, equality, and fraternity) the established socio-cultural norms and
axiological practices (such as ethics) are highly significant. The face in particular
as a socio-cultural norm has specific meaning to Western culture, as it is the first
place we look to understand a persons individuality. Fashion theorist Patrizia
Calefato explains that veiled faces are an alien concept to the subject of
Western culture which relies so much on the act of the reciprocal gaze for
identification (Calefato, 2004, 64). The eyes in particular represent reciprocity of
'
interaction, and of connection, between people. Late nineteenth century cultural
sociologist Georg Simmel attributes the face as the symbol of everything that an
individual has brought with him or her as the prerequisite of their life (Simmel,
1997, 112-113). Therefore the act of the Islamic veil in covering the face, and in
some cases the eyes, ostensibly upsets this Western norm and creates unease.
Furthermore this Western norm contributes to the complexities surrounding the
veil; Calefato goes on to explain that a gaze does exist within the Islamic culture,
though with completely different cultural significance. She clarifies that in Islam
the gaze is a perversion of the eye (as for example the touch is a perversion of the
hand), a sexualisation of the female body that exists within a cultural incongruity,
on the one hand, the gaze is prohibited, while on the other it is evoked by the
fascination of what is hidden (Calefato, 2004, 95). Therefore one might say that
it is precisely somewhere in the friction between two such disassociated cultural
norms, that the veil becomes the site of conflict. How does a modern French
Islamic woman, who is at once sensitive to both set of cultural norms perceive
and use the veil? Is the veil her passport to cultural freedom, and expression of
religious identity, and if so does the ban on its wearing effectively limit her
capacity to operate with impunity and freedom in her own nation? Does the ban
enforced in the name of European liberalism actually service the ideals of
liberalism? Freedom it seems is not so easily won.

It is at this point that Polish philosopher Leszek Kolakowski helps contextualise
this dilemma. In his book Modernity on Endless Trial, Kolakowski poses the
question; to what extent is it conceivable for us to affirm our exclusive
membership in one civilization without wanting to destroy others? (Kolakowski,
1990, 17). As Kolakowski contends, the ability to identify, connect with and
respect other cultures is a modern trait, essential to contemporary global society.
Yet Kolakowskis question, examining the line between acknowledgement and
acceptance of a different culture, holds an interesting counterpoint to what we
see as European modern liberalism. In effect Kolakowski argues that French
European liberal tolerance is central to Eurocentric ideals; Kolakowski ascribes
the strong modern Eurocentric sense of cultural superiority to its ability to detach
(
itself from its own culture and display benevolent tolerance towards other
cultures (Kolakowski, 1990, 19). A measure of modernity, Kolakowski suggests,
that is central to its identity as a European country.

Slovenian philosopher and cultural critic, Slavoj Zizek, contributes to this debate
by questioning, in the opening chapter of his book Living in the End of Times,
French modern ideology and its move to ban the burqa. Zizek points out the
incongruous reasoning behind the law by quoting French President Nicolas
Sarkozy and the parliamentary leader of the ruling French party Union pour un
Mouvement Populaire, Jean-Franois Cop. Cop maintains that the move
against the burqa is due to concerns of freedom and womens rights, We can
measure the modernity of a society by the way it treats and respects women
(Cop in Zizek, 2011, 1). However Zizek implies that Sarkozy is more worried
about the workings of the veil against the secular ideals of the French state. Zizek
continues, one cannot but note how the allegedly universalist attack on the
burqa on behalf of human rights and womens dignity ends up as a defence of
the particular French way of life (Zizek, 2011, 1). Zizeks evaluation is pertinent
to my argument as it points to the ideological slight of hand that surrounds
debates on the burqa. The gender debate is conflated into a human rights debate
that is quickly solicited to indicate the modernity and liberalism of the modern
French state.

In light of this however, it is interesting to note a conflict of interests between
French liberal ideology and French secular identity. Zizek suggests that while
Western liberal attitudes deem veils acceptable if they are donned of a womans
own free will, the veil is still undeniably a politicised object, one that is in
opposition to French secular ideals. Conceivably when a veil is donned
voluntarily its meaning goes from a representation of a group ideal, to that of
either an individual statement of identity, a reflection of spirituality or perhaps
even a form of religious fundamentalism. Roland Barthes explains that, the
wearing of an item of clothing is fundamentally an act of meaning that goes
beyond modesty, ornamentation and protection. It is an act of signification and
)
therefore a profoundly social act right at the very dialectic of society (Barthes,
2006, 97). An act of fundamentalism that, in a profoundly secular country like
France, is fraught with symbolic implications, and consequently one that is now
repressed.

