WAR, CONFLICT, AND
EXILE IN HANAN AL-SHAYKH’S ONLY IN
LONDON
Dr. S. Farhana Zabeen,
Associate Professor,
Department of English,
Vels Institute of Science, Technology and Advanced
Studies,
Pallavaram, Chennai.
Abstract:
Hanan al-Shaykh's Only in London explores the intricate
intersections of war, conflict, and exile, portraying characters whose
fractured identities and unstable loyalties stem from sociopolitical turmoil
and violence. The novel presents exile not merely as a physical displacement
but as a psychological and cultural rupture that redefines the self. Against
the backdrop of London—a city that both shelters and alienates—al-Shaykh
intricately navigates themes of belonging, estrangement, and transformation.
Through the experiences of her protagonists, the novel examines the challenges
faced by individuals uprooted from their homelands, highlighting the ways in
which displacement reshapes identity, memory, and interpersonal relationships.
The narrative engages with critical postcolonial themes, including forced
migration, gender dynamics, and the complexities of transnational identity.
Al-Shaykh critiques the enduring legacies of colonialism and conflict, showing
how exile is both an opportunity for reinvention and a persistent reminder of
loss. The novel’s portrayal of London as a paradoxical space—offering both
refuge and cultural dislocation—aligns with broader discourses on migration and
diaspora, reflecting the tensions between assimilation and cultural preservation.
This paper examines how Only in London
critiques the postcolonial condition by focusing on the protagonists’ struggles
with exile, identity, and self-definition. It argues that al-Shaykh presents
London as a city of both protection and disillusionment, where migrants and
exiles must navigate new freedoms alongside persistent societal and internal
conflicts. By analyzing the psychological and sociopolitical implications of
exile in the novel, this study sheds light on al-Shaykh’s broader commentary on
war, displacement, and the reconfiguration of identity in a globalized world.
Keywords: War, Exile, Conflict, Identity, Dislocation
Introduction:
With Hanan al-Shaykh being one of the leading voices in
modern Arabic literature, and export from her narrative portraits of personal
experience, which often resonate with larger socio-political realities, Only
in London (2001) is a narration of the Middle Eastern immigrant experience
in a multicultural but often alienating city. This novel meditates on identity
in the context of war and displacement and examines, within the framework of
exile, the psychological burden and the struggle for integration. Al-Shaykh’s
novel criticizes the engagement of war and conflict with the self, positioning
exile as a physical and emotional state. Hanan al-Shaykhexplores these themes
through personal narratives that resonate with larger socio-political
realities. Only in London (2001) captures the experiences of Middle
Eastern immigrants in a multicultural yet often alienating metropolis. The
novel reflects on how war and displacement shape identity, examining the
psychological burdens of exile and the struggles of integration. This paper
argues that al-Shaykh’s novel critically engages with the effects of war and
conflict on individual identity, positioning exile as both a physical and
emotional state.
War and Its Lingering Effects:
The novel underscores how the trauma of war extends
beyond the battlefield, infiltrating the personal lives of those who have fled
conflict zones. Lamis, a Lebanese woman, escapes the civil war in her country,
seeking solace in London. Her journey reflects the enduring impact of war on
personal identity and the quest for peace in a foreign land. Similarly, Samir,
an Iraqi exile, grapples with the memories of political turmoil, highlighting
how past conflicts continue to shape present realities.
War is an omnipresent force in Only in London,
shaping the lives and worldviews of its characters. While the novel is set in
London, the specter of past conflicts remains deeply ingrained in the
protagonists' consciousness. The characters hail from war-torn regions such as
Lebanon and Iraq, carrying with them the trauma of violence, loss, and forced
migration. The novel presents war not just as a historical event but as an
enduring psychological condition that affects the choices, relationships, and
self-perception of those who survive it.
Lamis, a Lebanese woman, represents the complexities of
war-induced displacement. She flees her homeland to escape both the violence of
civil war and the oppressive social norms imposed on women. Her journey
underscores the intersectionality of war and gender, illustrating how conflict
exacerbates patriarchal restrictions. Similarly, Samir, an Iraqi exile, embodies
the alienation felt by those who are forced to leave their homeland due to
political instability. His struggle to reconcile his past with his present
reflects the internal conflict faced by many displaced individuals.
