Muslim misery memoirs both endorse and destabilize war-on-terror ideology simultaneously

Evidence

I have tried in this chapter to indicate the ways in which Muslim misery memoirs partake of but at the same time always problematize the ideological messages of war-on-terror discourse. In doing so, I am working against the grain of the majority of criticism thus far produced on the subgenre, which is more often concerned with locating the novels as part of an overarching political discourse concerned to marginalize Muslims in the interests of geopolitical imperatives. This other kind of criticism performs the inestimable service of demonstrating how Muslim misery memoirs occur in specific contexts and are but a single brick in the ever-rising wall of imagery by which prejudice against Muslims may be fostered and consent to Euro-American domination manufactured. — Peter Morey, Islamophobia and the Novel, 260

In their inclusions and omissions and in the way they shape character and plot, Muslim misery memoirs ostensibly participate transparently in promoting those values of freedom and individual choice claimed to be at the heart of “our” side in the war on terror. As such, they can be seen to reinforce a hegemonic message in which potentially all societies run on Islamic lines are seen as inherently flawed and in need of intervention. — Peter Morey, Islamophobia and the Novel, 212

Categorization

• DEFINE: Establishes Morey’s core reading practice: texts are always conflicted, never purely either contesting or reinforcing ideology — the analytic hinge the reader needs.
• XREF: This dual partakes/always-problematizes stance directly gives vocabulary for reading whether Hamid and Naqvi contest or quietly reinforce Islamophobia.
• corroborated: 3 independent passages support this claim — Peter Morey, Islamophobia and the Novel, 260; Peter Morey, Islamophobia and the Novel, 212