It can be inferred from its history, that the veil has traditionally been used as a
symbolic representation of various cultural ideologies denoting social status,
identity, gender and political position. It follows then, that whenever the veil
comes into contact with modern Western ideologies (such as in France)
complications arise. Indeed the religious, political and cultural polarities
between an Ecclesiocracy (a religious/ traditionalist culture such as Iran) and
Modernist culture such as secular France are vast. To illustrate, Marcus (1994,
20-21) explains the break of cultural practices and value judgments from
traditional reliance on religious dictates, to modern idealistic notions of telos.
Cultural practices in this understanding constitute a
sphere in which no other authority counts but that of
talent and no other force is applied but that of the better
argument. They can be archonic, directing and guiding
processes of social change towards the realization of
genuinely valid ends, because in their internal
organization they embody what is the, perhaps never
completely realizable, telos of social development: the
reconciliation of the self-conscious autonomy of each
individual with the harmonious integration of all, made
possible when everyone follows the dictates of the
universal voice.
Conceivably, the French movement towards a genuinely valid end is based
upon a value judgement of significant French cultural practices, and as a result is
central to the reasoning behind the ban. Indeed, normative claims and value
judgements are two factors that Kolakowski (1990, 19) expands upon as elements
that are integral to the development and continuation of European culture.
Kolakowski explains that Eurocentric ideals of benevolent tolerance are in fact
peppered with judgement.
There is no abandoning of judgement; what we call the
spirit of research is a cultural attitude, one particular to
Western civilisation and its hierarchy of values. We
*
may proclaim and defend the ideals of tolerance and
criticism, but we may not claim that these are neutral
ideals, free from normative assumptions.

Kolakowskis argument thus enlightens us to the realities of European cultural
tolerance and liberalism - a liberalism arguably using oppression as a tool against
oppression. The French see the wearing of the full-face veil (which represents
Islamic ideology) as a symbolic statement against French national identity and
values and thus they have eradicated it in the name of freedom. And yet this in
itself goes against what we see as a free modern society. It is surprising that
countries, such as Malaysia, seem more open to expressions of religious identity,
and freedom of dress choice than France, once touted as the centre of revolution,
fashion and modern thought. As we can see in the example of the French ban,
dress and fashion are considered the ultimate expression of modern freedom and
yet this particular piece of dress is forbidden. It can only be concluded that
Kolakowskis evaluation of modern European tolerance and the practice of value
judgements are indeed occurring within modern society, and in this case, within
the judgements made by French officials. In the words of Barthes, it is precisely
the normative connections that are, in the final instance, the vehicle of meaning.
Dress is essentially part of the axiological order (Barthes, 2006, 7).







"+
Reference List
Barthes, Roland. 2006. The Language of Fashion. Translated by Andy Stafford.
Edited by Andy Stafford and Michael Carter. Oxford and New York: Berg.

Calefato, Patrizia. 2004. The Gaze and The Face. In The Clothed Body.
Translated by Lisa Adams. Oxford and New York: Berg Publishers.

Heath, Jennifer. 2008. Epilogue. In The Veil: Women Writers on Its History,
Lore, and Politics. Edited by Jennifer Heath, 319-321. California: University of
California Press.

Kolakowski, Leszek. 1990. Chapter 2: Looking for the Barbarians: Illusions of
Cultural Universalism. In Modernity on Endless Trial, 14-31. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.

Mrkus, Gyrgy. 1994. "A Society of Culture: The Constitution of Modernity". In
Rethinking imagination. Edited by Gillian Robinson and John Rundell, 15-29.
London & New York: Routledge.

Ricks, Stephen D. and Ricks, Shirley S. 2011. With Her Gauzy Veil before Her
Face: The Veiling of Women in Antiquity. In Bountiful Harvest: Essays in honor
of S. Kent Brown. Edited by Andrew C. Skinner, D. Morgan Davis and Carl
Griffin. Provo, Utah: Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, Brigham Young
University.

Simmel, Georg. 1997. Culture of Interaction: Sociology of the Senses(1907). In
Simmel on Culture. Edited by Davis Frisby and Mike Featherstone, 187-217.
London: Sage Publications

Smith-Hefner, Nancy J. 2007. Javanese Women and the Veil in Post-Soeharto
Indonesia. In The Journal of Asian Studies, 66 (2): 389-420
doi:10.1017/S0021911807000575
""
Veblen, Thorstein. 1994. Dress as an Expression of the Pecuniary Culture. The
Theory of the Leisure Class (1899). New York: Penguin Books.

Whitman, Sylvia. 2011. Seen Through a Veil: Head Coverings Have Many
Different Meanings. In Appleseeds 13 (5): 28-30. Peterborough: Cobblestone
Publishing Company.

Wieviorka, Michel. 2003. An Old Theme Revisited: Sociology and Ideology. In
Sociology and Ideology. Edited by Eliezer Ben Rafael, 79-100. Leiden: Brill
Academic Publishers.

Zahedi, Ashraf. 2008. Concealing and Revealing Female Hair: Veiling dynamics
in Contemporary Iran. In The Veil: Women Writers on Its History, Lore, and
Politics. Edited by Jennifer Heath, 250-265. California: University of California
Press.

Zeiger, Dinah. 2008. That (Afghan) Girl! Ideology Unveiled in National
Geographic. In The Veil: Women Writers on Its History, Lore, and Politics.
Edited by Jennifer Heath, 266-280. California: University of California Press.

!i"ek, Slavoj. 2011. Denial: The Liberal Utopia. In Living in the End of Times,
1-53. London:Verso.