Exile and Identity Formation:
Al-Shaykh portrays exile as both a geographical and
psychological state. “Exile in Arab literature is not merely a geographical
displacement but a psychological rupture that redefines the self in relation to
both the lost homeland and the adopted one” (Darraj 30). London, depicted as a
cosmopolitan yet indifferent city, serves as a backdrop for the characters’
attempts to forge new identities. The novel explores how exile leads to
cultural hybridity, forcing individuals to navigate between tradition and
modernity, home and hostland. “Exile is not just about leaving a place; it is
about carrying it within you, reshaped by memory and longing” (Al-Shaykh 102).
Lamis’ experiences in London illustrate the challenges of cultural adaptation.
While she finds a certain degree of freedom, she also grapples with nostalgia
and displacement. Her interactions with Western society reveal the difficulties
of assimilation and the persistent influence of her past. Samir, on the other
hand, struggles with his sexual identity, further complicating his sense of
belonging. His exile is not only geographical but also personal, as he attempts
to reconcile his desires with the cultural expectations imposed upon him.
The novel highlights how exile fosters both liberation
and loss. For some characters, leaving behind the constraints of their homeland
offers an opportunity for reinvention. For others, exile intensifies feelings
of rootlessness and fragmentation. The interplay of these emotions underscores
the novel’s central theme: the ambivalence of displacement.
Exile is portrayed as a multifaceted experience,
encompassing both physical displacement and emotional upheaval. The characters'
attempts to assimilate into London society reveal the challenges of maintaining
one's cultural heritage while adapting to a new environment. Lamis's struggle
with homesickness and Samir's exploration of his sexual identity exemplify the
internal conflicts faced by immigrants striving to reconcile their past with
their present.
The Role of London as a Space of Exile:
London functions as more than just a setting in Only
in London; it becomes a symbol of both opportunity and alienation. As a
global city, it offers refuge to those fleeing war and political persecution,
yet it also exposes them to racism, xenophobia, and cultural isolation.
Al-Shaykh presents London as a paradoxical space—a city that promises freedom
yet often reinforces marginalization. “Exile is strangely compelling to think
about but terrible to experience. It is the unhealable rift forced between a
human being and a native place, between the self and its true home” (Said 173).
The interactions between the novel’s characters and their
surroundings reveal the challenges of integrating into a Western society while
retaining cultural heritage. Lamis and Samir, along with their acquaintances,
navigate a city that both welcomes and estranges them. The novel critiques the
illusion of London as a haven, exposing the prejudices and struggles that
accompany exile.
London serves as a paradoxical setting in the novel—a
city that offers refuge yet often reinforces feelings of alienation. The
metropolis's multicultural landscape provides a backdrop for the characters’
interactions, reflecting both the opportunities and challenges of life in
exile. Al-Shaykh's depiction of London highlights the city's duality as a place
of potential freedom and persistent isolation.
War, Gender, and Patriarchy:
A significant aspect of Only in London is its
critique of gender roles within the context of war and exile. Lamis’s journey
is not just one of geographical relocation but also of personal transformation.
Her departure from Lebanon is driven by a desire to escape the gendered
constraints of her homeland, yet she finds that exile does not automatically
guarantee liberation. Her struggles with relationships, self-perception, and
cultural expectations illustrate the lingering impact of patriarchal
structures, even in the supposedly progressive West. “For many women in exile,
leaving home is a double-edged sword: it offers freedom but also reinforces the
weight of cultural expectations that travel with them” (Cooke 89).
The novel also examines how war disproportionately
affects women, often subjecting them to additional layers of oppression.
Lamis’s story sheds light on the ways in which conflict extends beyond the
battlefield, infiltrating domestic and personal spheres. Her journey toward
self-assertion challenges traditional narratives of female subservience, making
Only in London a powerful feminist text as well as a critique of war and
displacement. “Exile produces a double consciousness, a condition in which
individuals exist simultaneously in two places, belonging fully to neither”
(Naficy 14).
Al-Shaykh critically examines the intersection of war and
gender, illustrating how conflict exacerbates patriarchal oppression. Lamis's
departure from Lebanon is not only a flight from war but also an escape from
restrictive societal norms. Her journey toward self-discovery in London
challenges traditional narratives of female subservience, emphasizing the
resilience required to overcome both external and internalized constraints.
“The immigrant’s experience is marked by a continuous negotiation between the
old and the new, between tradition and the demands of assimilation” (Hassan
45).
Only in London offers
a nuanced exploration of the enduring effects of war, the complexities of
exile, and the intricate process of identity formation in a diasporic context.
Al-Shaykh's portrayal of her characters' struggles and triumphs provides a
profound commentary on the human capacity for resilience and adaptation amidst
adversity.
