Kathryn Babayan, The City as Anthology: Eroticism and Urbanity in Early Modern Isfahan (New Texts Out Now)

Kathryn Babayan, The City as Anthology: Eroticism and Urbanity in Early Modern Isfahan (New Texts Out Now)

Kathryn Babayan, The City as Anthology: Eroticism and Urbanity in Early Modern Isfahan (New Texts Out Now)

By : Kathryn Babayan

Kathryn Babayan, The City as Anthology: Eroticism and Urbanity in Early Modern Isfahan (Stanford University Press, 2021). 

Jadaliyya (J): What made you write this book? 

Kathryn Babayan (KB): I have always been drawn to the writing of social and cultural history from below, an affinity that goes back to my coming of age in Tehran on the eve of the Iranian Revolution. As high school students we were politicized, cognizant of authoritarian regimes, of social inequities, and of the power of ordinary people. But as a graduate student I was confronted with a different reality. I entered the field of Islamic history when philology continued to be the mode of scholarship; historical texts were mined for facts and understood as transparent truths, reflective of social practices and historical realities. Moreover, the historiography on the premodern Middle East privileged scriptural Islam and high culture over popular mentalities and everyday practices. Much like earlier trends in the writing of European and US history, institutional, intellectual, military, and economic history were valorized subjects of inquiry, narrating stories of men in power, and their acts and ideas. This was the mindset that shaped most Near Eastern studies departments in the United States during the 1980s. I was, however, lucky to have had a renegade advisor in Martin Dickson, and so I stepped out into history and benefited from the teachings of Peter Brown and Natalie Zemon Davis, who became my intellectual mentors. I wanted to write their vision of history where the material and affective lives and experiences of ordinary men and women came into intimate focus. The City as Anthology is this dream come true.

... friends exchanged poetry, essays, and letters among themselves, engaging their networks as they circulated and recorded urban knowledge.

J: What particular topics, issues, and literatures does the book address?

KB: The City as Anthology offers a different model to study early modern urban culture through verbal (majmuʿa) and visual (muraqqaʿ) anthologies collected in Isfahan’s households. It combines historiographies of the book with scholarship on urban space to intervene in contemporary discussions about experience and materiality from the vantage point of gender and sexuality.

The book began with simple questions: What were these anthologies? Who produced and preserved them? How were they made, and for what purpose? To answer these questions, I limited my research to Isfahan and the seventeenth century when most extant anthologies were assembled. I separated anthologies that assembled specialized subjects, such as diplomatic letters, philosophical, medical, or theological treatises, from those interspersed with professional and personal or familial objects. Categorizing anthologies along the lines of genre and modes of curation provided me with the model or rubric of what I have termed “household anthologies,” which are family archives distinct from single subject anthologies that were compiled for institutional purposes, such as the transmission of power and knowledge in courtly or religious circles.

It is the subjective processes of making urban knowledge that frame my reading of anthologies, as residents collected paintings, recorded segments of essays and poems, and chose personal and private letters or talismans to include in their family archives. The rich variety of habits of collecting and curating expose the professional and personal lives of households as well as their ties to generations of city life. For seventeenth-century Isfahan, anthologies-cum-archives are unique sources that bring people’s lives into view. This is particularly important for a city with no extant state or city archives.

The written word has been privileged as the site of literacy in the medieval Arabic-speaking world across several scholarly works that focus on histories of the manuscript or study reading practices connecting social networks to knowledge production. By way of anthologies, my history of Isfahan concentrates on the city as a space of urban knowledge making. Thus, part of my work is to use anthologies to map the social space of the household in Isfahan. Anthologies preserve networks of texts that connected households together with the intersecting lives of teachers, students, friends, and relatives that mattered to each respective family. Friendship is critical to this process; friends exchanged poetry, essays, and letters among themselves, engaging their networks as they circulated and recorded urban knowledge. Male friendships developed around shared habits of viewing and collecting images, which were to be read, discussed, and performed in the bazaars, coffeehouses, and streets of Isfahan. It is these rituals, I argue, that comprised not only the “anthologizing of the city,” but also the procedures and methods of sex and gender knowledge production. 

