Table Of ContentWhat does the Veil know?
Eva Meyer &Vivian Liska
(editors)
What does the Veilknow?
Heike Behrend
Stephanie Benzaquen
AyseErkmen
Rike Felka
Silvia Henke
Benda Hofmeyr
Rembert Huser
11s Huygens
Carol Jacobs
Elfriede Jelinek
Vivian Liska
Eva Meyer
Willem Oorebeek
Johannes Porsch
Laurence A. Rickels
Avital Ronell
Hinrich Sachs
Eran Schaerf
Gisela Volger
Jan van EyckAcademie,Maastricht
Institute ofJewish Studies,University ofAntwerp
Edition Voldemeer Zurich
ttl
Springer Wien NewYork
Editors
EvaMeyer.Berlin
Vivian Liska.Antwerp
PublishedwithsupportfromtheJan vanEyckAcademie.Maastricht.
andtheInstituteofJewishStudies.UniversityofAntwerp.
Thisworkissubjecttocopyright.Allrights arereserved.whetherthewholeor partofthematerial
isconcerned.specificallythoseoftranslation.reprinting.re-useofillustrations.broadcasting.
reproductionbyphotocopyingmachine orsimilarmeans.and storageindatabanks.
Copyright ©2009bytheeditors.theauthors.andVoldemeerAGZiirich.
~7r
EditionVoldemeerZiirich
~ P.O.Box2174
CH-8027Ziirich
Fortheworks ofart copyright©2009bytheartists.
Fortheillustrationscopyright©2009bythephotographers.
Allrights reserved.
Translators:CathyKerkhoff-Saxon&WilfriedPrantner(ElfriedeJelinek.HinrichSachs.
EvaMeyer},HuangQi(!i7~·~l!-itJt?l.CecileRossant (RikePelka),
Production.design.and layout:EditionVoldemeerZiirich (HuangQi.JanisOsolin),
ThelayoutisbasedonaconceptbyPascaleGatzen,EvaMeyer.JohannesPorsch,Eran Schaerf.
Printing:Gebr.Klingenberg Buchkunst,Leipzig.
Paper:MunkenPure(ISO14001.EMAS.PaperProfile.FSC.PEFCl.
With84illustrations
ISBN 978-3-211-99289-0 SpringerWienNewYork
~ SpringerWienNewYork
Sachsenplatz4-6
A-12OIWien
www.springer.at
www.springeronline.com
Contents
What does the Veilknow? 9
VivianLiska UponRevisting - the Veil 12
ElfriedeJelinek The Cast-off Gaze 19
HeikeBehrend& GiselaVolger ABC ofthe Veil 25
Hinricn Sachs APresent-DayVeil: The Fiction ofCompleteness 31
WillemOorebeek Michael in the Snow 40
Avital Ronell OFF DUTY: The VeilsofServility 41
LaurenceA. Rickels VeilofTears 46
RikeFelka BetweenWord and Space 57
IlsHuygens Kiarostami's Ten: Mobilizing the Viewer's Look 66
BendaHofmeyr The Future that Death/Other gives 73
Stephanie Benzaquen Harbin Express 85
JohannesPorsch Uneseconde: Sample 103
SilviaHenke The Possibility ofa Sign 128
CarolJacobs Reading,Writing, Hatching 130
EranSchaerf AMatter ofConfidence 144
RembertHuser Fichu's Fritz 156
EvaMeyer The Veil'sFree Indirect Discourse about Itself 173
Ay§eErkmen Inserts 401 561 721 881 1041 1201 136\ 1521 168\ 1841
What does the Veilknow? ifil~"1-tJ~-itIt·? 183
Contributors 192
What does
the Veil
know?
