Melancholic Migrants > Forum Home

Hello! I’m requesting to pass on this post because I wrote a pre-add/drop post for the class on Gender and Queerness. Thank you!

As I was reading Mannur’s and Buettner’s works, I started thinking about my own relationship with food and if I had some nostalgic relationship with it despite not being a migrant myself. I was always a picky eater as a kid. My mom always said I was like D.W. from D.W. the Picky Eater (it was coincidentally also one of my favourite books as a kid). I was constantly bickering with my mom about not wanting to eat kofte, dolma, fasulye aysekadin, but instead wanting to eat meals like macaroni, pizza and everything my white friends were eating. I sort of felt ashamed of what I ate at home and for lunch. My friends’ sandwiches were filled with that bright orange American cheese and ham, while mine were filled with tomatoes and feta. The worst thing I ever experienced was when my lahana tursusu (pickled cabbage) spilled in my lunch box and a classmate would not stop complaining about the smell and made exaggerated facial expressions (it did not even smell bad). It’s not that I disliked the flavour of what I ate, it was the fact that I did not want to be othered simply because of what I ate. I still spoke English and I still enjoyed the same things as my classmates. Funnily enough, when my mom started to make meals like shepherd’s pie and pre-made Campbell’s canned soup, I could not stand them. I actually missed my tomato and feta filled sandwiches, my manti, and my kofte. It was the only time I actually appreciated a “told you so” moment. Now, I proudly eat meals like chi kofte/kibbeh nayyeh and manti with garlicky yogurt. I also finally got to indulge in some delicious baklava 2-3 years ago; after being falsely told I was allergic to all nuts my entire life. You can image the pain 10-year-old me went through as my family happily ate some desserts while I just sat on the sidelines with a cracker and or sometimes nothing at all. That day I got to take a bite out of a walnut baklava from Mahrouse was like something out of Ratatouille. All this to say- this idealized version of nostalgia that Mannur mentions is not entirely bad. It helped me appreciate my cultural foods more, and the effort my mother (and now my sister) put into keeping our traditions alive. They would constantly uplift the flavours of our cultural meals, making them into something they probably weren't. But I do not dislike that type of hype, I truly appreciate it. I think my family does not suffer from melancholia because they were able to bring a bit of home to Canada/U.S.A, and the satisfaction of seeing their children indulge in the meals they also love is enough to wash away any sense of sadness. It shows how home is not a physical thing, but rather something more metaphorical. Some taplama doused in butter is much more homely to me than the couch in my living room because I can cherish the moment of rolling the dough with my grandma and the memories of my sister and I having butter all over our chins.

(I will confess however, that my picky eater tendencies have followed me into adulthood.)

Buettner’s discussion of “Going for an Indian” also sparked some interest for me. Claiming Tikka masala as a national British dish surprised me when I read it. Not only did the British Empire have a long history of colonization in South Asia (and basically the entire world), but their treatment of South Asians is also just atrocious. The British claim the food of South Asians as their own yet treat them with intolerance and racial prejudice. It was like Bald’s description of “Oriental goods” in Bengali Harlem, where Westerners would acquire these products from “Oriental” vendors, but racism and discrimination were still running rampant. The picking and choosing of elements of cultures makes my eyes roll to the very back of my head, and even that isn't enough to show off my annoyance. It shows how white settlers have this privilege that allows them to ransack as many countries as they like for their resources, but do not suffer from any consequences. They can proudly leech off of India, call chicken tikka masala their own national dish, and still have so much power. If a South Asian person said “Oh, I’m going for a Brit”, and got fish and chips, British nationalists would probably have a heart attack.