J: How does this book connect to and/or depart from your previous work?

KB: For my first book, Mystics, Monarchs and Messiahs: Cultural Landscapes of Early Modern Iran, which was based on my dissertation, I was unable to conduct research in Iran. I had been restricted to materials available either in print or in manuscripts housed in European libraries; these sources shaped my exploration of sovereignty and heresy in the Safavi Empire. Court chronicles and religious treatises were my recourse; I dove into accounts of popular revolts and became sensitive to the tensions punctuating dominant narratives as I considered these “official” sources alongside epics and poetry to gain access to the world view of the subjects of Safavi Iran. With a socially inflected perspective, my reading of the language of sovereignty and heresy complicated a historiography of the early modern Islamic world that had previously relied on a static view of scriptural Islam to understand the past. I was, of course, reliant on the mediating voices of historians, clerics, poets, and storytellers who spoke for monarchs, mystics, or messiahs.

My second book project is based on research in Iran. In 1993 I began reading through catalogues at the University of Tehran Library to see what kinds of material had survived beyond those produced by the institutions of the imperial court and the religious seminary. It was at this point that I came across anthologies, termed majumuʿa, literally a “gathering together.” As I read through the catalogues, I was baffled to see contents that included personal letters, wills, talisman recipes, and other miscellanea. Clearly these majmuʿa did not correspond to the anthology taxonomy I had heard of. Puzzled and fascinated by their genres and subjects, I knew then that these anthologies would be the archive from which a social and cultural history of the Safavi world could be written.

J: Who do you hope will read this book, and what sort of impact would you like it to have? 

KB: I very much hope that The City as Anthology comes to be known outside the circle of Persianists as a model for early modern urban culture wherever it can be found, from Venice and Barcelona to Kyoto. Its topic (the anthology as verbal, visual, and material construct) is interdisciplinary and so too are its methods, which draw from social history and art history, gender, sexuality, and media studies. Though grounded in scholarship within the specialized field of early modern Persianate studies, it addresses a large audience of scholars working on the history of the book, the city, and friendship, adding an exciting and heretofore understudied corpus of material to an already vibrant discussion. 

My aim has been to provide sufficient historical specificity to the practice of friendship and the forging of social relations, so as to facilitate a dialogic engagement between early modern Persianate studies and early modern sexuality studies. By means of my analysis, we can see both similarities and differences with the western world while adding some thickness to our broader knowledge of sexuality. Thinking sex with the early moderns has compelled me to see erasures that today silence passionate friendships and that obscured the entangled history that love shared with eros and beauty. The early modernity of homoeroticism archived in seventeenth-century household anthologies extends the possibility of the analysis of gender and sexuality to loving friendships that established amical communities in other geographies and temporalities. Whether moving the dialogue eastward to Delhi or westward to Istanbul, Damascus, Cairo, Paris, and London, my project details how erotic sensibilities forged social collectives that shaped the habitus of early modern Isfahan. 

J: What other projects are you working on now?

KB: Presently, together with a fellow historian, Nozhat Ahmadi, and her graduate students at the University of Isfahan, I have begun the vast project of collecting and generating tables of contents for numerous catalogued anthologies housed in the capital’s most prominent public libraries—at Majlis, Malik, Milli, and Tehran University. We have been indexing the various genres of texts included in each. Adapting our work to include reconnaissance, we have taken careful account of the content and organization of these anthologies and have considered eventually creating a Safavi digital database of Majmu’a where fellow scholars across the world may freely have access to these rich Persianate-world sources.

