Sufi Comics has published its first book, 40 Sufi Comics! If you're not familiar with Sufi Comics, it's a series by two Bangalore-based brothers, Arif and Ali, which conveys various Sufi teaching tales and religious stories through the medium of web comics.
Okay, maybe Ali's not Jack Kirby, but the drawings are charming and expressive, and everybody has to start somewhere. I think the overall effect of the comics is consistent with the humility and simplicity of the Sufi path. And any time people can manage to transmit religious knowledge with some humour, we're all over that. I find it's "teachy" without being preachy.
The book is a collection of the first 40 comics they've produced, and it includes a page after each one with relevant verses from the Qur'an and traditions from the Prophet (pbuh) and his companions. Sometimes Ali includes a few thoughts of his own about particular comics. So even if you've followed the comics as they were published and read them all online, there's still material in the book that augments them.
The book is available for free download, and will soon be available in print from Amazon, which could make a nice gift for someone, especially those just beginning to learn about Islam. And of course, you can read all the comics online. Here are two of our favourites:
Neman's choice (note that the imam's face is not illustrated in keeping with Islamic traditions about depictions of holy personalities):
Portal of the Great Mosque of Cordoba, Spain showing reflective and translational symmetries and decoration with complex tessellations
Anyone who has known me for a while knows how much I love the work of Dutch graphic artist MC Escher. While his work is extremely popular and well-recognized (though many might not know his name), what a lot of people don't realize is that Escher was deeply inspired by Islamic art.
Of the four famous Escher drawings above, only one directly ties into the Islamic inspiration.
Hopefully the tiles above helped answer that question. The tiles are actually a painting done by Escher, based on one of the Alhambra tile patterns. I replicated it to show the extended tessellation pattern more clearly; the actual painting is only one tile. (That makes what I did above…reptiling!) [Deborah, please don't edit that out. It's the highlight of my comedy career.] Escher visited the Alhambra first in 1922 and again in 1936. His work was never the same again.
Prior to 1937, his work was representational, but the effect of seeing the Alhambra was that Escher's work began to incorporate the stunningly intricate and complex mathematics of Islamic geometric patterns. He described tessellations, a mathematical term for tiling without any empty spaces or overlaps, as "the richest source of inspiration that I have ever tapped." Escher's third major period began in 1946 where he used perspective to great effect, creating impossible situations such as Waterfall. By 1956 he began focusing on the infinite, in works such as Snakes and these infinite tessellations below:
Escher considered it a pity that the tessellations were restricted to figures with abstracted geometrical shapes, thinking maybe even it had never occurred to the Moorish artist to use recognizable figures. Personally, I think what people can create with restrictions/guidelines (self-imposed or otherwise) can be infinitely amazing and inspiring.
In Islamic art, the spiritual world is regarded as being reflected in nature through geometry and rhythm. Hence, Islamic artists used geometry as an aid to raise their spiritual understanding as well as the viewer's.
Gelgi quotes the North Texas Institute for Educators on the Visual Arts:
Muslim intellectuals recognized in geometry the unifying intermediary between the material and the spiritual world. These patterns may be seen as symbolizing the Islamic principles of 'Tawhid' (the unity of all things) and 'Mizan' (order and balance), which are the laws of creation in Islam.
The kicker is the following beautiful insight that will likely stick with me forever, because it so perfectly puts into words what I have always felt when looking at either Escher's work, or Islamic architecture's stunning geometrical expressions of the divine (a sacred and meditative geometry in its own right):
Tessellations are one of the major components of Islamic art. Islamic artists mastered regular division of plane using, in particular, circles on triangular or square grids, because the circle – which has no beginning and no end and thus symbolizes infinity – was considered to be the most perfect geometric form. In mosques, where a wealth of these geometric patterns could be found, one could contemplate the infinite nature of God simply by looking at the walls or ceiling. In short, these geometric forms expressed Islamic artists' fascination with mathematics as a metaphor for divine order and presence.
