Malala as the 'Other': Can the Subaltern Speak?

Gender representation in the media is not arbitrary, altruistic, or apolitical, and so it is unsurprising that the polarisation surrounding Malala’s image serves as a point of contention highlighting certain disparities between Western and Eastern values. While Western values of girlhood — such as autonomy and education — are believed by the West to be universal, this belief is not shared globally, and so the media representation and consequential criticism of figures such as Malala reflect these conflicting beliefs. Gender representation, moreover, is a complex and deeply political issue, one which Malala alone cannot solve, and has come to represent; thus by understanding both praise and criticism of Malala we can learn something greater about the political climate of today, and West-East relations, in that responses to Malala reflect deeper political and cultural issues between the West and the rest of the world, and those who seek to engage with her image within global media.

There are many critiques of Malala’s portrayal in particularly Western media, specifically that she has come to represent, under the success of hashtags such as #IAmMalala, the multiplicity of all Muslim girls, their levels of suffering and empowerment, and their position on the topic of education, which some argue to be a deeply reductive and dangerous misrepresentation. However, in order to understand the impact of gender representation in the media on politics and international relations, it is more fitting to look at criticisms of her image as a feminist hero, which many argue to be strictly controlled, monitored and orchestrated by the Western man. Due to the portrayal of Western values and interests as superior in much of global media it is easy to see why so much of Pakistan’s population have condemned Malala as an opposer, oppressor and ‘other’ to Pakistani culture and beliefs, and most critically, a as a puppet of the West “ventriloquis(ing) the Western agenda on education” (Sindoni, 2014). In the Global North, as Berents (2016) writes, Malala represents an oppressed young girl who overcame her suffering and trauma, triumphing over her oppressors; whereas in parts of the Global South, Malala is seen rather reductively as an image of Western supremacy, neocolonialism, and thereby her image functions as a form of justification for Western intervention in the governing of countries such as Pakistan. These disparities in opinions continue to emerge from the conflicting ideologies of the Global North and the Global South, whereby the nature of “girlhood” is used as a tool as a means for political triumph. As Berents (2016) explains, if the Global North’s ideal of girlhood, as an “autonomous, educated experience” (2016) is successfully portrayed by a Muslim girl, then girlhood in the Global South, becomes an entirely failed concept, in that it’s shown to be in danger and at risk of corruption when compared to “the liberal, enlightened values of the Global North” (2016). This construction of the Western concept of girlhood as ‘correct’ within the realm of media leads to the reinforcement of neocolonial power relations, in which as Berents (2016) construes, “this observation reveals that our conception of girlhood is framed and motivated by white men using brown girls to legitimise attacks on brown men” (2016).

Therefore, when we look at Malala as a subaltern within Western media, her rise to fame and legitimacy provided her “with an international platform that she could have never found in other ways, suffering from three different forms of powerlessness: being a child, being a woman, and being a reified object by the Taliban autocratic rule” (Sindoni, 2014). In this sense, her voice as a subaltern has become something of value globally in fact, yet critics continue to question whether that voice actually belongs to her, or that of “Western mainstream media and of politicians that exploit her for their purposes” (2014). As Sindoni (2014) explains “ultimately, digital textuality can in effect empower the powerless, but not silence the mainstream — be they male-centred, Western-centred, etc. — views of the world” (2014). In this regard, although it can be said that the West have empowered Malala by providing her with a platform at which to enact her vision, the “performance” (2014) she gives is both “controlled and sanctioned” (2014) and the Malala we see “is not living girl, but an imagined, co-created, iconic figure” (2014) of which her “political subject-hood is partial and controlled” (2014). In this regard, many view Malala simply as a tool in the white man’s fight against the ‘other’ — “the dangerous male Islamic extremist” (Berents, 2016) — in which whilst white men legitimise her story and consolidate her pursuit of educational reform, they simultaneously control her message, narrative, and image, and utilise her triumph over the ‘other’ as their own.

In order to understand this paradox it is seemingly vital to understand the motives of the West in advocating universal education for girls. Not only does education reduce chances of radicalism, it also contributes to stability within national frameworks, and, justifies Western intervention in the governance of education in countries of the Global South. Investing in Pakistan’s education system under the guise of Malala’s voice increases Western control in the Global South, thereby reinforcing neocolonialism in the 21st century. Just as Western constructions of girlhood are portrayed as “good” whilst alternative constructions are deemed as “bad”, an image of Malala as “the good Muslim” (2016) is contrasted with “not only the Taliban, but any group that did not support US involvement Pakistan as the ‘bad Muslim’” (2016). Evidently, “conspiratorial thinking about Malala is strengthened by Pakistanis’ deep mistrust of the West” (Kugelman, 2017) and many suspect it of “harbouring designs on their country” (2017). It is hardly surprising then, that many Pakistanis’ condemn Malala as a Western tool for dominance and control within their country.

In summary, Malala is a controversial figure, a paradox of sorts, as all the legitimacy, power, and prestige she has accumulated in the West — all of which are necessary to secure greater education for girls in Pakistan — serves to work against her in the country she is trying to help. The irony of this cannot be ignored, as the name Malala even now, in 2018, carries meaning in nearly all parts of the world whether that be as “the ideal personage of an empowered, postfeminist Muslim girl” (Lesko, 2015), or as a puppet of West, and an enforcer of Western paternalistic values and control.

Cited Works

Berents, H. (2016). Hashtagging girlhood:# IAmMalala,# BringBackOurGirls and gendering representations of global politics. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 18(4), 513-527

Kugelman, Michael. Why Pakistan Hates Malala. Foreign Policy, Foreign Policy, 15 Aug. 2017, foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/15/why-pakistan-hates-malala/.

Lesko, N., Chacko, M. A., & Khoja-Moolji, S. S. (2015). The promises of empowered girls. Handbook of Children and Youth Studies, 1-11.

Sindoni, M. G. (2014). Can the Powerless Speak? Linguistic and Multimodal Corporate Media Manipulation in Digital Environments: the Case of Malala Yousafzai. LEA-Lingue e Letterature d'Oriente e d'Occidente, 3(3), 273-288.