 

Excerpt from the book (from the Conclusion, pp. 196-201)

The City as Anthology reads household anthologies as verbal and visual archives of an entwined urban and erotic form of knowledge, typically overlooked in the historiography of seventeenth-century Isfahan. Eight residents acted as protagonists in this early modern history of Isfahan. Anthologizing their experience of the city, they wrote their relationship to the habitus they helped shaped. Seven men and one woman enacted the gestures, manners, and sensibilities of a shared culture of adab that configured their social and erotic relations. Schooled in the politics and aesthetics of Isfahan, residents deployed different media to embody what I have termed “urbanity,” displaying their mastery of the adab of sociability and flaunting their knowledge of the city and its ways. From king to widow, painter to religious scholar, poet to bureaucrat, their authorial voices and habits of writing, reading, seeing, and desiring have grounded my analysis of the urban. A shared phenomenology emerges from these anthologies as residents learned to see the beauty of Isfahan, realized how to read eros in its beauty, cultivated desire for the coy gestures of the beloved, and studied the protocols of writing love in letters to friends. These intimately entangled acts—seeing, reading, desiring, and writing—converge to fashion the urban self through the sensual and the sexual. As authors, the eight protagonists of this book made the city their own, writing their quotidian engagement with friends, kin, and clients, dynamically divulging the many dimensions of the social, the cultural, and the religious spheres of life in Isfahan. 

Furthermore, these anthologies posit a highly refined sensuality as the prism through which the recognition of a subjective self, family, and beloved friend become tangible in the context of the beauty of Isfahan. The prominence of ʿishq—the mystic love that is desiring—in household anthologies underscores the emotional apparatus that enables us to trace these protagonists’ encounter with Isfahan. Inhabitants deployed the idiom of mystic love to produce their urbanity and exhibit their refinement. Whether as collectors or authors of letters, poetry, drawings, manuals, or essays, men mobilized the idealized rhetoric of beauty and love, fetishized in the figure of the male youth, to engage in politics and fashion their masculine bonds. Among the cast of characters in this history, one king, Shah Abbas I, composed his anthology in the form of a central square (analogized to the Image of the World) adorned by wall paintings and epigraphy illustrating paradise with all its material delights, including homoerotic pleasures for residents and visitors to view and to be seduced by. Shah Abbas I’s authorizing act, aimed to convert his subjects to Shi’ism, drew men and women into the urban public sphere which, as this book has shown, was also a sphere of intimate affects. Although it was articulated in a range of idioms and scales, the representation of male homoerotism was ideologically and materially central to Isfahan’s social and moral fabric, engraved as it was from the walls of the city center to the images and words collected on sheets of paper in households. Though household anthologies and their male authors speak in the privileged language of patriarchy, anthologies themselves were domestic objects, pedagogical tools with which family members across gendered lines could educate themselves and cultivate their relations with kin and friends. In particular, the pedagogical material gathered in anthologies served to educate household members in the adab of sociability and decorum. In this respect, gender difference does not seem to matter much in the practice of intimate friendship, where ʿishq is the ubiquitous emotion that signifies spiritual, familial, and amical ties. The words of one female resident, the Urdubadi widow, illustrate that she, too, marshalled the rituals and language of mystic love to inscribe her relationship to God, her deceased husband, as well as a beloved female friend. While the Urdubadi widow provides suggestive evidence for the practice of intimate female friendships, the question of the practice and acceptance of female homoeroticism more broadly remains speculative. Nonetheless, as manifest in the central square, homoerotic affects were nothing less than world-making, and embodied desire was imagined and lived as a site of both power and resistance.