Look at these few incredible examples of Islamic artistry:
La Mezquita (The Cathedral-Mosque of Córdoba)
Alhambra tile tessellations
Detail of tiles in the Alhambra
Alhambra "magical ceiling"
Escher was a mathematical, artistic, architectural, and communicative genius. But let's remember the Muslim artists and mathematicians who hand-carved the tiles. They did the heavy math – and the heavy lifting – hundreds of years before Escher, Penrose, and others. These inspired Muslims worked to great and lasting positive effect, long before their techniques' "discovery" by Europeans. Islam's arguably most-known and strangely least-acknowledged visual brand – by those who wish to believe Islam is nothing but barbarians wielding swords – is its geometric artistry and its indelible impact on art, architecture, and history. It's almost as if acknowledging the mindblowing beauty of these rivals to the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel or Notre Dame might somehow bring to light that Islam isn't a religion of crazed maniacs and bloodthirsty freaks. It's actually a way of life that values contemplation, peace, beauty, order, unity, and balance.
(Spoiler alert: this post discusses these issues in detail.)
The story so far: The City of Tomorrow falls apart at its opening as an evil underling infects its citizens with something that causes everyone to start beating on everyone. The whole world is devolving into a massive G20 summit, but instead of Toronto Police Services beating the Jahannam out of people standing around taking pictures or wearing black pants, it's each other. Dr. Ramzi of The 99 Steps Foundation, a few of his protégés, Superman, Wonder Woman, and Lucius Fox are doing what they can to hold it together. Hawkman and a crew on the other side of the world have discovered a new Noor stone, the object that gives the members of THE 99 their powers, and boy is it wreaking havoc, earthquake-style. Batman, monitoring the Earth from the Justice League satellite, quickly realizes there are multiple earthquakes and all the sudden violence around the world is related, but he's not yet sure how.
In the second issue (34 pages with a lot of ads, but this time my shields were up and I was ready, unlike back in issue 1), we learn the instigator for all this is none other than Ramzi's arch-nemesis, Rughal. Yes, that old crazy man is at it again. We also see that Superman has something weird at the base of his skull, and it's not the Best Neck Tattoo EVAR. Disappointed, Supes. The Man of Fe3C however, is becoming less interested in the people taking crazy pills. He's put himself above it all – literally – leaving the rest of the pack to deal. The City of Tomorrow is sealed off by the evil underling, and Batman finally stands up to let us all know that Earth is under attack from a giant starfish named Starro the Conqueror. (Much more lifelike picture here.) A starfish. Uh huh…
Comic Vine has a summary and list of characters in the issue here.
After plunging into the graphic novels that came to North America in the late 1980s, and being introduced to the possibility of serious, noir work in comic form, I think my standards and expectations have changed even though I've hardly read any comics over the last 25 years. I'm finding the dialogue and hyperbole in issue 2 somewhat harder to handle than issue 1. There's so much jumping between threads that each storyline only gets about 5 minutes of advancement in story time. Not very satisfying.
My last complaint about issue 2 is the lack of anything even vaguely relevant to Islam. At the end of the comic we have a major revelation of cosmic proportions, the sort of thing that ought to cause anyone to drop a little G-D bomb. I know this isn't a Muslim comic, but the reasons THE 99 get the press they do definitely include their Islamic roots. Nothing. Not a thing. (I'm on about this not because I need to see Islam everywhere, but because it kinda matters to this blog, and this makes issue 2 almost irrelevant to Philosufi.)
So… no plot advancement, not much explanation, no Islam, and 10 pages of ads (7 about Batman). On the other hand, Superman has gone rogue and given up on humanity, so this could be fun.
Consider that our good deed for the month. We took one for the team.
On to the current action in issue 3. Seems that the evil underling has been spreading a new breed of the starro; not the normal drones that control your mind and make you a member of the Tea Party. These ones are microscopic, easily transmittable, and really fast-acting. Batman really gets down to work here, figuring out what's going on and funnels his idea into "safe-suit #3," a truly wicked-looking, bad-Bats armoured outfit that'll scare the ampullae out of any starfish.
Rughal is revealed to be not just an independent actor, but in a partnership with the chief Starro. (That's a misnomer; they're hive mind beings. But hey.) Like Superman and countless others, he's got one on the base of his neck, but unlike everyone else, Rughal intentionally chose this. Not that much else makes sense here, but Rughal's helping Starro to have humanity destroy itself and wants only the remaining cinders.
