The first thing that comes to mind when I walk to my classes in the Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations (NMC) department is how worn out, dusty, and outdated the building looks. Although the campus is strewn with buildings that are both historic and functional, the NMC department lacks in efficiency. It is not the architecture that makes the building emasculated, but rather the inefficient elevator, the small classrooms and library, the ancient computers, and the dark, narrow hallways. I wonder how long the building has been there, and why there aren’t any renovation efforts underway.
I also wonder why the departmental name is not on the building sign, since Zoology, Forestry, and Environmental Science are clearly displayed. Is “Bancroft” code for “Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations”?
Most importantly, I wonder about the geography of the building. How come the department is located among the science departments? Why is it not closer to the other humanities?
While U of T’s NMC department is isolated and neglected, the Middle East is hardly far from the forefront of many economic, social, and political issues throughout history. The turn of the 21st century has proven especially personal to the Middle East, witnessing a series of eruptions in the region that boggle the mind. The present conflicts have awakened ancient discourse on freedom and democracy and have given birth to novel controversies about terror and self-defense.
It is undeniable that the developments in the Middle East launched a new political era whose contours are defined by the phrase “war on terrorism.” It is also undeniable that the NMC department is expected to address some of these challenges by introducing new courses that deal with recent issues. After all, it is the department that is supposed to address all aspects of the Middle East. However, neither the Palestinian Intifada, nor the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan, nor even the Lebanese-Israeli war had enough power to force the history section of the NMC department to discuss the political, historical, and cultural issues that affect the Middle East and Western perception of the region.
What is the department waiting for?
If they are waiting for a whisper of interest from the students, the students have already made earthshaking noises. From on-campus activist efforts like campaigns, boycotts, and demonstrations, to educational efforts like lectures and discussions, students are searching everywhere for answers and perspectives on the issues.
Yet the only response the NMC department has to such eagerness is to further reduce the number of courses offered in the history section. There exists a plethora of student interest on campus but a paucity of faculty enthusiasm to feed it.
This year the department is only offering 11 out of the 31 available history courses. This means that almost two-thirds of the history courses dealing with Middle Eastern civilizations were cut out of the curriculum at this most pressing time. Courses like “The Iranian Constitution,” “Ancient Israel” and “Orientalism and Occidentalism” are central to learning about the Middle East, and while their importance shines through during these troubled years, they are not even offered.
U of T’s neglect of the NMC department has proven to be disastrous. The department is not only devaluing student interest in the region, but encouraging indifference to issues that dominate our times. The students that enter the NMC program focus on the languages and archeology of the region due to the lack of coherency in the history section. But should all students be forced to graduate with a focus on archeology or languages alone? The issues of the Middle East that confront the world today are too important to be ignored.
