However, of Muslims with Muslimness; and the

However, why did the proponents of Islam
français distinguish so clearly modern, secular French subjects
and make such reductive claims about the identities of people from the Maghreb
and West Africa? How was it possible to suggest that “Algerian” and “Muslim”
were synonymous, while never suggesting that “French” and “Catholic” were? TL1 To answer these questions, one must first consider two aspects: the
issue of the saturation of Muslims with Muslimness; and the ways in which
Catholics and Jews were exempted from a similar logic. As Naomi Davidson
explains, to understand the issue of saturation, two analogies must be
considered: the saturation of women with their gender and of colonial peoples
with their “primitivism”.1 To many influential French politicians and intellectuals, Muslims had
an irrational personhood that was inscribed in their very bodies. In this
sense, the embodied Muslim self, like the female and colonial self, was not the
same as the male, bourgeois, French self. As Joan Wallach Scott and Gary Wilder
pointed out, embodying a particular identity such as one’s gender or colonial
subjectivity makes it impossible for one to be a republican abstract
individual.2  In the case of Muslims, their
subjectivity as fundamentally religious individuals kept them from becoming
republican subjects. TL2 

1 Ibid, 3

2 Naomi
Davidson, Only Muslim: Embodying Islam in
Twentieth-Century France. (Cornell University Press, 2012), 3.

 TL1Double rhetoric questions… consider rephrasing or joining together
to form one thought.

 TL2Upon doing a quick “fact check” I noticed that a lot of this
paragraph is taken directly from another source, word for word.  This is definitely considered plagiarism, and
if you have done this anywhere else in your paper you need to go back and
rewrite it in your own words.  


I'm Mary!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out