The Thief and The Dogs | Fate and Free Will

Prompt: How does Mahfouz illustrate how fate is a major determiner of one’s happiness in life?

Within the novella, The Thief and The Dogs, Mahfouz illustrates how fate is a significant determiner of one’s happiness in life through the main character Said, and the actions of secondary characters.

Said Mahran was born in a lower socioeconomic class, which ultimately leads to a lack of opportunities and interactions with other classes. His circumstances of birth can be considered as a form of fate, as Said is not able to control his destiny. This destiny develops his internal and external conflict with upper classes and post-revolutionary society. His fate continues in his path of revenge and violence and the uncontrollable death of his parents. Said’s father died under mysterious circumstances, and her mother was denied treatment at a luxurious hospital. Both situations are uncontrollable, and we can see how his dissatisfaction drives him to commit his first theft. His predisposition in a social hierarchy was determined by faith and leads to a series of uncontrollable events which fuel his desire and obsession with revenge. With Rauf as his mentor, he believes that his understanding of self derives from his personal perception of the legitimacy of his actions.

This pattern is also evident in the actions of secondary characters. Again, this is identified as a form of fate as Said has little to no control of the behaviour of others. As a result of his turbulent childhood, Said seeks a father figure in Rauf, aligns his actions with the teachings of the Sheikh, and seeks an overly Romantic idealization of his relationship with Nabawiyya. However, through the actions of these secondary characters, he is betrayed by Ilish, Rauf and Nabawiyya. This further constricts his attainability of happiness in life and further motivates his revenge.  

The Thief and The Dogs | Passage Analysis

Chapter Four

Passage:

"You made me and now you reject me: Your ideas create their embodiment in my person and then you simply change them, leaving me lost –rootless, worthless, without hope—a betrayal so vile that if the whole Muqattam hill toppled over and buried it, I still would not be satisfied.

I wonder if you ever admit, even to yourself, that you betrayed me. Maybe you’ve deceived yourself as much as you try to deceive others. Hasn’t your conscience bothered you even in the dark? I wish I could penetrate your soul as easily as I’ve penetrated your house, that house of mirrors and object d’art, but I suppose I’d find nothing but betrayal there: Nabawiyya disguised as Rauf, Rauf disguised as Nabawiyya, or Ilish Sidra in place of both—and betrayal would cry out to me that it was the lowest crime on earth. Their eyes behind my back must have traded anxious looks throbbing with lust, which carried them in a current crawling like death, like a cat creeping on its belly toward a bewildered sparrow. When their chance came, the last remnants of decency and indecision disappeared, so that in a corner of the lane, even in my own house, Ilish Sidra finally said, “I’ll tell the police. We’ll get rid of him,” and the child’s mother was silent—the tongue that so often and so profusely told me, “I love you, the best man in the world,” was silent. And I found myself surrounded by police in Al-Sayrafi Lane—though until then demons themselves with all their wiles had failed to trap me—their kicks and punches raining down on me.

You’re just the same, Rauf—I don’t know which of you is the most treacherous—except that you guilt is greater because of your intelligence and the past association between us: You pushed me into jail, while you leapt free, into that palace of lights and mirrors. You’ve forgotten your wise sayings about palaces and hovels, haven’t you? I will never forget."

Analysis

This passage amplifies Said’s desire to seek revenge on Rauf, Nabawiyya and Ilish. By doing so, the narrator develops vital elements of Said’s tragic hero archetype, specifically his hamartia and hubris. In addition, the passage also reveals underlying themes such as the modernist genre’s concern with the individual and the disenfranchisement with the Egyptian Revolution.

The passage employs the stream of consciousness narration technique to probe deeply into the complexities of Said’s thoughts and motivations, while simultaneously giving clues to his mental condition, emotional stability and intellect. By doing so, Mahfouz characterizes Said Mahran’s external reality and his feelings of rage, revenge and betrayal. Through the use of indirect internal monologue, Mahfouz describes Said’s relationship with Rauf as “You made me and now you reject me: Your ideas create their embodiment in my person, and then you simply change them, leaving me lost –rootless, worthless, without hope”. The use of parallelism within this quote illustrates the changing relationship between Said and Rauf. This leads to his revengeful nature as “a betrayal so vile that if the whole Muqattam hill toppled over and buried it, [Said] still would not be satisfied.” This analogy emphasizes his inability to control his overwhelming emotions of anger. Ultimately, his inability to adapt to change to post-revolutionary Egypt and control such feelings shape his hamartia and evoke empathy from the reader.