Muhammad Qasim’s drawing of the Bastinade on the cover of my book encapsulates the social shape and significance of erotic desire for the experience of masculine adab in Isfahan. Educating the male child entailed the solicitation, but also the taming, of homoerotic desire with a disciplinary stick, a technique with which youth were trained into the patriarchal order. The initiation of an apprentice into the circle of his master painter, Muhammad Qasim, reproduces communal hierarchies and symmetries according to age and rank. Men with beards and mustaches bear the regalia of power, from the stick to the book, the pen, and the rosary. A shared performance of adab marks the bodily comportment of Muhammad Qasim; in gesture and gaze he embodies the knowledge of the arts and eros, authorizing its transmission to initiate subservient beardless youth into the proper politics of sexuality. Asymmetries of standing between master and student intersect with symmetrical associations between friends under the scrutiny of two masters, one of the craft and the other of the spiritual brotherhood. Model affective ties, arranged according to the concepts of ʿishq and the protocols of friendship, bound men of all ages together in configuring fraternal communities of learning. The didactic message of the bastinade signals to the audience that ʿishq must also be governed by the adab of urbanity to safeguard the prescribed moral and social order. Inscribed in students’ notebooks as a first lesson, ʿishq is to be practiced according to established codes of behavior to ensure the apprentices’ submission to their master painter and loyalty to their friends and coworkers. In this context of patronage and apprenticeship, erotic desire operates both through resistance and disavowal, highlighting the social condition that produces sensual affirmation. A traffic of affect, involving pain, pleasure, fear and agony, forge the emotional bonds that establish social relations. Muhammad Qasim’s Bastinade signals how sexual desire is experienced through intimate contact with male bodies, as it gives visual form to the epistemology of sexuality that renders intelligible the mutual obligations and the reciprocal relationship binding men in networks at work, at court, in the seminary, and in the city.

The City as Anthology draws on the analytical purchase of eroticism to provide a distinct vantage point onto the connections between urbanity, friendship, and spirituality. Though this project began by treating the anthology as a genre to understand the city that incited its production, the homoerotic vista provided by the anthologies I consider here tendered a cognitive panorama of Isfahan with a view into how the city was materially and affectively performed. Adopting a different way of doing history in the field of early modern Persianate studies, I focus on a discrete moment in the story of Isfahan, when the lines of force between eroticism and passionate friendship were being reinforced, to think more broadly with historians of sexuality about the valences of erotic desires that bound together networks of friends living in previous centuries. Inspired by historian Alan Bray’s scholarship on sworn friendships, I adopt his mode of social history by locating religiously sanctioned male bonds within systems of affect and kinship. One of the important contributions of his analysis of Western Europe is that intimate male friendship provided both the terms of social cohesion and the means of its disruption. Moreover, I take up literary critic Valerie Traub’s invitation to “think sex with the early moderns,” which involves confronting those moments when the meanings of sexuality and eroticism are far from transparent. In an effort to bring the practices of history into dialogue with queer and feminist methodologies, Traub exploits the opacity of sex as a productive way to lay bare the difficulties and impasses historians elide when, and if, we write about our conceptual frames and processes of making sexual knowledge. To this methodological common purpose, I bring the multiple representations and significations of the Persianate concept of ʿishq to bear via my eight character studies. Considerable historical context informs my reading of the contours and tensions with which residents of Isfahan mobilized the power and pleasures of eros to write and display their adab in anthologies. 

My book explores the capacity that homosocial and homoerotic intimacy awarded for social cohesion as well as the threat of disruption it carried over the course of the seventeenth-century in a city experiencing exponential growth in wealth, immigration, and public surveillance. To properly historicize the emotions that animated friendships, I focus on the figure of the friend represented in letters, paintings, and love poetry. Collected in household anthologies, the presence of so many epistolary manuals and model letters to a friend (rasaʾil-i ikhvaniyyat), as well as the personal letters exchanged by friends, first struck me as remarkable. But as I collated fragments of evidence of vows of friendship (sigha-yi ukhuvvat), gifts of drawings to friends, together with model and personal letters, I began to understand them speaking to a convention that was far from unusual for the residents who collected them, gifted them, learned from them, and wrote their own loving letters to friends in and out of Isfahan. The visual and verbal language of eroticism that friends deployed to convey their moods and dispositions, drawn from already resonant mystic love poetry (ghazal), have guided my critical inquiry into the urban history of Isfahan. This language has directed me toward the built environment and the material experience of urban objects, to see, smell, to taste and hear so as to consume eros, for it is these sensual experiences that engendered the lived experience of Isfahan for the seven male and one female characters in this book.

