Naguib Mahfouz, a pioneering Arab author, expresses his frustration with government through the themes of individual freedoms in society and the ineffectiveness of government in his short story, The Norwegian Rat. Born on December 11, 1911, Naguib Mahfouz was the youngest of a family of seven bourgeois children, raised by a strict and religious father. Mahfouz witnessed the Egyptian Revolution of 1919, which was considered the first nonviolent mass demonstration in the Middle East (Bisgaard-Church 18), at a young age, which inspired his resentment toward the government and his encouragement of socialism. Mahfouz distrusted his own government and often alludes to it in his writings. He earned a degree in philosophy from King Fuad I University in 1934 – renamed the American University in Cairo – and later entered the civil service, just like his father. After realizing he wanted to become a writer, he published his first book in 1939 and left the working world (Constantakis 67). He studied writers from Arabic and English literature, influencing his style of short story writing and allowing him to blend ideas of social realism with magical realism. Mahfouz was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature when he received "more than half the votes" (nomination 7) in 1988 for his Cairo trilogy, and was surprised because "he thought it was a Western price” (“The Norwegian Rat” 191). His writings became a gateway for the Western world to Arabic literature as his books received critical acclaim and circulated worldwide. His writings were considered extreme by Islamic fundamentalist circles due to their anti-government and sacrilegious views, and some of his articles were even banned in Egypt. He was eventually put on a “kill list” and survived a stabbing in the neck by terrorists. He later died from an injury sustained after a fall. Shortly after his death, the AUC Press established an award in his honor because of his contributions to Arabic literature (Hewison 2), and this helped "discover new talents in Arabic literature" ( AUC Press 1). Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essayMahfouz opens his work, The Norwegian Rat, in media res (in the middle of things). The conflict has just begun and involves a rat infestation in a small town in Egypt where the unnamed main character lives. The time of year is not specified, but the atmosphere is tense as tenants worry about the imminent risk of rats eating their food. When one of the characters, Mr. AM, decides to raise this risk, “voices are raised in the room” (Mahfouz 1) adding to the growing stress of the situation. None of the tenants are comfortable with the idea of ​​rats invading their daily lives. Rats quickly come to embody the tenant's fears and problems, further amplifying the stress in the atmosphere. The climax of the story occurs when the bureaucrat arrives to inspect the narrator's apartment. Previously, tenants had been put under pressure by buying cat food, using dangerous rat poison and cleaning their homes almost twice a day. The tenants had become increasingly distraught and tired, and many began fighting within their families and disagreeing among themselves. Initially, the bureaucrat's appearance reminds the narrator of that of a cat, but later, either through the narrator's unreliable testimony or through magic,the bureaucrat's appearance changes from that of a rat to that of a cat. This change occurs due to the bureaucrat's voracious appetite, leading him to eat all of the narrator's food, which is already scarce. Mahfouz allows the audience to interpret this scene, but the conflict ultimately remains unresolved, as the bureaucrat leaves the house and offers no help to the tenants, even though they needed it most. The resolution of the story is very open and open to audience interpretation, as it ends when the bureaucrat walks away, with "a fleeting Norwegian smile" (Mahfouz 5) intended to leave the reader confused and interested in analyzing the encounter. Mahfouz incorporates elements of magical realism into his stories, and following this trend, he describes his characters minimally and focuses more on symbolism and meaningful conversation. In fact, only one character is given a name, and the narrator only refers to himself as a singular being, instead of being part of the collective group of tenants. Mr. AM, the elderly head of the family, is the head of the tenants of the building. He is the eldest and is therefore held with the greatest respect compared to the other tenants. The emphasis on age difference is another trend followed by Mahfouz, as he wanted to connect readers of all age groups (Teisch 39). His relationships with local government agencies further solidify his role as an authority figure in the apartment complex. Mr. AM's tenants are never physically described, but one of the tenants is formally recognized as the narrator. The narrator is also never described physically, but his narration reflects the mental state of the collective body of the tenants: he is their spokesperson in the story. Mr. AM is able to control the tenants through their strict religious beliefs, as he cites the Quran to encourage the tenants to continue fighting the rats: “He turned