Passage Analysis

“So this is the real Rauf Ilwan, the naked reality—a partial corpse not even decently underground. The other Rauf Ilwan has gone, disappeared, like yesterday, like the first day in the history of man—like Nabawiyya’s love or Ilish’s loyalty. I must not be deceived by appearances. His kind words are cunning, his smiles no more than a curl of the lips, his generosity a defensive flick of the fingers and only a sense of guilt moved him to let me cross the threshold of his house. You made me and now you reject me: Your ideas create their embodiment in my person and then you simply change them, leaving me lost—rootless, worthless, without hope—a betrayal so vile that if the whole Muqattam hill toppled over and buried it, I still would not be satisfied.

I wonder if you ever admit, even to yourself, that you betrayed me. Maybe you’ve deceived yourself as much as you try to deceive others. Hasn’t your conscience bothered you even in the dark? I wish I could penetrate your soul as easily as I’ve penetrated your house, that house of mirrors and objets d’art, but I suppose I’d find nothing but betrayal there: Nabawiyya disguised as Rauf, Rauf disguised as Nabawiyya, or Ilish Sidra in place of both—and betrayal would cry out to me that it was the lowest crime on earth. Their eyes behind my back must have traded anxious looks throbbing with lust, which carried them in a current crawling like death, like a cat creeping on its belly towards a bewildered sparrow. ”

Excerpt From: Naguib Mahfouz. “The Thief & the Dogs.”

Once again, Said is caught up in the continuos betrayal from those close to him. "The other Rauf Ilwan has gone, disappeared, like yesterday, like the first day in the history of man—like Nabawiyya’s love or Ilish’s loyalty." He catogorizes Rauf's identity as his most significant attribute, "like Nabawiyya’s love or Ilish’s loyalty." Said considers Rauf’s success as betrayal to him and his principles. Rauf's betrayal causes Said to hover on the side of paranoia, stating that "I must not be deceived by appearances."

The effect of Rauf's betrayal on Said is exemplified and further emphasized in the claim "You made me and now you reject me: Your ideas create their embodiment in my person and then you simply change them, leaving me lost—rootless, worthless, without hope—a betrayal so vile that if the whole Muqattam hill toppled over and buried it, I still would not be satisfied." Rauf plays a critical role as his mentor, who he values "more than the Sheik", who infused in him a political and moral spirit. In order to meet his selfish ends, he has joined the mainstream - the stream of power, politics, pleasures and corruption. Said, on the other hand, is led to be a criminal or rather a blot on the society - a society that begets and nourishes corruption. The delineation of Said evokes our sympathies for him in spite of his apparently anti-social activities.  Said having been betrayed by his comrades, he felt the loss of the moral values that inspired him to take action against those who are in the mainstream. Especially by Rauf, his past mentor, who justified his first theft.

Furthermore, although the writer portrays him as an intelligent man, his reaction after finding that Rauf had become a wealthy newspaper journalist was hostile. This reaction does not show intelligence but jealousy and illiteracy.

Narrative Structure Analytical Response

‘Stream of Consciousness’ is a technique that was first used in the late 19th Century that broke away from the formality of Victorian literature.  This technique allows the audience to experience the “emotional, moral, and intellectual thought” from inside a character’s mind, and explored new points of view, beyond the traditional first or third person narration.

With The Thief and The Dogs, Mahfouz starts to write shorter and faster-paced psychological novels, using stream of consciousness narratives. Rather than presenting a full and colorful picture of society as he does in previous realistic novels, Mahfouz concentrates on the inner workings of the individual psyches and its interaction within the social and cultural context. Mahfouz’s style ranges from realistic to impressionistic to surrealist, using a pattern of evocative language and imagery that binds the work together. 

Said continuously indulges in long and passionate internal monologues with himself, throughout the novel. Due to his self-denying predisposition, he suffers both internally and externally. Said is unable to come to good terms with his society, and finds it hard to reconcile himself to the bitter reality, which surrounds him. By employing the stream of consciousness narration, Mahfouz presents the protagonist’s inner thoughts as the flow of life and something beyond human control. We, the audience, side with him as we are affected by his torment and suffering, being made painfully aware of his flow of thoughts.

Said’s thoughts and his interpersonal interaction with his interlocutors are loaded with meaning in their Egyptian context. Mahfouz’s careful diction and structures play an important role in the psychological portrayal of an unjustly imprisoned man. 

The audience tends to accept Said’s interpretations as we keep developing empathy for him. Mahfouz combines dialogic interactions and monologues in order to subtly engage the reader in favor of Said. He portrays him, in his plights and predicaments as an oppressed and exploited character.  Mahfouz skillfully uses the stream of consciousness narration to effectively enhance Said’s characterization. Said’s internal crisis is portrayed explicitly through the stream of consciousness narration.

Value of Literature in Translation

In the article Why Won't English Speakers Read Books in Translation, Anderson states "Literature – fiction especially – offers a crucial window into the lives of others, promoting empathy and understanding in a way that traveling somewhere rarely does. By not translating more widely, publishers are denying us greater exposure to one of reading’s most vital functions." This statement is echoed throughout the article Found in Translation, with focus on the contemporary Arabic novel, providing us with "answers to questions we did not know we wanted to ask". Translated works allow us to access different narratives, offering us a more balanced perspective and therefore, a better understanding of our world. For instance, Things Fall Apart by China Achebe was written as a counter narrative to the colonial perspective at that time.

In previous posts, I've discussed the significance and complexity of the relationship between language and culture. In this sense, language can affect the historical, cultural and social context a text is received in. This is because that language's and that culture's attitude and values will be transferred as well. Writing in a certain language can reveal the author's intention. For instance, Achebe choses to interpose Western linguistic and literary forms with Igbo phrases, tales and other forms of Igbo orality, in order to preserve Igbo culture and offer an effective and balanced counter narrative to the colonial attitudes at the time. By writing in English, Achebe could reach a much wider audience and expand its value to contemporary times.

However, in The Thief and The Dogs, Naguib Mahfouz writes in Arabic for the Egyptian people. Thus, Mahfouz is given access to Egypt's attitudes and values in order to create a context for his text. However, in translation, it can be difficult to transfer the same attitudes and values with a different language, and this can therefore affect the context in which the text is read and interpreted. In the article, What makes a good literary translator, Daniel Hahn, director of the British Centre for Literary Translation, and Urdu language translator Fahmida Riaz comments that "Every word or phrase; every syllable, for that matter, will be different from the original text." and that "Every translation is an interpretative act, as well as a creative one." In this sense, the role of translators can be seen as ideological gatekeepers and negotiators of foreign values in the way foreign texts are translated.

Furthermore, another learning outcome questions "how form, structure and style can not only be seen to influence meaning but can also be influenced by context." Riaz states that "there’s not a single word in any of the languages I translate that can map perfectly onto a word in English." In view of this, translation can change the "form, structure and style" of the text. Riaz continues with "Anything that is, itself, a ‘linguistic’ quality will by definition be anchored in a particular language — whether it’s idiom, ambiguity, or assonance. All languages are different. There are congruences between languages that are more closely related, of course, but those relationships are very much in the minority." Essentially, in order to capture the essence of what and how the author is trying to communicate, translators may have to change their literary devices in light of the language and their rules.