| |
|
|
 |
| On the train from Ankara to Instanbul, by Jeremy Walton ’99 |
|
  |
In Turkey, the law forbids female students and government
workers from wearing headscarves; in Sudan, the law requires modest dress, which has been
interpreted to mean wearing loose clothes and covering one’s hair. Such differences
in legislated dress are just a small reflection of greater political agendas.
The 1920s secularist reforms of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk fostered
the modern secular Turkish state, and those reforms trickled down to the illegality of
wearing headscarves in public buildings. |
| |
|
|
 |
Bosphorus, Atatürk Bridge, Ortaköy
Mosque
Photos taken by Jeremy Walton (left). Fatih Mosque, Istanbul
(right).
|
 |
|
Conversely, Sudan’s National Islamic Front (NIF) took power in 1989
and sought to Islamicize both public institutions and national character through what it termed
its Civilizational Project. There the wearing of the headscarf was mandated through strict interpretation
of the article of the criminal code regulating “disgraceful dress.”
Throughout the twentieth century, many Muslim-majority nations have
struggled to determine the nature of their law. Should it incorporate principles from the
sacred law (and, if so, to what extent)? Or should it remain beyond the sphere of religion?
While
usually portrayed as a clear either/or choice, the reality is not so straightforward.
At Reed, the complex relationship between religion and politics in society
is a subject of critical study in the religion department. This past March, a Reed symposium
addressed this relationship between Islam and secularism in modern states. Chaired by Kambiz
GhaneaBassiri, assistant professor of religion and humanities, the Religion Department Union
on Contemporary Islam brought together students, faculty, and local alumni to hear and discuss
papers by Jeremy Walton ’99 and Noah Salomon ’99, both department graduates who
are now Ph.D. students at the University of Chicago. Walton and Salomon questioned the rigid
dichotomy between a state based on Islamic principles and one based on secular liberalism.
They illustrated that, although national tensions exist between secularism and Islamism, these
two “-isms” can and do coexist in localized contexts.
next page

|
|