Although my focus is on my protagonists’ shared epistemic affinities of sexuality—grounded in affect, kinship, and intimacy—I also compare the affinities to those of other temporalities and geographies. My aim is to provide sufficient historical specificity to the practice of friendship and the forging of social relations so as to facilitate a dialogic engagement between early modern Persianate studies with early modern sexuality studies. By means of my analysis, we can see both similarities and differences with the western world while adding some thickness to our broader knowledge of sexuality. Thinking sex with the early moderns has compelled me to see erasures that today silence passionate friendships and that obscured the entangled history that love shared with eros and beauty. The early modernity of homoeroticism archived in seventeenth-century household anthologies extends the possibility of the analysis of gender and sexuality to loving friendships that established amical communities in other geographies and temporalities. Whether moving the dialogue eastward to Delhi or westward to Istanbul, Damascus, Cairo, Paris, and London, my project details how erotic sensibilities forged social collectives that shaped the habitus of early modern Isfahan. By the middle of the seventeenth century, residents of Isfahan lived under a new regime of public surveillance where a range of techniques and procedures were deployed by the Safavi court, together with the Twelver Shi’a mosque and seminary, to discipline the body’s sexuality and the homoerotic culture of urbanity. The stigmatization of homoeroticism and its association with sodomy and boy-gazing would reemerge with nationalist projects that rewrote gender roles and sexual desires for Iranian citizens. My book posits an early modern genealogy for the longue durée history of tensions operative in the erotics of beauty and embodied desire. In her Women with Mustaches and Men without Beards, Afsaneh Najmabadi has masterfully demonstrated how, by the turn of the twentieth-century, Iran’s nationalism closeted the male beloved (amrad) and unveiled women to cleanse homosocial spaces from the taint of erotic desire. My history of Isfahan presents an early emergence of heteroerotic anxieties, provoked by the adab of urban love and sufi homoerotic desire, that in the twentieth century were recuperated to make Iran modern. The contradiction of the sex/gender system underpinning the early modern gendered order at the Safavi court and the city of Isfahan illustrates how male sexual patronage and apprenticeship was practiced through asymmetries of age and rank, authorizing the possibility and visibility of behaviors subversive to that order, to simultaneously cultivate hetero or disguised male homoerotic desire, thus laying the conditions for modernity in Iran to produce its heterosexuality. 

New Texts Out Now: Mandy Turner and Cherine Hussein, guest eds. "Israel-Palestine after Oslo: Mapping Transformations in a Time of Deepening Crisis." Special Issue of Conflict, Security & Development

Conflict, Security and Development, Volume 15, No. 5 (December 2015) Special issue: "Israel-Palestine after Oslo: Mapping Transformations in a Time of Deepening Crisis," Guest Editors: Mandy Turner and Cherine Hussein.

Jadaliyya (J): What made you compile this volume?

Mandy Turner (MT): Both the peace process and the two-state solution are dead. Despite more than twenty years of negotiations, Israel’s occupation, colonization and repression continue–and the political and geographical fragmentation of the Palestinian people is proceeding apace.

This is not news, nor is it surprising to any keen observer of the situation. But what is surprising–and thus requires explanation – is the resilience of the Oslo framework and paradigm: both objectively and subjectively. It operates objectively as a straitjacket by trapping Palestinians in economic and security arrangements that are designed to ensure stabilization and will not to lead to sovereignty or a just and sustainable solution. And it operates subjectively as a straitjacket by shutting out discussion of alternative ways of understanding the situation and ways out of the impasse. The persistence of this framework that is focused on conflict management and stabilization, is good for Israel but bad for Palestinians.

The Oslo peace paradigm–of a track-one, elite-level, negotiated two-state solution–is therefore in crisis. And yet it is entirely possible that the current situation could continue for a while longer–particularly given the endorsement and support it enjoys from the major Western donors and the “international community,” as well as the fact that there has been no attempt to develop an alternative. The immediate short-term future is therefore bleak.