Another aspect of Said’s tragic hero archetype is his behavior of always justifying his path of revenge. This is evident in the rhetorical question “Hasn’t your conscience bothered you even in the dark?”. Rather than focusing on Said’s own actions, he justifies his burglary with his feelings of revenge, which develop his hubris. In addition, Said wishes he “could penetrate [Rauf’s] soul as easily as [he] penetrated [Rauf’s] house, that house of mirrors and object d’art, but [he] supposes [he’d] find nothing but betrayal there”. By juxtaposing Rauf’s extravagant house (through the use posh diction) with Said’s actions of burglary, Mahfouz illustrates to the reader the contrasting roles during the Egyptian revolution. Consequently, this develops the underlying theme of Said’s inability to adapt to change to post-revolutionary Egypt.

In addition, the narrator uses animal imagery to characterize Said. For example, the narrator compares Said “like a cat creeping on its belly toward a bewildered sparrow”. The use of animal imagery suggests that Said’s behavior is barbaric; characteristics which are incompetent with the new social changes in Egypt. By doing so, this invites the reader to comprehend Said’s struggle to control his circumstances, a conventional technique used to justify Said’s actions throughout the passage.

Ultimately the ending of the passage marks a flashback in the plot, which marks Said’s reversal of fortunes (peripeteia). After Ilish called the police and Said found himself “surrounded by police in Al-Sayrafi Lane—though until then demons themselves with all their wiles had failed to trap me—their kicks and punches raining down on me,” his fates continue to worsen. Subsequently, this sheds light on Said’s attitude towards Rauf and his hunger for revenge.

The Thief and The Dogs | Stream of Consciousness Narration

Prompt: How and to what effect does Mahfouz employ stream of consciousness narration in the novel?

‘Stream of consciousness’ is a narrative technique which aims to depict a multitudinous flow of a character’s impressions –visual, emotional, physical, subliminal—to form part of one’s awareness and consciousness. Through this technique, readers are immersed in the sensation and uncensored thought of a character’s mind. Often, authors choose to use this technique through interior monologue, in which the character’s thoughts and emotions take over the narrator.  

The use of the stream of consciousness technique is evident in the psychological realism novel, The Thief and The Dogs. Mahfouz broke away from panoramic narration and combines realism and stream of consciousness narration. Specifically, Mahfouz uses interior monologue to probe deeply into the complexities of Said’s thoughts and motivations, while simultaneously giving clues to his mental condition, emotional stability and intellect. By doing so, Mahfouz characterises Said Mahran’s external reality and his feelings of rage, revenge and betrayal.

Throughout the novel, Mahfouz switches between third person-omniscient narration and the interior monologue of Said. This invites the reader to comprehend Said’s struggle to control his circumstances. For example, when Said is released from prison he describes himself as “a man who can dive like a fish, fly like a hawk, scale walls like a rat, pierce solid doors like a bullet!” (pg. 14). Such use of animal imagery to describe his animalistic nature is also evident when he infiltrates Rauf’s house; “like a cat creeping on its belly toward a bewildered sparrow” (pg. 48). The use of animal imagery in suggests that Said’s behaviour is barbaric; characteristics which are incompetent with new social changes in Cairo. In addition, the narration allows the reader to sympathize with Mahran and understand his emotions to explain his barbaric actions: “You made me, and now you reject me… I wonder if you ever admit, even to yourself, that you betrayed me… You pushed me into jail, while you leapt free… I will never forget” (pg. 47-48).

