Editor for this issue: Naomi Ogasawara <naomi
linguistlist.org>
Dunne, Michele Durocher. Democracy in Contemporary Egyptian Political Discourse. Discourse Approaches To Politics, Society and Culture. John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2003 Announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/14/14-2639.html Ihab A. I. Shabana, Visiting Research Student, SOAS, University of London; Assistant Lecturer, Department Of English, Al-Azhar University, Egypt Political discourse or the study of politics on the basis of discourse analysis has taken prominence over the last decade of the 20th.century. Previous contributions were concerned more with the use of language in politics. Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four is a classical example which inspired prominent scholars like Chilton (1988) to approach the use of political language in the media. Fairclough (1989) and Wilson (1990) are also among the leading works that contribute to the well establishing of the study of politics and discourse. Chilton and Sch�ffner (1997) and (2002) are also among the building blocks towards establishing an interdisciplinary area of research that needs more contributions. Dunne's work in hand is a good step on the way. This book presents a good introduction to the issue of democracy in Egypt as one of the most pivotal countries in the Middle East. The motivation for this topic was the feeling of frustration experienced by the author at the difficulty American experts find in reading rightly public discourse on many political issues including democracy. She also admits that another reason for opting to tackle the issue of democracy is the variety of different interpretations, which surround the march of democracy in Egypt, and the different attitudes she came across. The selected data, although all concerned with the issue of democracy, vary greatly. They comprise excerpts from presidential speeches of president Mubarak during the period 1999-2000, a written appeal signed by leaders of the opposition parties in late August/early September 1999 and an earlier declaration by Arab human rights activists in a human rights conference hold in Casablanca issued in April 1999 under the title ''Casablanca Declaration'', analyzed by the author for comparison. In addition there are newspaper reflections from two eminent columnists at the Al-Ahram daily newspaper, Fahmi Huwaydi and Hala Mustafa, whose writings focus on democracy but from different perspectives; Huwaydi is classified as a moderate Islamist intellectual who does not see any contradiction between democracy and Islam, while Mustafa is perceived as a liberal intellectual who has wide connections with the government that may enable her to have access to policy makers in Egypt. Having introduced the data, in Chapter 2 Dunne presents the theoretical approach applied in her analysis. First, she reviews the thoughts of some prominent theorists in discourse like Bakhtin and Goffman. Then, she introduces Ron Scollon's theory of Mediated Discourse as an approach to the interpretation of social actions. According to Scollon (1998) all human actions are interactively mediated and hence our communicative practices are made via suitable means, either text or talk, to build a certain image in the mind of the receiver. Dunne also utilizes Critical Discourse Analysis, as applied by Ruth Wodak who has a special interest in the use of discursive strategies to build national image. Dunne finds in Wilson (1990) a model for her analytical work from a pragmatic perspective: in addition to implicature, presupposition metaphor, and question use, which are considered as primary linguistic tools for pragmatic analysis, Dunne, following Wilson, focuses on pronoun use and self-reference as an effective tool in politics for distancing oneself from a certain responsibility or even for positioning oneself at the center of policy making. In the course of her analysis, Dunne is mainly concerned with probing the purposes sought beyond a given discourse on democracy, and also how these purposes are realized through the use of language. In chapter 3, Dunne reviews the different contexts from which she has obtained her data. A visit paid to Egypt for fieldwork enabled her to provide clear and objective contextualization for the different types of discourse she analyses. In particular, interviews with some of the closest persons in the presidential circle afford her clear vision of how the president's speeches are written. In that regard, Mubarak, unlike his predecessors, does not have only one journalist responsible for drafting and preparing his speeches; rather they are prepared by a community of participants around him, depending on the degree of power each party enjoys. However, the mastermind of the final draft is his senior aide. This doesn't exclude the fact that Mubarak has the final say on his speech before delivering it in public. In the case of the opposition powers' petition, their lack of real power is apparent, and their constant endeavor to compromise with the government in exchange for more seats in the People's Assembly. This reflects, in my belief, the real dilemma of the democratic experience in Egypt. That is, there is a giant power (i.e. the National Democratic Party), which has dominated the political scene in Egypt since the return of the parties in the seventies, whereas all other parties do not hold any real ground among the people. The Islamic movement, represented in Muslim Brotherhood Group, and though officially banned by the government, is more popular than all the other opposition parties. It has seventeen MPs in the Assembly, elected in 2000 as independents. As for the intellectual journalists, both Huwaydi and Mustafa reflect their views on the issue of democracy in their writings. Huwaydi constantly stresses his belief in democracy but from an Islamic perspective, whilst Mustafa portrays herself as a democratic liberal who shows support for Mubarak's notion of gradable democratic reform. In Chapters 4 and 5, Dunne explores two key strategic functions of the discourses she analyses. The two prominent functions are ''constructing identity'' and ''power relations''. The linguistic devices she uses in her analysis are deixis (focusing on self-reference and the definite article) and interdiscursivity. She also uses other devices when needed to serve her purposes. According to Chilton and Sch�ffner (1997:212), the language of the elite in power reflects not only their thoughts but also their actions, for either those who govern or even those who are classified as opposition. This is highly recognizable