Guided by these observations, this special issue sought to undertake two tasks. The first task was to analyze the perceptions underpinning the Oslo framework and paradigm as well as some of the transformations instituted by its implementation: why is it so resilient, what has it created? The second task, which follows on from the first, was then to ask: how can we reframe our understanding of what is happening, what are some potential alternatives, and who is arguing and mobilizing for them?

These questions and themes grew out of a number of conversations with early-career scholars – some based at the Kenyon Institute in East Jerusalem, and some based in the occupied Palestinian territory and elsewhere. These conversations led to two interlinked panels at the International Studies Association annual convention in Toronto, Canada, in March 2014. To have two panels accepted on “conflict transformation and resistance in Palestine” at such a conventional international relations conference with (at the time unknown) early-career scholars is no mean feat. The large and engaged audience we received at these panels – with some very established names coming along (one of whom contributed to this special issue) – convinced us that this new stream of scholars and scholarship should have an outlet.  

J: What particular topics, issues, and literatures do the articles address?

MT: The first half of the special issue analyzes how certain problematic assumptions shaped the Oslo framework, and how the Oslo framework in turn shaped the political, economic and territorial landscape.

Virginia Tilley’s article focuses on the paradigm of conflict resolution upon which the Oslo Accords were based, and calls for a re-evaluation of what she argues are the two interlinked central principles underpinning its worldview: internationally accepted notions of Israeli sovereignty; and the internationally accepted idea that the “conflict” is essentially one between two peoples–the “Palestinian people” and the “Jewish people”. Through her critical interrogation of these two “common sense” principles, Tilley proposes that the “conflict” be reinterpreted as an example of settler colonialism, and, as a result of this, recommends an alternative conflict resolution model based on a paradigm shift away from an ethno-nationalist division of the polity towards a civic model of the nation.

Tariq Dana unpacks another central plank of the Oslo paradigm–that of promoting economic relations between Israel and the OPT. He analyses this through the prism of “economic peace” (particularly the recent revival of theories of “capitalist peace”), whose underlying assumptions are predicated on the perceived superiority of economic approaches over political approaches to resolving conflict. Dana argues that there is a symbiosis between Israeli strategies of “economic peace” and recent Palestinian “statebuilding strategies” (referred to as Fayyadism), and that both operate as a form of pacification and control because economic cooperation leaves the colonial relationship unchallenged.

The political landscape in the OPT has been transformed by the Oslo paradigm, particularly by the creation of the Palestinian Authority (PA). Alaa Tartir therefore analyses the basis, agenda and trajectory of the PA, particularly its post-2007 state building strategy. By focusing on the issue of local legitimacy and accountability, and based on fieldwork in two sites in the occupied West Bank (Balata and Jenin refugee camps), Tartir concludes that the main impact of the creation of the PA on ordinary people’s lives has been the strengthening of authoritarian control and the hijacking of any meaningful visions of Palestinian liberation.

The origin of the administrative division between the West Bank and Gaza Strip is the focus of Tareq Baconi’s article. He charts how Hamas’s initial opposition to the Oslo Accords and the PA was transformed over time, leading to its participation (and success) in the 2006 legislative elections. Baconi argues that it was the perceived demise of the peace process following the collapse of the Camp David discussions that facilitated this change. But this set Hamas on a collision course with Israel and the international community, which ultimately led to the conflict between Hamas and Fateh, and the administrative division, which continues to exist.

The special issue thereafter focuses, in the second section, on alternatives and resistance to Oslo’s transformations.

Cherine Hussein’s article charts the re-emergence of the single-state idea in opposition to the processes of separation unleashed ideologically and practically that were codified in the Oslo Accords. Analysing it as both a movement of resistance and as a political alternative to Oslo, while recognizing that it is currently largely a movement of intellectuals (particularly of diaspora Palestinians and Israelis), Hussein takes seriously its claim to be a more just and liberating alternative to the two-state solution.