In his autobiography, Malcom X discusses his time in prison, both at Concord Prison and Norfolk Prison Colony. He would have two very contrasting experiences, one being full of gossip and hatred while the other encouraged a more "intellectual" atmosphere of debate and discussion. I found these chapters really amazing, as it shows the flow of Malcom X's thoughts in these times that truly shape him as a person and an important political and social figure. His articulation is very interesting as he is aware about certain things regarding himself. For example, there are the themes of writing and history that go hand in hand in this novel. After Reginald explains that the white man is the devil, Malcom X goes through this long process of contemplation. He thinks of all the white people he had encountered in his life, understanding how they, and other white people, have prevented POC from acknowledging and understanding their own greatness. Their version of Christianity encourages self-hatred and calls "black" a curse. Elijah Muhammad, a black messenger of Allah, completely counteracts these beliefs. Not only does he provide Black Muslims representation, his teaching also promotes greatness. Malcom X's interpretations of Elijah Muhammad and his messages comes in the form of research and reading. His original frustration with writing is quite relatable. Speaking is not the same as writing. Writing calls for some type of formality, especially when one considers who the message is directed at. Malcom X's perseverance to learn and expand his knowledge is quite admirable. At first it is simply a means to articulate himself, but it slowly develops into something else. With this new understanding, he was able to learn about the history of white supremacy, colonialism, and the atrocities committed against POC. He learns that there is power in writing as he reflects how the history of Black people is either erased or minimized in history books. This completely contrasts the words of Elijah Muhammad, who's main focus is the black community, and highlights their historical greatness. Furthermore, Malcom X learns of the treatment of the Chinese by the West. He sees how the white man, or the white devil, not only hurts African-Americans, but all those who do not match "Whiteness". The Chinese suffered at the Treaty of Nanking and at the hands of America, France and the British. Even in 1901 during the Boxer Rebellion, they were calling for the deaths of white devils.
Malcom X's relationship with writing reminds me of Michel-Rolph Trouillot, a Haitian anthropologist. His work Silencing the Past emphasizes what Malcom X realized. There is an absence in history about minorities and POC. However, one can still gain knowledge from this gap, as an absence still provides a person with an answer.

The autobiography of Omar Ibn Said offers much insight into the enslavement of African Muslims in the Americas during the 18th century. According to Omar Ibn Said’s account, he was taken from Senegal and enslaved. He would recount being sold off to evil men like Johnson, running away, and talks positively of his experience with Jim Owen, a slave owner that treated him humanely (i.e. not making him do hard labour, feeding him, etc). What is interesting about this autobiography was the fact that it was translated, from Arabic, by Isaac Bird, a missionary that was stationed in Syria.
I was wondering what would lead a missionary to translate the work of a Muslim. If their purpose is to spread their Christian faith, would it not have been better to hide away Said’s accounts of being an enslaved African Muslim? Or was Said’s “questionable” (in the words of Diouf, p. 83) enough of a success story? Furthermore, I was curious as to how trustful his translation could be.
In my very first semester, I took a class called “Islamic Civilization”, and in this class, we discussed the importance and controversies of translation. Translations can carry the author’s biases, thus changing the original work. Could it be that Bird changed elements of Said’s work? Moreover, could his work be re-translated in our current day an age? If so, what kind of translator would be acceptable?
Another aspect I was curious about was the intended audience of Said’s work. He states that he was asked to write about his life, but I wonder what he had in mind when he was writing. He seems to address Americans at one point: “O ye Americans, ye people of North Carolina” (p. 90). I wonder why he would address them especially in a language they would not understand.

Another aspect I wanted to touch upon was Diouf’s discussion of upholding the 5 Pillars of Islam in a context that would prevent one from doing so. He dives the initial example of the first pillar, the profession of faith. Diouf lists many African Muslims that maintained their profession of faith despite the intervention of missionaries. Examples like Ayuba Suleyman Diallo and Bilali Mohamed demonstrate the resilience of African Muslims in the face of adversaries.
The reason why I am so hung up on this aspect of dedication is due to the similarities I found in another work, this time in a fictional context. Shannon Chakraborty’s historical fantasy, The Adventures of Amina al-Sirafi, tells the story of a Muslim female pirate during the Golden Age of Islam around the Arabian Peninsula. The reason I bring this completely contrasting work up is because someone like Amina, a criminal who is constantly faced with obstacles that intervene with her faith, also makes sure she practices the 5 Pillars of Islam. I think these various accounts, both real and fictional (although there are actual accounts of Muslim women as pirates like Sayyida al Hurra!) are really representative of how resilient Muslim populations, like that of West Africa, are.

(Side note: I HIGHLY recommend Chakraborty's novel, she has such an addictive and exciting way of writing and every single character in this book was so much fun. She represents many intersecting topics such as sexuality, religion and gender in a very interesting way)