The positions of writers cannot be understood on a personal level, or on a collective level through their literary groups or their writers’ union; Except by understanding the political and intellectual contexts and the transformations that have befallen the nation. The political positions of writers cannot be understood except by studying the circumstances associated with them, and the intellectual and ideological orientations of the writers around them, which helps us understand the circumstances of the emergence of the Writers’ Union in the mid-seventies of the twentieth century, and to know the personalities who stood behind it, and their tendencies towards power or the extent of their independence from it. In addition to the importance of studying the climate of the 1970s itself, in terms of the position of the Sadatist authority towards intellectuals and the developments that occurred in it, and how it dealt with Abdel Nasser’s intellectual, political and economic legacy in general. It is also important to be aware that writers and intellectuals have a special nature. They are not a single whole, nor a monolithic bloc, where individualism prevails over their positions and opinions, and the honest ones among them prefer independence in position and opinion over subordination within a union, institution, or forum. Perhaps this is due to the writer’s high narcissism, as he sees himself as one of the poles of the world. Therefore, it is difficult to find a collective position that includes all writers, as there are always those who tweet alone, or rebel publicly, or withdraw from support or opposition to a trend, but it can be said that there are visions agreed upon by a segment of writers, who represent a majority in the cultural and literary community. One of the defects of Arab cultural life is the absence of institutional collective action, and if it exists, it is limited and vulnerable to attack, criticism, and veto. We can monitor hundreds of positions and opinions of a personal nature, from thinkers and intellectuals, but it is difficult to find a collective work that contains them. Even the literary and artistic groups that are formed quickly fade and their members disperse, which made it easier for the authority to attract individual writers, either by enticement or intimidation, and then allowed it to put its hands on the various literary societies or unions through literary figures that report directly to it. Our reading in this topic will focus on the cultural scene of the seventies, the circumstances of the formation of the Writers’ Union, and the goals sought from it, within the emerging political and intellectual dimensions of this era, and the dramatic changes that afflicted the nation.
Sadat and the 1970s:
The orientations of power in Egypt changed when Anwar Sadat took power, as he worked to change the Nasserist legacy on many levels. It began by confronting the leftist tide with all its factions and sects, and eliminating the centers of power in what was known as the May 1971 Correction Revolution. Then, he decided to war in October 1973, which gained him great popularity, which made him continue his program, by launching the leaders of the Islamic movement, and making room for them to work against the Nasserists and the leftist sects in general. He also introduced a policy of economic openness, seeking to transform Egypt’s economy into a capitalist economy, to address the economic problems that resulted from Abdel Nasser’s socialist decisions. Then he made his decision to conclude the Camp David Accords in 1978 AD, followed by a peace treaty with the Zionist entity in 1979 AD, in order to recover occupied Sinai. He also sought to form political parties, allowing the return of the Liberal Wafd Party, then the Socialist Rally Party, and he established the National Party to be a political party. To power, as an alternative to the Socialist Union that collapsed. Sadat’s decisions were against the tendencies of intellectuals and writers, who were dominated by the Marxist, nationalist, or Nasserist trend, and they entered into a battle with the authority, opposing many of the steps taken by Sadat, with regard to politics, economics, and the empowerment of political Islam trends. Islamic discourse was present side by side with the Nasserist, Marxist, and liberal discourse. The seventies era witnessed a lot of intellectual movement about the issues of the nation and its identity, and the decisions of the authority, which were successive and accelerating. The movement began with the abolition of censorship of newspapers and publications in February 1974 AD, and the pens of intellectuals and journalists began to attack Abdel Nasser and his policies, and important names emerged who took over the leadership of Egyptian culture and sided with the authority of Sadat, and among the most prominent of them were: Abdel Qader Hatem, Youssef Al-Sibai, Saleh Jawdat, Tawfiq Al-Hakim, Naguib Mahfouz, Anis Mansour, and the journalist brothers Mustafa Amin and Ali Amin ([1]). It is noticeable that all of them were supporters of Abdel Nasser, and even held many important positions during the Nasser era, and they always wrote justifying, praising, and confirming the validity of the great path of the inspiring leader. Especially the two former army officers, Youssef Al-Sibai and Abdel Qader Hatem. Tawfiq Al-Hakim’s position also changed and he published his famous book The Return of Consciousness, fiercely attacking the Nasserite intellectual falsehood with its crude propaganda. As for Naguib Mahfouz, his intellectual positions are well-known. Despite his belief in scientific socialism (Marxism), he believed in the concept of the Egyptian nation, proud of the Pharaonic civilization, and hostile to the Arab-Islamic orientation. Which Mahfouz called the Egyptian Nationalism Movement, which made him reject the international concept of scientific socialism, as he believed that the Egyptian character settled on both banks of the Nile had its own characteristics.