THE 99 kids are still all learning their powers and learning to work together. One of the more interesting aspects of the franchise is the requirement for teamwork. They work in triads, each person's powers complementing the group to fulfil their current mission. This isn't coincidence; it's something Dr. Naif Al-Mutawa, the inventor of THE 99 series, intentionally put in there to teach young readers. Another little thing about the kids – they're exceedingly polite, at least the ones we've seen so far. It's cute, and I actually rather like it. These are kids, and they're dealing directly with the Holy Trinity of superheroes as well as their disciples. Some manners are in order.
There is – for the first time – a little hint of Islam. One of THE 99, Rola Hadramy, better known as Batina the Hidden, makes her series debut. She is fully covered in a niqab built for action, and can make herself and others invisible. Batina is one of five of the 50 women who comprise THE 99 who will cover completely, showing there are multiple ways to interpret Islamic dress. Others, such as Samda the Invulnerable (she can project force fields) might loosely cover, while others like Mumita the Destroyer or Noora the Light might just start an affair with their hair. To be fair, all the names of THE 99 keep challenging me to remember the 99 Names of Allah and see how much I remember from my old Sunday school at the top of the Jami Mosquein Toronto with Dr. Mahdi. I have no idea how Dr. Ramzi keeps it all straight.
Can't wait to see what happens when Batina meets the half-naked but ludicrously-hijab'd Hawkman. Should be interesting.
Page count: 34, of which 12 are ads. Looks like my earlier ranting may have had an impact; only four of the full-page ads are about Batman.
Recently, Deborah wrote on article on Sakina Design in which she quoted Miles Young, Global CEO of Ogilvy & Mather Worldwide who I had the distinct pleasure of hearing lecture at the 2010 American Muslim Consumer Conference. She quoted one of his most important thoughts from the lecture:
Islam is not strongly enough associated, in this country, with design: with graphic design, with the arts, with fashion or creative design. And in this sense it differs from the minority Muslim communities in Europe and certainly from the majority Muslim communities. And let me tell you, art and design diffuse fear. They normalize, they soften...
Islamic imagery tends to fall into very few categories: crescents, stars, Arabic calligraphy, the hamsa, and swords, to give some primary examples. The idea that Islam was spread by the literal sword far more than the metaphorical one (i.e., the sword of truth) has been pretty well investigated and debunked repeatedly (agree, disagree, agree), but the strength of that idea and the iconic images of the sword die hard. (Some of it is propagated by Muslims, since it helps bolster the ego.) The problem is that it feeds the fantasies of Islamophobes, and helps justify their ideas that Islam and Muslims have always been and continue to be bloodthirsty and violent. We are our own worst enemies in this regard. Here is perhaps the most egregious example I've seen in the recent past:
This tie was created in November 2010 by Iranian designer Hemat Komeili. Iran has generally disapproved of Western-style neckties since the 1979 revolution. Allegedly in the early days of the revolution, men with ties were detailed and their ties were cut off. (I should emphasize these are rumours I've heard but haven't been able to confirm.) Komeili, sensing a deep sartorial gap, went to Islamic history and modeled the tie after Imam Ali's famous scimitar, Zulfikar ("bifurcated"). Komeili says that his tie has been approved by some of the "sources of emulation" (probably sounds better in Persian). He says it appears beautiful like a tie, in addition to being based on Islamic values. The inscription is based on a hadith of Prophet Muhammad, "There is no hero but Ali and no sword except Zulfiqar," after Ali's use of the sword to defeat a tremendous warrior during the Battle of the Trench.
It's a powerful historical symbol that means a lot to some Muslims, and in particular Shi'a Muslims (since it was Ali's sword). But if dawah through neckwear is your thing, check out these ties from Zazzle. They look good. (I rather like a few of them, like the Alhambra Elegance.) And you're not wearing a friggin' sword around your neck! Could you really wear this to any interview other than one for an Iranian government position? I'm not picking on Islam here. I'm picking on design that makes the wearer look…questionable. There are similar examples that aren't Islamic (e.g. this or this).