to the Quran for an answer. “God does not burden a soul beyond his reach. » (Mahfouz 1). Mahfouz strived to make his characters relatable to Egyptian audiences, as all are depicted as Muslims and a large majority are from the lower working class, where more than half of Egypt's current population is located (Bisgaard-Church 1). The final main character is an extension of the Egyptian government, the bureaucrat, and is the only character Mahfouz takes the time to describe in appearance: "His square face with its short, upturned nose and his glassy gaze reminding me of a cat" (Mahfouz 3). . This conglomeration of human and animal attributes demonstrates the extent to which the characters are more metaphysical than concrete or defined (Naguib Mahfouz - Facts 8). The change in the bureaucrat's appearance plays into this metaphysical sense because later the bureaucrat transforms and begins to resemble a rat, more precisely a Norwegian rat. The close connection between the rat and bureaucracy serves to portray government in a negative light and establishes bureaucracy as a cumbersome system intended to benefit the wealthy. The narrator of The Norwegian Rat, as previously mentioned, is never named or described. physically. Adhering to Mahfouz's love of magical realism, the narrator remains a part of the collective, reflecting their stresses, desires, and fears. The narrator alternates between limited third person and omniscient third person. When the story begins, the narrator is both trustworthy and narrating from a third-person omniscient perspective. The narrator is part of the collective and is influenced by the same events. “We returned home in good spirits and with sincere determination” (Mahfouz 1). Its narration emphasizes the collective and demonstrates a sense ofcommunity. Mahfouz was influenced to write the main character as part of a collective because of his need to speak to the common person, particularly the everyday Egyptian working class. This collective narrative was partly influenced by his departure from the government and the bureaucracy (Naguib Mahfouz - Biographical 2). The narrative shift occurs about halfway through the novel, when the tenants begin to become more stressed as they anticipate the impending invasion of rats. The narration becomes unreliable and the narrator essentially separates himself from the collective. He first refers to himself as imagining his worst fears: "I imagined the earth filled with hordes of rats as far as the eye could see" (Mahfouz 2), emphasizing how stress has divided the community. The constant threat of rats weighs on the tenants, forcing them to lose sleep, separate from each other and argue over trivial matters. The loss of sleep makes the narrator's comment unreliable, as he associates the bureaucrat's appearance with a cat, then later sees the same bureaucrat as a rat. This change can be interpreted in two ways: either stress and lack of sleep caused the narrator to hallucinate, or the change from cat to rat symbolically represents how the government cannot be trusted, as it is constantly changing for its own sake. own profit. This view could be influenced by Mahfouz's view of the Egyptian revolution of 1919, where the government conscripted workers and reduced wages (Bisgaard-Church 14), thereby driving many people into poverty. The money was used to build the Aswan Dam, causing an influx of pests, including rats. These fears of parasites and his own family's safety are exaggerated by the narrator in an attempt to drive home the point; The government is untrustworthy and only serves itself. Mahfouz uses symbolism extensively in The Norwegian Rat. The symbolism personifies the hardships faced by tenants and highlights the government's blatant disregard for the needs and well-being of Egypt's working and lower classes. The important symbol of the Norwegian rat is mentioned several times and its main purpose is to convey the fear felt by the tenants. The Norwegian rat is representative of the problems faced by tenants; starvation, loneliness, and a feeling of unpreparedness (Constantakis 78). Starvation is a symptom of government oppression, as tenants are encouraged to buy cat food and a "new poison" (Mahfouz 2), described as more dangerous than anything they had used before. The allocation of resources does not reflect the needs of tenants and they are gradually spending their money to defend a non-existent problem. The Norwegian rat and the fear associated with the situation closely reflect the uncertainty of the situation in the ongoing Arab-Israeli conflicts. In both cases, civilians are disconcerted by social change and fear imminent conflict, which they are ill-equipped to deal with. The other relevant symbol is the cat. The apartment complex's cats are supposed to eliminate the rat problem, but the expense of feeding and housing them quickly outweighs their benefits. Mr. AM advocates the continued use of cats: “An evil is not warded off by something worse” (Mahfouz 1), arguing that if cats were not worse than rats, they would be ineffective. He ultimately alludes to the fact that it's not the cats that are the problem, but the rats. The two fixed symbols of the cat and the rat give more meaning.