As the novel progresses, Said’s desire for revenge cause his thoughts to become less rational, and his emotions increasingly volatile. Subsequently, Said’s narration and description of secondary characters become subjective and biased. The reader is now continuously urged to engage more with the novel in order to make meaning of the situation. This is evident in Said’s perception of being an excellent thief: “You’ll get away without a scratch, just as easily as you have scores of times: you can scale an apartment building in seconds, jump unhurt from a third-floor window—even fly if you wish!”. Such heroic and competent characterization stands in stark contrast with Said’s failure to rob Rauf’s house, his murder on two innocent people and ultimately his downfall. It is also interesting to notice how the combination of both omniscient third-person narration and stream of consciousness narration characterizes Mahran’s contrasting perspective of justice and revenge.

In an interview with the Paris Review, Mahfouz stated: “A simple crime tale became a philosophical meditation on the times! I subjected the main character, Sayyid Mahran, to all my confusion, my perplexities.”. This context of production suggests that Mahfouz wanted to highlight the confusion he experienced during the post-revolution period in Egypt. In order to illustrate his perplexities to the reader, the stream of consciousness allows the reader to experience confusion due to the duality in reality and Said’s emotional thoughts and associations.

In comparison to Achebe’s novel Things Fall Apart, both authors have used third-person omniscient narration. However, as opposed to Mahfouz’s stream of consciousness narration, Achebe presents each character’s private thoughts and emotions through the third-person narration. He achieves this by shifting the narration between characters; the novel begins with Okonkwo, thought of Ikemefuna, Nwoye and the District Commissioner in the closing statement. This serves his purpose and mission of delivering a plot with duality; various emotions, multiple perspectives, reactions. Achebe wants to illuminate the danger of the single story, and in order to achieve this, multiple approaches and characters are necessary to deliver the mentality of duality. This sense of duality is also seen in The Thief and The Dogs, however, to a lesser extent as the reader relies on Said’s comprehension of secondary characters. Instead, Mahfouz decides to focus on the duality between reality and Said’s multitudinous impressions. 

Translated Literature

Your task is to write a response that evaluates the study of literature in translation. Your response should demonstrate an awareness of specific benefits and challenges through references to today’s readings, as well as making tangible connections to the learning outcome from Part 3 of the course.

When literature is translated from one language to another, historical, cultural and social contexts are significant aspects not only for the translator but also as a reader. An example of a translated literature is the novel The Thief and the Dogs, written by the Egyptian writer and Nobel Prize winner Naguib Mahfouz. Initially, the novel was published in Arabic and translated for non-Arab speakers in English. Such translation not only illuminates the importance of translated literature but also the many challenges that come with it.

 A pivotal benefit of translated literature is that it allows readers to gain insights into different perspectives, experiences, social and cultural values. As mentioned in the article “Found in Translation”, translated literature provides an insight in “the ways that people think and work and suffer and fall in love and make enemies and sometimes make revolutions”. Often public television, documentaries or archaeological discoveries fail to divert our focus on such human experiences and emotions. As a result, translated literature gives us a new curiosity and understanding to questions we did not know we wanted to ask. Another substantial benefit that comes with translated literature is that it encourages readers to develop an open-minded and international awareness of other cultural and religious values. Instead of focusing on literature written in their mother language and native culture, readers are now exposed to novel experiences which could not be shared if the literature were not to be translated.

While there many benefits that come with translated literature, it also equips challenges which are significant to consider when reading and analyzing novels such as The Thief and the Dogs. As Amara Lakhous stated: “translation is a journey over a sea from one shore to the other. Sometimes I think of myself as a smuggler. I cross the frontier of language with my booty of words, ideas, images and metaphors.” In other words, this allusion illustrates that, like smuggling, translation has a risk involved when done incorrectly. In the article, “What Makes a Good Literary Translator” is it evident that one of these risks is the impossibility to translate literature directly. Instead, translators attempt to recreate the essence and mood of the text to maintain its intention, authenticity and attitude. If a translator fails to capture this essence, the limits of expression cause a loss of purity. Subsequently, criticism may arise, as seen in the recent controversy of author Feng Tang translation of Tagore’s ‘Stray Birds’ poem. Such challenges lead to a misinterpretation of mood, style and emotion by the reader in which the original intent of the author is lost.