“WHENEVER a taboo is broken, something good happens, something vitalising. Taboos after all are only hangovers, the product of diseased minds, you might say, of fearsome people who hadn't the courage to live and who under the guise of morality and religion have imposed these things up on,” said Henry Miller, American author. Last week, I discussed some prominent taboos in cinema. Taboos lose their sting over time, but despite this, the creation of new taboos, or even those that had no stigma of being forbidden in the past, may now emerge as a taboo. Egyptian cinema is still dealing with taboos that the Western world has moved on from. Nowadays, simple acts that used to be seen as normal have now surfaced as taboos, such as smoking. In the 1960s, smoking was everywhere; in the office at work, as it seen in the American series “ Mad Men”, which is set during the 60s, it was even socially okay for pregnant women to smoke. Now smoking has become nearly socially taboo. In America in certain cities such as New York and Los Angeles, it has been banned almost everywhere, except for your own home or on the street. This demonstrates that there are levels of taboo, such as social, religious and cultural. In a country where religion is at the centre of everything, every forbidden act is implicitly or explicitly tied into religion. Even when it comes to discussing old taboos such drugs on film, as the topic was portrayed during the decade of the 80's, it was tied with religion, as it was seen that one must turn to God in order to free one's self from the influence. Another interesting taboo is racism; inter-racial marriage was once considered a taboo in America, but now speaking ill of such act is looked down upon and considered racist. American cinema has illustrated this at length. “Guess Who's Coming to Dinner” (1967) was considered a groundbreaking film dealing with the controversial subject of inter-racial marriage, which historically had been illegal in most of the United States, and was still illegal in seventeen southern American states up until June 12th of the year of the film's release. Although it was legalised, the topic was still taboo in many areas – because legalising something does not automatically lift the stigma surrounding it. In 2005, a loose remake was made, titled “Guess Who?” and the film switches the roles of the main characters: instead of the white girl bringing the black boyfriend to meet the parents, it's the black girl bringing the white boyfriend. If the original story was told now, it would seem racist, and it would take a much more serious tone – it would be considered taboo, but not for the same reason that it was back then. With the development of new conceptualisation of the social standard, it's okay for the film to be a light-hearted comedy because of America's long history with racism. It's somewhat acceptable to show black character that is not accepting of a white character. Racism, as discussed in an article a few weeks ago, isn't an issue that Egyptian society is fully aware of existence of, although it does exist. On the other hand, religious differences are an issue that has become a topic in Egyptian cinema. The topic, when discussed though, has always been dealt with in “a walking over egg shells” manner due its common immediate backlash, usually from the Christian community. Most recently, the film Wahid Sifr (One-Nil) (2009), got a lot of criticism. One of characters, played by Elham Chahine, is a Christian who was not allowed a remarriage from her church, but her ex-husband could. The issue of divorce and remarriage in Christianity is a very controversial and touchy issue, especially in a traditionalist country like Egypt. It would actually be much easier for filmmakers to deal with such difficult topics if there were a better involvement with the comedic genre. As the genre can actually handle a lot, and deal with many problems that a straigh -up drama can't. Comedy allows a delicate topic to be addressed in a manner that allows discourse on the problem without threatening the audience with the serious presentation of a potentially difficult topic. This has been demonstrated in many films in America, as there are many sub-fields of that genre, such as: comedy of manners, anarchic comedy film, etc. Films like “Wag the Dog” (1997) and “Man of the Year” (2006), and even “South Park: Bigger, Longer and Uncut” (1999), an animated satirical comedy/musical film, all contain political and social commentary. In Egyptian cinema, mostly the comedies fall into two categories, they are either romantic or physically crude. Not that there is anything wrong with crude comedies, but for the most part no laughs derive from them, like a lot of Mohamed Saad's films. There have been some exceptions, one of the very few recent highlights is Film Sakafi (2001) (A Cultured Film), which tells the story of three friends who are eager to watch a pornographic film, but have to go through many funny adventures to find a TV, a VCR, and a place to watch it. On the surface, it seems like a raunchy comedy, or a subdued version of the “American Pie” films, but it actually touches on the lack of sexual education and sexual oppression in Egyptian society. This is subject that is still taboo, regardless of how many overtly sexual music videos are made, or how many times Khaled Youssef gives his distorted image of woman's liberation. Since women liberation will not happen without a sexual revolution, and that is something this country may never come into contact with, because it also can't happen unless a religious revolution occurs, and that might be the biggest taboo of all.