Perhaps the most famous visual association of the sword with Islam is on the flag of Saudi Arabia. Now I realize I'm treading on dangerous ground here, not qualifying my statements with history and context. My point is simple: sensibilities and understandings change as history unfolds and we encounter each other in all our diversity. Most people won't take the time to learn your context – they will only ever see it in theirs. Perception is all that matters. Moving people away from the idea of all Muslims being frothing-at-the-mouth nutjobs, and toward the realistic understanding that of the 1.57 billion Muslims in the world, only a tiny fraction is barking mad, requires (among things) a significant exercise of rebranding through design. It might not be the single most important thing, but it's not as trivial as some might think. That was Miles Young's point: art and design aren't negligible. They are critical elements of communicating with others. (It's one of the reasons we are selling T-shirts rather than handing out pamphlets expounding our philosufi.)
Drop the swords, yelling, and screaming. Change comes from within. Enough with the swords. Even taking into account the strongly aniconic elements of Islam, our tradition has such a mindblowing history of art and design – I mean seriously, when you see some of the simply stunning examples of Islamic calligraphy or Islamic architecture, is a sword really the best we can do? Really?
Islam is not strongly enough associated, in this country, with design: with graphic design, with the arts, with fashion or creative design. And in this sense it differs from the minority Muslim communities in Europe and certainly from the majority Muslim communities. And let me tell you, art and design diffuse fear. They normalize, they soften...
We couldn’t agree more. So I want to tell you about an American company that is working to correct this tendency, taking a fresh approach to design and decor for the Muslim market.
Sakina Design is a California-based family-owned company producing stylish and appealing decor and gifts for Muslims with a modern, North American sensibility. Sakina Design’s website describes their approach to business:
The approach that guides Sakina Design is summarized by the word ihsan. Ihsan is the Islamic concept of perfection and excellence. The Qur'an teaches that inner faith should be reflected in deeds and actions, and that social responsibility is another manifestation of this faith.
Therefore, our approach centers on providing customers with excellent products that adhere to Islamic values and principles. We ensure that the materials that go into our products are top quality, and we make every effort to minimize harm to the environment. We use recycled and recyclable materials, and give back to the community by donating a portion of our sales to charity. Please see our Sakina Green page for additional information about our commitment to the environment.
I somehow stumbled across the company last summer, while I was in the throes of preparing for a number of family weddings, including Neman’s sister’s. As soon as I saw Sakina’s pieces of wall art, inspired by classical Islamic art and calligraphy, I knew they would make a perfect wedding gift for his sister and her husband-to-be. His sister has travelled through Turkey and Spain, among many other places, and I knew she loves Turkish art—she was incorporating Turkish tile imagery into her wedding décor—and loved the Alhambra. So I ordered the Iznik and Alhambra wall decor pieces immediately. Jontie of Sakina Design was incredibly helpful. The Alhambra piece was not in stock at the time I wanted it—Jontie said it’s been their most popular pattern—but a production run was about to take place, and he asked his producer make some Alhambra pieces first. While I was at it, I ordered one of each of the greeting cards, too.
Everything arrived very quickly and in perfect condition—I had been worried that the pieces, which are glass, could arrive broken. But everything was packed perfectly and there were no problems. Shipping was incredibly cheap—$10 USD if I recall correctly—but I should warn other Canadian customers: the duty and taxes were somewhat gobsmacking. So you will want to budget for our government’s pound of flesh. But it was worth it. Everything was absolutely beautiful—I wanted to keep the gifts for ourselves! Every piece was attractive, well-made, and good quality. The wall art works in both traditional and contemporary interiors. The square shape and manageable size of the wall art pieces contributes to their versatility in interiors (see Sakina Design's Decorating Tips page for several photos of how they can be combined and displayed).
I was glad I’d ordered some of the greeting cards; they are even finer than they look on the website. You may not be able to tell from some of the images, but the greeting card designs are not printed: they’re laser-cut overlays on coloured paper. They come with several inserts for the covers, both pre-printed (in English on one side and Arabic on the other), as well as some blank ones so you can inscribe your own greeting or salutation. And Jontie had generously included several Sakina bookmarks, which are as nicely made as everything else, and are currently gracing various books in progress.