[2]) which makes it distinct from all other proposals that link it to Arab nationalism or the Islamic League and others. But he did not declare this openly during the years of the Nasserist era, and he had been close to its authority since the mid-fifties, after his transfer to the Ministry of Culture and National Guidance, and his appointment to many positions, including ([3]When Sadat came, Mahfouz became closer to him, and remained close to power for a long period, not opposing, and if he did oppose, it was through symbolism or general intellectual discourse, which was not directed directly against the regime. Thus, Sadat found those who supported him among the old or new intellectuals, or those returning from the royal era and its press and atmosphere, such as the twins Mustafa and Ali Amin. This is at the top level. As for the middle and lower levels, there is a category of writers with limited talent, who were employees in the Ministry of Culture, or in the press, and they maintained their positions and supported the new trends, so they wrote in their newspapers and assumed their positions. The conclusion drawn is that some of the intellectuals and writers who supported Abdel Nasser and united behind his nationalist project were men of authority rather than those with opinions, positions, and orientations. Unfortunately, some of them were figures in literature, culture, and the arts. In order not to be harsh in judging them, we can find an excuse for them, as the Nasserite authority was very oppressive towards those who opposed its trends, and these people were busy with their literary and artistic production, which would inevitably be exposed to injustice, neglect and neglect, if not a complete ban, as happened to some of them. There is nothing wrong with them meeting with the authority in one way or another, and remaining silent about the negatives and shortcomings that they saw in society, life, politics, and many more. We will also notice that most of these people continued their presence and support or silence during the Hosni Mubarak era, and developed their discourse to be compatible with the slogans raised about peace and stability, and took positions of alignment or hostility according to the fluctuations of the Mubarak regime. On the other hand, the opposition of a large group of well-known intellectuals and writers intensified against Sadat’s orientations and his political and economic steps, and their opposition started from leftist tendencies, based on slogans and visions taken from the Nasserist legacy, against the economic dependency on global capitalism, the position on Zionism, and the United States’ empowerment of Egypt and the region, especially since Sadat was characterized by shrewdness, and played on many strings and different wings, bringing some closer together and excluding others. Or he brings them all closer, and leaves them struggling, to be a spectator in front of this struggle, and he will inevitably be the winner, as any struggle will detract from the balance of each group, its unity, and its individuals. This vision may have been correct on a theoretical level, but the practical reality in the 1970s indicated a strong rise of Islamic movements, in universities, neighborhoods, and cities, which detracted greatly from the left’s popular balance; Which made them attack Sadat forcefully because he released the Islamist leaders, as if they were supposed to remain in prisons until the day they were resurrected, so that these leftists could enjoy the public space and say what they wanted. They want without contradicting propositions. This is the crisis of the left and its intellectuals resulting from the era of Abdel Nasser, when they became accustomed to the atmosphere of one voice and the directed media, which promoted their point of view, and considered everything else a betrayal of the homeland. This does not mean that we support Sadat in his positions and trends, but rather we compare the position of the exclusionary left, which claimed to be in harmony with the people, and that Abdel Nasser – despite his tyranny and oppression – was the best for them, and that he relieved them of their Islamist or liberal opponents, but the Nasser experience brought back a catastrophe on the entire nation. It also does not mean that all of the left are similar in characteristics and positions, but rather like any movement, there are sincere devotees who sympathized with the poor, the marginalized, and human rights issues, and opposed tyrannical authority in the days of the monarchy, Abdel Nasser, Sadat, and Mubarak. Moreover, the positions of