What does the veil know but will oness and flees into a cave. leaving
not tell us directly? This phrasing her veil behind. The lioness, whose
may sound like an odd personifica muzzle is dripping with the blood of
tion- the veil is not a person and a fresh kill, rips Thisbe's veil.When
cannot know anything-but for the Pyramus finds the torn and blood
moment I would like the question stained veil.he concludes that the li
and the figure ofspeechjust to cross oness has killedThisbe and commits
your mind. like an epigraph or a suicide with his sword.WhenThisbe
haunting melody.Against this back findsPyramus'sdeadbody.shethrows
ground music. we can reexamine herselfon his blade.
how we define knowledge, know These are some ofthe first known
ledge by experience or personal ac referencestoveiling.andinterestingly
quaintance,knowledge as awareness enough.they allrefertothe veil'spo
offacts.knowledgeasanunderstand tential for leading to wrong conclu
ing of patterns of relations, and re sions. It is this very potential which
alize that the veilinsists. knows that is embraced by storytelling but re
there is more to it than we can ever strictedbylawinorderto containfe
know about it. male sexuality and to structure the
AnAssyrian legal text of the thir social status imposed on women: In
teenth century BCE restricts veiling the Assyrian, Greco-Homan, and By
to respectable women and prohibits zantine empires.as well as inpre-Is
it for prostitutes. The Middle-Assyr lamicIran.veilingandseclusionwere
ian Lawsfrom 750-612BCEprescribe marksofprestige and symbolsofsta
punishment for a harlot or slave girl tus. Onlywealthy families could af
foundwearingaveilinthestreet. Ovid ford toseclude their women.The veil
(43BCE-17CE) inBookIVofhisMeta was a sign of respectability but also
morphosesrelies onthe veiltoconvey ofa lifestylethat did not require the
aBabylonianlovestory:Pyramus and performance ofmanual labor.Its ab
Thisbe fall in love.but their parents sence was asignofpoverty and pros
disapprove oftheir relationship.The titution.but also ofthe performance
lovers agree tomeet insecrecy at the of movement, in the streets and on
tomb of the Babylonian KingNinus. the fields. unimpeded by the veil. It
Thisbe, who arrives early, sees a li- is the practice ofveiling that makes
9
women's absence omnipresent and forces us to suspend the parameters in Delphi.Philosophyturned this into
turns the veil into cause and sym ofour investigation carefully. the transcendentalpostulatethathu
bol of political, social, and religious Wemustbe awarethatoncethe se mans are to know themselves as ra
controversy. mantics oftheveilcanbedefinedthey tional beings.Evenifit is meanwhile
Movingforward to the present day, set a dynamic in motion that dictates assumed that this refers not only to
wefindourselves confrontedwith an aparadigmaticcontext.Andwhilethe theoreticalself-knowledge butalsoto
ideological split that instrumental politics ofthe veilcan be dividedinto the experienceofthe boundarywhere
izes a cultural and religious artifact twomainreactions,againstorforthe oneknows one isjustahumanbeing,
for various reasons.Analyses of dif veil,we must refrain from doing the what is still missing here is the dis
ferentpolitical representationsofthe same byinstead exploringthe differ tinction whereby one knows one is
veildemonstratethatitssymbolicsig ences within these reactions, going onlyonehumanbeing and needsoth
nificance is constantly being defined from difference to difference within ers as a quality in which we are im
and redefined, to the point of ambi the foldsofthe veil,and releasingthe mersed, as in a veil.Yetthis immer
guity.In Iran the veil was abolished veil from any certain meaning, be it sion can only take place as a willed
in 1936for its backwardnessbyReza religious, sexual, social, or political. and systematic indirectness, a multi
Shah and less than fifty years later It is its ubiquity that seems to allow voicedmonologue,cutloosefrom any
reinstated bythe Islamic Republic of everyone toform an opinion aboutit, subjectivity.Itpossiblyshowsalackof
Iran to mark its progress along the and it is its ambiguity that stops us imagination,expressingitselfwithout
ideological path of Islam. And let us short and imposes on us not the veil, reference to anything else, indepen
not forget the West that rejects the but the omnipresence ofabsence, its dently of any question of its actuali
veilasbeing associatedwithwomen's potentiality. zation.Ofcourse,this does not mean
oppression under Islam, while capi "Taking the veil" means to with thereis anythingunrealaboutit.Itis
talizing on the enormous marketing draw from the world. For it is not awayoflookingthe world's complex
potentialofits secretsexiness.More as it appears to be or as we would ityin the face.