in the language of the presidential excerpts. The speeches of the president are carefully prepared by his community of practice in order to enhance, center and stabilize the image of the president as the real holder of power in the country. However, the speeches also reflect the strong belief of the president in democracy as the ultimate option for the country. Similarly we can observe at which points the community of practice seem to use the definite article to distance the president from issues which may draw criticism from the audience. Such issues, from which the president is meant to be distant, include unfair previous elections and the credibility of the democratization process. This, in my view, reflects the power and centralization enjoyed by the presidential institution in Egypt as the real holder of power. In contrast, fragmentation, disunity and lack of coordination are fully apparent in the language used by opposition parties and those involved in the September 1999 petition. Their use of the pronoun ''they'' reflects a deep sense of depersonalization, and distancing from the content of the petition. This may of course show their fear of the potential consequences of the petition. In addition, they want to maintain space for negotiation with the government in attempt to secure seats in the new parliament. Unfortunately such negotiations may take place simply because the government is interested in having the opposition represented in the parliament, despite the fact that the opposition may not have enough support in their constituencies. This fact was discovered by the author in one of her interviews: a member told Dunne that the weak and disorganized situation reflects the lack of ''ideological commitment'' suffered by the opposition parties in their negotiations with the government for real democratic reform. The strategic function of ''identity construction'' therefore, on the part of the opposition parties, is affected by their fragile attitude towards the issue of democracy in Egypt. In the case of the two prominent columnists, Dunne notices that their endeavor to build their identity is largely shaped by the background of each. Here, things are more personalized, as each author attempts to persevere with the issue of democracy in his writings, but from their two different perspectives. Huwaydi usually positions himself as a defender of democracy, but from the Islamic point of view, while Mustafa presents herself as a 'think tank' with affiliation to the government (she writes for Al-Ahram newspaper, one of the main state institutions). However, both are similar in using the technique of interdiscursivity to express their commitment to president Mubarak's thoughts on democracy. It is also interesting that Dunne demonstrates Huwaydi's tendency to portray himself as an independent from Islamic movements, given that his father used to be a prominent figure in the Muslim Brotherhood, and despite the fact that he is widely perceived as an Islamist writer. In relation to power relations in the discourses of the different parties, it is clear that the community of practice in the presidential discourse aim at boosting the pro-democratic image of the president. At the same time however, ''framing'' the other and ''hidden polemic'' techniques are used in the president's speeches to reinforce the centralized power enjoyed by the presidential institution. Similar techniques are used for example to portray NGOs as a potential danger whose loyalty to the country is questionable. Power relations in the discourse of the September 1999 petition are again in the domain of keeping space for compromise with the government. This also reflects to what extent the opposition parties in the Egyptian political arena are weak and dependent on the government for gaining ground, even on a crucial issue like democracy. In respect of the discourses of Huwaydi and Mustafa on democracy, power relations are shown in the form of challenges to the other power groups. Each one uses interdiscursivity in his/her own interest; Mustafa presents herself as a pro-democrat to enhance her image as a prominent liberal intellectual, while Huwaydi uses his literary competence to show how far he is independent from the Islamists and also to negotiate power with the censors at the state-controlled press who may ban some of his weekly articles for different (or no) reasons. Chapter six assesses the findings Dunne revealed in her research. It is remarkable that there is no difference between the discourse of the presidential speeches on democracy and on practice. This reflects the top-down gradable democracy that is meant to be applied in Egypt by the ruling group, and which, in their view, will give the government the chance to qualify the people for further adaptation to democracy. Dunne considers that the use of the terms ''democracy'' and ''civil society'' was really an appeal to different communities during the pre-presidential election in 1999 as a sign of a new period for the president. However, she also demonstrated via interviews that democracy has become a well-established concept in Egyptian public discourse, in response to the global discourse in which Egyptians need to participate. In sum, the book in hand presents a thorough and objective study of the discourse of democracy in Egypt in different domains. It presents an analytical study of the production and processing of discourse in politics from pragmatic, ethnographic, sociolinguistic approach. It is considered as a useful source for students of linguistics in general, and of discourse and politics in particular. It is also a good case study on a contemporary issue for students of Near and Middle East studies. REFERENCES Chilton, Paul (1988) Orwellian Language and the Media, London: Pluto Press Chilton, P. and Sch�ffner, C. (1997), Discourse and Politics, in Teun van Dijk (ed.) Discourse as Social Interaction, London: Sage Publications pp. 206-230 Chilton, P. and Sch�ffner, C. (2002) Politics as Text and Talk, Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Fairclough, Norman (1989), Language and Power, London: Longman Scollon, Ron (1998) Mediated Discourse as Social Interaction, London and New York: Longman Wilson, John (1990), Politically Speaking, Oxford: Basil Blackwell ABOUT THE REVIEWER Ihab A. Shabana is a Ph.D. candidate at Al-Azhar, Egypt & SOAS, London. She is Assistant Lecturer of Linguistics, Al-Azhar, and Visiting Research Student at SOAS in 2002-2004. Her areas of interest include: Pragmatics, Political Discourse, Sociolinguistics and Translation studies.Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue