The Guardian‘s Narrative

The Guardian produces news media from a Western feminist liberal society which reflects dominant culture in U.K society. As Hall claims the dominant code draws from dominant culture (46). In this case, the dominant culture believes in equal rights for women and

children to education. From a postcolonial point of view it can be considered the Guardian‘s presentation of Malala‘s voice produces a narrative that reinstalls another element of Western dominant culture; imperialism. Drawing theory from Monhanty (2003) and Spivak‘s (2009) writings it has been observed feminist practices of Western heritage assume that the

suppression of women in postcolonial or marginalised groups derives from the ideology by which they are connected to. From a negotiated stance (Hall 46) it can be argued the narrative in the Guardian echoes an imperialist view; that the oppression of women and girls in

Pakistan is singularly the result of the Taliban or extremist Islamic beliefs.

For instance the narrative in the Guardian does not present events to the USA or Britain‘s role towards Pakistan‘s cultural dynamic like the narrative in I Am Malala addresses. A portrayal of ―the West‘s‖ involvement in the suffering of women in Pakistan would not fit the narrative of Western superiority. Whilst the numerous killing of women in Pakistan is a horrific

patriarchal practice carried out by the Taliban, it confirms the imperialist view that it is a problem within that causes the oppression of women.

In comparison, I Am Malala conveys that the Taliban‘s holds extreme views of

education for women and girls. The article does not discuss in full detail the reasons as to why the Taliban is reluctant to change their ideology or accept equality and accessible education for women in Pakistan other than there being a perversion of Islam. The Guardian presents Malala to condemn the ideology by which the Taliban follows ―The terrorists are misusing the name of Islam and Pashtun society for their own personal benefits‖ (Pilkington). The article does not further introduce how the US and Britain have contributed to this factor that has allowed the Taliban to claim power under the veil of extremism and reluctance to Western influences in Pakistan. By taking a negotiated stance towards the deconstruction of the events presented by the Guardian, it can be considered that the Guardian agrees with equal rights to education which means this is an article that promotes feminist ideals. However, the

generalisation of events in this example, demonstrates that the narrative in this article

reproduces hierarchies that stem from an imperialist perspective of postcolonial societies. To some extent, the coloniser has failed to acknowledge their role to effect of the colonised (Spivak 2006). For instance in I Am Malala the narrative provides reasons why the Taliban refuse to accept and take violent measures against education equality:

The Taliban is against education because they think that when a child reads a book or learns English or studies science he or she will become Westernised.‘ Malala replies

‗But I said, ‗Education is education. We should learn everything and then choose which path to follow.‘ Education is neither Eastern nor Western, it is human. (136)

This statement is a reiteration of Malala‘s father‘s belief. Malala is presented to take on this belief because of education‘s role in her father life and her close relationship to him.

Arguably, the narrative presented by the Guardian although promotes equality, education and shifting cultural perceptions of narratives surrounding Muslim uses language stemmed from postcolonial and imperialist perspectives as this is the dominant culture that the Guardian presents its narrative from. Malala‘s story is a symbolic narrative for the Guardian because it promotes education and aligned ideology. However, the Guardian does not define whose concept of education it promotes. It does not inform the West‘s role in the oppression of women in Pakistan and across the globe. Progress towards a more equal society is a respectable goal yet it is manipulated to support the superiority over Islamic ideals.

Through I Am Malala, Malala breaks her role as a puppet of the Guardian‘s message and becomes her own intended symbol of hope, promoting her vision of progress towards equality. As Ryder claims:

By linking her philosophy to world religions, international leaders, Pakistani and Pashtun history and her family, Malala dispels any sense that her approach is merely a child‘s naiveté, or that her approach is unique to her. She calls upon a long,

international history of nonviolent action to refute calls for revenge (180)

As previously discussed throughout I Am Malala Malala‘s father and Pashtun identity are significant in the presentation of Malala‘s beliefs towards peaceful activism and critical thinking This is reflected to some extent in the Guardian‘s narrative. More so, the presentation of Malala‘s identity can be considered re-presents Malala with a different identity associated to presentations of ―Third World‖ women. Instead, Malala arguably is presented with both elements of that are associated to the presentation of Western women ―as educated, as modern, as having control over their own bodes and sexualities and the freedom to make their own decisions‖ and Third World women ―ignorant, poor, uneducated, tradition-bound, domestic, family-orientated, victimized‖. (Mohanty 22) For instance Malala‘s interpretation of Islam and peaceful defiance is also presented as motivator for Malala. One can suggest, Malala‘s story then acts a symbol of education and critical thinking overcoming the Taliban. An identity associated to the presentation of Western women. However, Malala is

presented as a victim being that the first paragraph outlines Malala‘s attack by the Taliban.

Although the Guardian‘s narrative presents Malala‘s ability to critically interpret Islamic teachings in a progressive light. The Guardian does not present the Taliban with a human insight as presented in I Am Malala. Instead the Guardian leans towards rhetoric that labels the men who are categorised with the Taliban as their identity as a ―militant‖ group, an army-like force, whose disbelief in education for girls stems from their greed; their need for power.

In comparison to I Am Malala‘s narrative which shows the Taliban rising out of various community‘s desperation and frustration with political discourses in Pakistan.