over,there exists a vast relay oftexts like to have it. Our withdrawal does Insummer 1996,theMinistryofCul
and filmsinwhich the veilisused not not concern some good or bad qual ture and Islamic Orientation in Iran
only as metaphor, metonym, or syn ity of that world. Rather it concerns published rules for the Iranian cin
ecdoche for the experiences ofwhat no quality at all or the very fabric of ema,censoringnotonlythe represen
are for the most part, though not al the quality that surrounds the sub tation of the woman's body but also
ways,Muslimwomen,but also for its ject, confined within the space ofits the contactbetweenwomen and men.
visual and literary dynamics. Allthis consciousness,likeaveil."Knowthy Womenwere forbidden tightclothing,
testifies to the semantic versatility of self'were the words with which visi not allowed to show any part of the
amerepiece ofcloth and, indoingso, tors were welcomedatApollo'sshrine bodyexceptface and hands,andthey
10
could not have physical contact or from its self-presence by subject that underrepresents its complexity
exchange tenderwords orjokes with ing it to the otherness of a different whilegivingup onrepresentation al
men. Confronted with these restric language, by introducing a barrier together, exceeding rather than un
tions, Iranian filmmakers had to fi which, again and again, separates dermining its goal. It surpasses the
gure out a form ofpatience;they had us from and connects as with a for interpretativethoughtorganizingthe
toturn tothe image not as represen eignlanguage.Itiscertainlyimpossi discourse ofemotion that unites the
tation but as nodal point or passage ble toliftthatbarrier and, infact,we inside/outsideimageryofpersonalex
in the circulation ofmeaning.It dis wouldprefernotto,sinceitisour only perience by projecting both sides. It
places the locus ofthe gaze,which is means ofaccess-less translation in stretches between a world in which
not a subjectivity, but the right dis itselfbuttranslationofourselves-to representation is in charge, and an
tance fromthe beliefinGodthatputs a plural place.The interference be other world that opens onto its own
at adistance boththe explicitcensor tween two or more heterogeneous presence. It reveals that it is there,
shipofrepresentationbythe Eastand systems displaces the barrier,makes despite the ideologyofemotion's ten
the implicitcensorshipcarriedoutby it visible as the movement ofinade dency to effaceitinfavour ofsubjec
representation in the West. quation and the work ofdifference. tive expression, and it compels us to
Writing about the veilinvolvesthe What has recently become synony do what it asks for:to redefine both
necessity ofencountering something mouswiththosecultural andreligious knowledgeandemotionasastructure
radicallystrange.Tobesure,eachlan differencesrepeatedlypresentedtous that cuts expression loose from per
guage has its own system ofthought asunbridgeable,alien,and terrifying, sonal feeling and does not fall back
which conditions the thinkable. We has infact been part ofbothWestern on the mediation of professionals.
cannot detach ourselves from the and Eastern cultures for millennia, That is whywe have to organize the
decisions our language has already from aristocratic women of ancient veil's impulses into two areas linked
made for us and which dictate us Greece to contemporary brides and bythe conjunction"and":description,
self-evident assumptions and pro widows worldwide.The veil is not a includingunwillingdescription,ofac
scriptions.Buttothe extentthatcon sign oftruth but ofchange, an emo tual experience that givesway to an
servatism consists in the fear ofcon tional territory which is peculiarly experience leadingtooverdetermina
sequences,whileradicalismisdefined resistant to any theory ofthe subject tion ofthe image ofthe veil;and an
by the desire to push consequences that refers to a thinking, feeling,and ontologyofthe unthought that gives
to their furthest limits, what we are willingselfasan existingpartofwhat waytoaself-differentialtext,the text
dealing with here is a radical import used to be called a person. Both the ofthe veil.
of strangeness into our language. A discourse ofthe subject and the ide
failure of translation that cannot be ologyof the subject converge in the EvaMeyer
repressed.It dislodges our language veilasanarrativeabout the discourse
II
Vivian Liska a field of knowledge. Thinking the
materiality of these metaphors not
UponRevisiting-the Veil only unfolds possibilities for a rear
rangement of social and philosophi
cal spaces but also unleashes the ki
The veilis one, it divides into two,it netic forces (as possibilities inherent
occupies the place ofa third, and of in language) to no longer mark but
fers the observer the position of a make a difference.