My article highlights the work of a small but dedicated group of anti-Zionist Jewish-Israeli activists involved in two groups: Zochrot and Boycott from Within. Both groups emerged in the post-Second Intifada period, which was marked by deep disillusionment with the Oslo paradigm. This article unpacks the alternative – albeit marginalized – analysis, solution and route to peace proposed by these groups through the application of three concepts: hegemony, counter-hegemony and praxis. The solution, argue the activists, lies in Israel-Palestine going through a process of de-Zionization and decolonization, and the process of achieving this lies in actions in solidarity with Palestinians.

This type of solidarity action is the focus of the final article by Suzanne Morrison, who analyses the “We Divest” campaign, which is the largest divestment campaign in the US and forms part of the wider Palestinian Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement. Through attention to their activities and language, Morrison shows how “We Divest”, with its networked, decentralized, grassroots and horizontal structure, represents a new way of challenging Israel’s occupation and the suppression of Palestinian rights.

The two parts of the special issue are symbiotic: the critique and alternative perspectives analyzed in part two are responses to the issues and problems identified in part one.

J: How does this volume connect to and/or depart from your previous work?

MT: My work focuses on the political economy of donor intervention (which falls under the rubric of “peacebuilding”) in the OPT, particularly a critique of the Oslo peace paradigm and framework. This is a product of my broader conceptual and historical interest in the sociology of intervention as a method of capitalist expansion and imperial control (as explored in “The Politics of International Intervention: the Tyranny of Peace”, co-edited with Florian Kuhn, Routledge, 2016), and how post-conflict peacebuilding and development agendas are part of this (as explored in “Whose Peace: Critical Perspectives on the Political Economy of Peacebuilding”, co-edited with Michael Pugh and Neil Cooper (PalgraveMacmillan, 2008).  

My first book on Palestine (co-edited with Omar Shweiki), Decolonizing Palestinian Political Economy: De-development and Beyond (PalgraveMacmillan, 2014), was a collection of essays by experts in their field, of the political-economic experience of different sections of the Palestinian community. The book, however, aimed to reunite these individual experiences into one historical political-economy narrative of a people experiencing a common theme of dispossession, disenfranchisement and disarticulation. It was guided by the desire to critically assess the utility of the concept of de-development to different sectors and issues–and had a foreword by Sara Roy, the scholar who coined the term, and who was involved in the workshop from which the book emerged.

This co-edited special issue (with Cherine Hussein, who, at the time of the issue construction, was the deputy director of the Kenyon Institute) was therefore the next logical step in my research on Palestine, although my article on Jewish-Israeli anti-Zionists did constitute a slight departure from my usual focus.

J: Who do you hope will read this volume, and what sort of impact would you like it to have?

MT: I would imagine the main audience will be those whose research and political interests lie in Palestine Studies. It is difficult, given the structure of academic publishing – which has become ever more corporate and money grabbing – for research outputs such as this to be accessed by the general public. Only those with access to academic libraries are sure to be able to read it – and this is a travesty, in my opinion. To counteract this commodification of knowledge, we should all provide free access to our outputs through online open source websites such as academia.edu, etc. If academic research is going to have an impact beyond merely providing more material for teaching and background reading for yet more research (which is inaccessible to the general public) then this is essential. Websites such as Jadaliyya are therefore incredibly important.

Having said all that, I am under no illusions about the potential for ANY research on Israel-Palestine to contribute to changing the dynamics of the situation. However, as a collection of excellent analyses conducted by mostly early-career scholars in the field of Palestine studies, I am hopeful that their interesting and new perspectives will be read and digested. 

J: What other projects are you working on now?

MT: I am currently working on an edited volume provisionally entitled From the River to the Sea: Disintegration, Reintegration and Domination in Israel and Palestine. This book is the culmination of a two-year research project funded by the British Academy, which analyzed the impacts of the past twenty years of the Oslo peace framework and paradigm as processes of disintegration, reintegration and domination – and how they have created a new socio-economic and political landscape, which requires new agendas and frameworks. I am also working on a new research project with Tariq Dana at Birzeit University on capital and class in the occupied West Bank.