Hanan al-Shaykh’s Only in London explores the
complexities of exile as a lived experience, illustrating how displacement is
not just about physical movement but also about a psychological and emotional
transformation. As Hamid Naficy argues, "Exile produces a double
consciousness, a condition in which individuals exist simultaneously in two
places, belonging fully to neither." (Naficy 14). This dual existence
is evident in the novel’s protagonists, particularly Lamis and Samir, who
struggle to reconcile their past with their present. While London offers them
refuge from war and political instability, it also confronts them with
alienation, cultural dislocation, and the pressure to assimilate. Lamis, for
instance, longs for freedom from the patriarchal norms of her homeland, but she
also experiences nostalgia and a sense of loss that complicates her journey
toward self-assertion.
Similarly, Samir, an Iraqi exile, faces an internal
conflict shaped by both his cultural background and his personal identity. His
struggles with belonging reflect what Faisal Darraj describes in his analysis
of Arab exile literature: "Exile in Arab literature is not merely a
geographical displacement but a psychological rupture that redefines the self
in relation to both the lost homeland and the adopted one." (Darraj
30). In Only in London, this rupture manifests through Samir’s
fragmented sense of identity. His attempts to forge a new life in London are haunted
by memories of his past, demonstrating how exile creates a permanent state of
in-betweenness.
Al-Shaykh’s depiction of London as a paradoxical
space—both liberating and alienating—aligns with broader discourses on exilic
identity. While the city represents new possibilities, it also exposes the
limits of integration for those who carry the scars of war and displacement.
The novel illustrates that exile is not just about leaving one’s homeland; it
is about carrying the past within, continuously negotiating between memory and
adaptation. Through Lamis and Samir, Only in London critiques the
illusion of complete assimilation, emphasizing that the experience of exile is
one of constant reconstruction and negotiation of selfhood.
Fragmented nature of diasporic identity:
Hanan al-Shaykh’s Only in London offers a profound
exploration of war, conflict, and exile, demonstrating how these forces shape
not only individual lives but also broader cultural and political identities.
Through the journeys of its characters, the novel highlights the deep
psychological and emotional scars left by displacement, emphasizing how exile
is both a condition of loss and an opportunity for reinvention. The struggles
of Lamis, Samir, and other exiled characters illustrate the fragmented nature
of diasporic identity, where the past continuously intersects with the present,
complicating the process of self-definition.
Al-Shaykh’s portrayal of London as a paradoxical space—a
city that provides both sanctuary and alienation—underscores the complex
realities of migration in a postcolonial world. While London serves as a refuge
from the violence and sociopolitical turmoil of the characters’ homelands, it
is also a site of cultural dissonance and existential uncertainty. The novel
critiques the illusion of seamless integration, illustrating the tensions
between assimilation and the preservation of cultural heritage. Through this
nuanced representation, Only in London aligns with broader discourses on
globalization, migration, and the politics of belonging, reinforcing the idea
that exile is not merely a geographical displacement but an ongoing negotiation
of identity.
Furthermore, al-Shaykh intertwines themes of war, gender,
and cultural hybridity, shedding light on the intersectionality of oppression
and resilience. Lamis’s journey, for instance, not only reflects the struggles
of exile but also critiques patriarchal structures that transcend national
borders. By presenting multiple perspectives on displacement—whether through
political exile, forced migration, or personal escape—the novel offers a
multifaceted examination of the postcolonial condition.
Conclusion:
Ultimately, Only in London challenges readers to
reconsider the meaning of home, belonging, and survival in an era marked by conflict
and migration. It invites a deeper understanding of how individuals navigate
cultural hybridity, the weight of memory, and the quest for autonomy in an
unfamiliar world. Al-Shaykh’s work remains a vital contribution to contemporary
literary discussions on exile, underscoring the resilience of those who must
redefine themselves in foreign landscapes while carrying the indelible imprints
of their past.
Works Cited
Al-Shaykh, Hanan. Only in London.
Anchor Books, 2002.
Cooke, Miriam. Women Claim Islam: Creating
Islamic Feminism Through Literature.Routledge, 2001.
Darraj, Faisal. “Arab Exile Literature and
the Construction of the Self.” Journal of Arabic Literature, vol. 34,
no. 1, 2003, pp. 25–52. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/4183489.
Hassan, Waïl S. Immigrant Narratives:
Orientalism and Cultural Translation in Arab American and Arab British
Literature. Oxford University Press, 2011.
Naficy, Hamid. An Accented Cinema: Exilic
and Diasporic Filmmaking. Princeton UniversityPress, 2001.
Said, Edward W. Reflections on Exile and
Other Essays. Harvard University Press, 2000.