fourth.Butistheveilone?Doesitpar Whencethese forces?Theimpact of
tition in two,since it generates rela the veiland otherimagesofliminality
tionsasmuch asitdivides?Nottaking reside in the interface between their
up much space, it surely does not oc linguistic (metaphoric, iconographic,
cupyaplace, be ita"third."Anddoes symbolic) existence and their "real"
itallowfor an observer's"fourth"po function in the world. This interface
sition,or any position at all? duplicates the valour of the division
Is the veil one? It is an object, a they convey and perform what they
symbol,an icon,apiece ofclothing,a refer to,destabilizing it:Athreshold
sign,aword.Lingerie,curtain,mask, "happens" at the threshold between
membrane, it suggests transparent their real and their metaphoric use.
secret,seductive taboo,visibleseclu This divisionis again the locus ofthe
sion. It is a problem, a discourse, a divisionbetweentheiractual function
contentioustopic,ameansofoppres and their linguistic existence.Bring
sionandaninstrumentofdefiance,an ing these terms into circulation en
obstruction, a protection from intru meshes world and textwithout allow
sion,a sign ofdiscretion, a device of ingthemtofalltogether, neitherwith
concealment,and atoolofrevelation. each other nor with themselves-a
Heavilygender inflected and cultur porous, mobile,ineffable divisionre
ally loaded, the diaphanous,weight mains.
less thing hangs between men and Theveil,likethe threshold,the bor
women,Orientand Occident,tradition der,the limit,triggers a self-reflexive
and the modern.Itsignals prohibition movement that does not arrive back
and evokes curiosity, eros, pudeur, to itself because, superseding any
taboo at once.It calls up tactile and synthesizing, harmonizing dialectic,
visual sensations:soft,fragile,yet re it carries the spirallingmovement as
sistantandimpenetrable.Aparadigm a permanent "shifter" within itself.
ofambiguity,itisneitherone nor two When the action ofthe veilis turned
and confuses rigid divisions, as, ad on itself, the separation, distinction,
mittedly,other"thirds" do,too. divisionit is supposed to provide be
The veilindeed belongs to a series comes uncertain and opens the veil
oftopographicalmetaphors- thresh to new use. But what, among other
old, border, margin-used to con metaphors ofliminality,is specificto
ceptualize and,in away,visualize di the veil?
vision. The inflationary topicality of More concrete than thresholds or
these terms in recent discourse lies borders, endowed with richer and
in their potential to disturb a static more varied iconographic histories
logic of inside/outside, exclusion/in and anthropological functions, the
clusion, totality/separation, that sug veil involves the aesthetic, the reli
gests hierarchic power relations in gious,and the politicalrealmat once.
politics and a potentially self-defeat Itorganizesdistinctionsrangingfrom
ing epistemology out to dominate gender relations (the veilofwidows,
12
of Muslim women, or of belly danc
ers) to divisions between public and
private,sacredand profane (curtains
in windows, before Torah scrolls, or
around beds) or degrees offictional
ity(suchasveilsinfront ofastage for
dreamlike or fantastic atmosphere).
Between opacity and transparency,
the veil plays on mystery and sem
blance and features in phantasms of
ultimate unveiling-of truth, of the
body, of being itself-just as much
as in celebrations ofsemblance and
appearance. In this proliferation of
ambiguities what the veildivides re
cedes, and its shape and texture, its
ownsignificance and mode ofsignifi
cation comeinto focus.
Its own?Asall means ofdivisionit
seems to constitute a third between
the sides thatit partitions. Belonging
neither to the one nor to the other
side, thresholds and divisions were,
in traditional cultures, places of an
nunciations and apparitions, ofgood
or evil spirits, spots of dereliction
for magical or holy contact between
worlds. In another register, they are
lociofepistemologicalcomplexity.But
is the veila third at all? Inextricably
linked to perception,it is more mov
able, flexible, unstable than thresh
olds: the veil can take the shape of
that which it covers; transparent, it
remains suggestive ofwhat it hides.
And since it can cover both the eyes
and the object they perceive, or re
side anywhere in the space stretch
ing from the one to the other, it has
nofixedplace within the in-between.
Carryingalongthe metaphoricalfield
oftexture,text, weaving, and folds,it
is woven into the very fabric of the
medium transporting its memory,its
discourse,its history.
Inthe faceofseeminglyendlesspro
liferation of potential signification,
what are wetodowiththeveilbeyond
writingitshistories,structuringitsty
pologies,and measuring its multiple,
13