If you are searching for unique and tasteful items to give as gifts or keep for yourself, I strongly recommend Sakina Design’s products. I am looking forward to ordering some wall art for our own home when we have the funds (maybe as a graduation gift to myself). In the meantime, I will enjoy seeing it at my sister-in-law’s place, and I look forward to each new item from this company.
Comedy has this way of getting you to drop your guard. Satire is particularly strong at telling the truth behind a story. No one does comedy and satire quite like the British, who coincidentally, have experienced decades of terrorism and internal strife. So who better to create Four Lions, a cheery, sneery, adoring, and loathing film about five idiotic but deadly earnest Muslim suicide bombers from Sheffield? Omar (the ringleader), Waj (strong and smart as an ox), Barry (the zealous and fiery "revert"), Faisal (the pathetic redshirt), and Hassan (the rapping joker playing a game that became real) are five men who have every intention of carrying out this murderous act, to wound the (perceived) enemies of Islam and radicalize the moderate Muslims to rise up against the West. Think Manuel from Fawlty Towers meets 24 and you're in firing range of Four Lions.
Waj and his tiny AK-47. "Proper replica!"
We enter into the film in the final days of their plot, as they attempt to make their jihadi videos, and two of them (Omar and Waj) get called to a training camp in Pakistan. After screwing up big time (pay attention to the end credits!), Omar and Waj are kicked out and returned to the UK. The crew must recalibrate and create their own deadly plan – suicide bombing the London Marathon.
As a comedy, the film is funny and extremely absurd – straight up, we both laughed at pretty much everything, and some of the stuff was note-perfect. (Watch the deleted scenes for more memorable lines.) Sure, the characters were more stereotype than archetype, but that's pretty forgivable for this film. It's a meditation on idiocy, not a character study. It was an entry at Sundance in January 2010, had a very small release in British theatres in May (initially only 115 screens, upped to 200, but still pulled in £3M), and only recently came to North America in November 2010. It's received loads of critical attention and acclaim (including 81% fresh at Rotten Tomatoes), but made strangely little noise here. It's being distributed in the US by Drafthouse Films (you can find out where it's playing now, and where it will be playing, on the main page of that site). One thing's for sure – this is a British film. There's no way a comedy like this could be made in America, and maybe that's one of the reasons it just hasn't made much of a splash – the sensitivities and sensibilities are just different. ["Plus the accents, idioms, and slang are pretty challenging, I think, to most North American ears. Thank God for subtitles. I had to watch it a second time with the subtitles on to catch all the dialogue and jokes. Even without the difficult subject matter, films like this are a hard sell in America." -- Deborah.]
One quick side note about our different sensibilities – where North Americans like to praise and defend freedom of speech when it meets our needs (see our article on Medal of Honor), note the comments of the sister of a woman who died in the 7/7 London suicide bombings who says, "I feel just because for me it's personally a sensitive subject that it's not something that shouldn't be tackled. It should be tackled and maybe this will provide a platform for some honest and upfront discussion." In the same article, a Muslim youth worker points out "[t]he moral of the story is that the Muslims are not the terrorists, it's the idiots that are the terrorists." and "[i]f Muslims get offended by terrorists having the mickey taken out of them, it just means they're attached to and they believe in that terrorism, so I don't think any Muslim should be offended by that."
As a statement against terrorism, Four Lions is not your average American "terrorists are bad" film. While four of the five suicide bombers are almost completely comic and two-dimensional, the de facto leader Omar manages to get in a full life, with a loving wife (Sofia), pre-teen son (Mahmood), and a deeply religiously observant brother (Ahmed). The film is filled with things we discussed late into the night, and Omar's relationship with his family was one of them. His family members all know about his plot; Sofia and Mahmood are loving and encouraging, and Ahmed is the only one making any effort to talk him out of it. The way Omar is lovingly encouraged to carry out his murderous plot by happy Sofia and the adoring (and adorable) Mahmood, the way they playfully banter and the Lion King-based stories Omar tells Mahmood about their plans all defy our stereotypical understanding of the terrorist as scary, isolated wack job.