left-wing intellectuals on power varied. Some of them packed their bags and immigrated to an Arab or European country. Some went to Iraq, where Saddam Hussein welcomed them (who continued his nationalist socialist ideology through the Baath Party), some went to the Gulf to work or worked in some governmental or journalistic institutions there, or to Paris and were welcomed by the French Socialists, or to London, where some Gulf newspapers wrote to them, or some of them found a job in an international body. But travel was not available to everyone, due to age or special circumstances, nor was it the ideal behavior in the eyes of some of those who were steadfast in their positions and insisted on continuing the struggle within the country. There are others who preferred silence, secluded themselves in their homes, and devoted themselves to writing texts that tend toward the literature of expatriation. On the other hand, Anwar Sadat sought the help of a number of intellectuals who were known to have tendencies towards authoritarianism or liberalism, such as Rashad Rushdie, or some old leftists who converted to the compass of power, and they saw in Sadat’s policies a wisdom that others did not see. Lotfi al-Kholy wrote praising what he called the Sadat political school, and there were those who praised peace and normalization.[4]). On the other hand, Sadat worked to trim the nails of the left who opposed his policy in the Egyptian cultural apparatus, keeping those who were supportive, negative, or silent; According to what one of the leaders of the Egyptian left narrates, dozens of cultural, media and literary platforms have been annihilated, such as the magazines: Al-Katib, Al-Tali’a, Contemporary Thought and the Heritage of Humanity, and attention has also been neglected in the fields of poetry, stories, theater and cinema, and intellectuals (left) have been expelled from their various positions, while welcoming cultural symbols of a liberal nature or, more precisely, European-American, to pave the way for the new era, which raises the slogans of peace, prosperity and progress, while normalizing and distancing itself from… The Arab nationalist orientation, by changing the faces and discourse in the media, culture and arts.[5]Sadat also raised the slogan of village morals, the patriarch of the Egyptian family, and the faithful president, all of which are slogans that contradict the Nasserite inheritance and support social class, as the left repeats.[6]His aim was to provide an intellectual reference that would be available to authoritative writers in their criticism of Nasserism. The 1970s era witnessed cultural and intellectual transformations that affected the nation, represented by the state’s withdrawal from supporting arts and culture, leaving it to the efforts of writers themselves, or to private artistic institutions, which controlled the market and corrupted public taste. This policy continued during the Mubarak era, and if some support was available, it was within the framework of the state’s general policy, as the authority would not support anything that contradicted its official line politically and intellectually. As for the noise of support that the Nasserists boasted about during the era of Abdel Nasser, it was not for the sake of God or culture, but rather to consolidate the intellectual authority’s tendencies represented by its socialist proposal and its nationalist slogans. Artists and writers supported it as a kind of convergence of interests. When the authority changed, in the Sadat era and then Mubarak, and its intellectual orientations changed, it was inevitable for leftist intellectuals to attack this change, which deprived them of opportunities for expression, and also deprived them of material and moral support for the authority. The tyrannical authority, even if its policies and orientations have changed, is the same in its control of the media, to direct public opinion, and to promote its visions. During the era of Abdel Nasser, a unilateral intellectual orientation prevailed, and it found support from major artists and writers, who were in line with the authoritarian orientation of the government. When Sadat came, the decline of public taste and the arts increased, and Westernizing tendencies and consumer culture prevailed, consistent with the policy of openness, and the alienation of writers and their isolation from society increased. The concepts of Egyptian nationalism increased, and the concept of the Greater Middle East began to be promoted, which includes non-Arab and non-Islamic countries, meaning, of course, Israel, and an attempt to integrate it into its Arab surroundings, in response to calls for normalization and peace.
[1]) Intellectuals and Military, Salah Issa, p. 236.
[2]) I, Naguib Mahfouz (A Complete Biography), Ibrahim Abdel Aziz, Egyptian General Book Authority, Cairo, 2012, pp. 66, 67.
[3]) Previous reference, pp. 228, 229.
[4]) What did Sadat do to Egyptian intellectuals?, Dr. Jalal Amin, Al-Masry Al-Youm newspaper, 12/3/2014.
https://www.almasryalyoum.com/news/details/592115
[5]) Confronting the reactionary imperialist Zionist cultural invasion in the Arab world, Mahmoud Amin Al-Alam, Complete Works, vol. 1, p. 527.
[6]) Privacy and originality among Arab thinkers, Mahmoud Amin Al-Alam, op. cit., vol. 1, p. 662.
