foucault-and-the-iranian-revolution-janet-afary

Visits to Iran and Controversies with " Atoussa H." and Maxime Rodinso n 93
not read the artide she criticizes, " because he never daimed that Islamic spirituality
was superior to the shah's dictatorship. Foucault mentioned that he
had pointed to "several elements " in the Iranian upheaval that "did not seem
to me to be very reassuring " ("Foucault's Response to Atoussa H.," app., 210).
But he did not take the opportunity to detail what those elements were. In
particular, he ignored the issues she had raised about women's rights.
His second argument was more substantive, however. What was "intol·
erable" about Atoussa H.'s letter, he wrote, was how it "merges together" all
fo rms of Islam into one and then proceeded to "scorn" Islam as "fanatical. H
It was certainly prescient on Foucault's part to note as he did that "Islam as
a political force is an essential one for our time and the coming years." But
this very discerning prediction was seriously undercut by his utter refusa l to
share her critique of the implications of an Islamist politics, even with regard
to Saudi Arabia. Instead, he conduded his rejoinder by lecturing Atoussa H.:
"In order to approach [ Islam I with a minimum of intelligence, the first condition
is not to begin by bringing in hatred" (HResponse to Atoussa H.," app.,
210). While we are aware of no other public attacks in France on Foucault's
Iran writings at this time, we should also note that, none of his supporters
came publidy to his defense, as they had on several previous occasions
when he had been attacked. In March and April 1979, once the Khomeini
regime's atrocities against women and homosexuals got underway, this exchange
would come back to haunt him.
Foucault's dismissive attitude toward Atoussa H. has made even some of
his strongest supporters cringe. One of them later wrote of Hthis remarkably
forceful rejection of a comment by an intelligent and concerned woman"
(Stauth 1991, 266). The mystery about Atoussa H.'s identity has also led to
some creative readings of their exchange by contemporary Iranian feminists.
One of them, the visual artist Gita Hashemi, has focused on how Le Nouvel
Observateur had shortened Atoussa H.'s letter, 17 also evoking Foucault's curt
reply:
There is the editor: Sitting at his desk, chopping chunks of Atoussa ' s letter,
probably thinking them unimportant, perhaps irrelevant, definitely requiring
too much space. Subjective, he (for it is quite likely that the editor is a man)
must be thinking. Perhaps she has made stronger aCCllsations, but I'll never
know because the letter was not published in full. And here, in this room, I
cannot help but ponder the power that vested the writer and the editor with
the authority to cut her voice, to silence it, to decide what part of what she said
could be heard and countered and what not. But this was the ki nd of theater