Excerpt from the Editor’s Note 

[Note: This issue was published in Dec. 2015]

Initially perceived to have inaugurated a new era of hope in the search for peace and justice in Palestine-Israel, the Oslo peace paradigm of a track one, elite-level, negotiated two-state solution is in crisis today, if not completely at an end.

While the major Western donors and the ‘international community’ continue to publicly endorse the Oslo peace paradigm, Israeli and Palestinian political elites have both stepped away from it. The Israeli government has adopted what appears to be an outright rejection of the internationally-accepted end-goal of negotiations, i.e. the emergence of a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital. In March 2015, in the final days of his re-election campaign, Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, visited the Jewish settlement of Har Homa in Palestinian East Jerusalem, which is regarded as illegal under international law. Reminding its inhabitants that it was him and his Likud government that had established the settlement in 1997 as part of the Israeli state’s vision of a unified indivisible Jerusalem, he promised to expand the construction of settlements in East Jerusalem if re-elected. And in an interview with Israeli news site, NRG, Netanyahu vowed that the prospects of a Palestinian state were non-existent as long as he remained in office. Holding on to the occupied Palestinian territory (oPt), he argued, was necessary to ensure Israel’s security in the context of regional instability and Islamic extremism. It is widely acknowledged that Netanyahu’s emphasis on Israel’s security—against both external and internal enemies—gave him a surprise win in an election he was widely expected to lose.

Despite attempts to backtrack under recognition that the US and European states are critical of this turn in official Israeli state policy, Netanyahu’s promise to bury the two-state solution in favour of a policy of further annexation has become the Israeli government’s official intent, and has been enthusiastically endorsed by leading ministers and key advisers.

[…]

The Palestinian Authority (PA) based in the West Bank also appears to have rejected a key principle of the Oslo peace paradigm—that of bilateral negotiations under the supervision of the US. Despite a herculean effort by US Secretary of State, John Kerry, to bring the two parties to the negotiating table, in response to the lack of movement towards final status issues and continued settlement expansion (amongst other issues), the Palestinian political elite have withdrawn from negotiations and resumed attempts to ‘internationalise the struggle’ by seeking membership of international organisations such as the United Nations (UN), and signing international treaties such as the Rome Statute, the founding treaty of the International Criminal Court. This change of direction is part of a rethink in the PA and PLO’s strategy rooted in wider discussions and debates. The publication of a document by the Palestine Strategy Study Group (PSSG) in August 2008, the production of which involved many members of the Palestinian political elite (and whose recommendations were studiously discussed at the highest levels of the PA and PLO), showed widespread discontent with the bilateral negotiations framework and suggested ways in which Palestinians could ‘regain the initiative’.

[…]

And yet despite these changes in official Palestinian and Israeli political strategies that signal a deepening of the crisis, donors and the ‘international community’ are reluctant to accept the failure of the Oslo peace paradigm. This political myopia has meant the persistence of a framework that is increasingly divorced from the possibility of a just and sustainable peace. It is also acting as an ideological straitjacket by shutting out alternative interpretations. This special issue seeks a way out of this political and intellectual dead end. In pursuit of this, our various contributions undertake what we regard to be two key tasks: first, to critically analyse the perceptions underpinning the Oslo paradigm and the transformations instituted by its implementation; and second, to assess some alternative ways of understanding the situation rooted in new strategies of resistance that have emerged in the context of these transformations in the post-Oslo landscape.

[…]

Taken as a whole, the articles in this special issue aim to ignite conversations on the conflict that are not based within abstracted debates that centre upon the peace process itself—but that begin from within the realities and geographies of both the continually transforming land of Palestine-Israel and the voices, struggles, worldviews and imaginings of the future of the people who presently inhabit it. For it is by highlighting these transformations, and from within these points of beginning, that we believe more hopeful pathways for alternative ways forward can be collectively imagined, articulated, debated and built.