Sofia is cast as modern, liberated, and not at all under Omar's thumb. She laughs, and defends her husband and herself with a squirt gun when his brother comes to talk him out of his plan. Later in the film, after an accident that leaves one of the group dead, Omar temporarily suspends the plan. Discussing it that night with Sofia, his sadness is evident; she says half-jokingly, "you were much more fun when you were gonna blow yourself up, love." Let's face it – some of these people have supportive families, and that might be the scariest part. If you truly believe that dying to defend the cause results in going to heaven as a martyr, then death should be a happy event. ["I am still struggling to make sense of Omar's family and their relationship to each other, and what director Morris was trying for here. If Omar is so worried about one of his wanna-be mujahideen cronies blowing their cover (justifiably so--they're all morons), why is he casually sharing his plans for a suicide mission with his young son? Children aren't typically known for their discretion. And it's not like he's terrorized his wife and child into silent obedience. In every respect save for the suicide mission, they have a normal, loving, warm, conventional, comfortable existence. Nothing about Sofia suggests that she holds radical ideology. I agree that those who believe in suicide martyrdom probably do welcome death as some sort of joyous achievement, but nothing in the portrayal of Sofia and Mahmood suggests they share these beliefs. I really am not sure what is going on here, and it was by far the most problematic part of the film for me." -- Deborah.]
Omar and Sofia have a laugh at Ahmed's expense
My favourite part of the idiocy and delusions is when the egomaniacal and power-hungry Barry (who adopts the nom de Islam "Azzam Al-Britani" but can't get anyone to call him that) can justify any target or action by twisting all rationality into a pretzel and the weakest-minded cell members (i.e., everyone but Omar) all follow what he has to say--from bombing a mosque to "pushing a baked bean up the end of [their] knob[s]"--to demonstrate submission and dedication.
We had difficulty with the lack of justification presented for their terrorism. Yes, they're angry, yes there's a war in Iraq, in Afghanistan, oppression in Palestine, but most well-adjusted, comfortable people don't decide on suicide bombings. Maybe terrorist anger is the same as Tea Party anger – just anger, and the only perceived solution for their anger is escalating conflict and violence, because anything else would require communication, maturity, insight, sympathy, and empathy. ["Sorry, bro, that all smacks of effort." -- Deborah.] In other words, it's easier to punch someone than talk to them, and it's really easy to believe that someone else is the cause of all your problems. ["As director Chris Morris has said, 'Terrorism is about ideology but it’s also about doofuses.' This film is very heavy on exploring the 'doofus' part, and much lighter on the ideology part--although part of the commentary is definitely that their ideology, such as it is, is informed mainly by unfocused rage, piss-poor analysis and extremely confused politics." -- Deborah.]
Very few characters in the film aren't idiots, but every character is played 100% straight, even the spacey neighbour whom Hassan cluelessly invites into the secret flat and then might become a target for straight-up murder. Omar's brother Ahmed, who fails to talk Omar out of his plans, may have a solid intention, but he too is played for a fool because of his highly conservative tendencies. Even a co-worker of Omar's who runs marathons, and defends him in the end out of loyalty, goes on about talking to his legs. The best portrayal of idiocy, though, has got to be the police snipers at the London Marathon. Brilliant not only in their stupidity, but in their unwillingness to acknowledge the reality of what they've just done. ["Something that I think has been overlooked because of the controversies that overshadow this film is that Four Lions is actually quite an interesting exploration of male interaction--how men work together (or don't), how they relate under pressure, how they struggle for power, and so forth. There are only a couple of female characters in the film and other than Sofia, their roles are almost negligible. The focus is entirely on men's interactions and relations." -- Deborah.]
Here's the official trailer. (Click here to watch it on YouTube.)
See this movie if you can (and then come back here and comment on it -- we'd love to talk about it with more people). Four Lions is ultimately much bleaker than the trailer suggests, and one of the most uncomfortable comedies we've seen.
Recent Comments