Warning: this became a jumbled thought-experiment, and therefore may not prove coherent. Apologies.

In class last Monday, we spent a good portion of our Tangier discussion (led wonderfully by Kai, hats off) speaking about ideals of tourism and representation. Focusing on Paul Bowles, our conversation challenged the concept of authenticity, especially in writing. Even if Bowles was conveying his lived authentic experience, the audience to which his message was conveyed would utilize his experience to romanticize and further orientalize Tangier. Especially given his sensationalized form of travel writing, very popular during the 1950s, Bowles would largely shape the way that the West viewed Morocco. He and his wife first arrived at a time of immense political unrest in Morocco, and thus treated the city not as a place that real people lived and struggled, but as an exotic adult playground. The widespread lawlessness as a result of the 1923 Tangier Protocol was seen as a haven for stiffly bored European artists. The effect of countless imperialist influences was seen as a “delightfully unnerving split personality” (as described by the cringe-worthy “Port of Shadows” written only four years ago).

However, the most disturbing aspect of this conversation for me was a quote from Bowles himself, from his 1958 article “The Worlds of Tangier.” He had written that as a result of the  modernization efforts of Tangier through the twentieth century, “there is nothing left to spoil.” This quote left me with an uncontestable sour taste in my mouth. How could Bowles so romanticize the “authentic” Tangier he’d experienced, a hub of crime, espionage, and smuggling, complete with a failing economy, just because it allowed him to live his indulgent and imperialistic fantasies?

Considering this, I have developed a theory — more of an idea, really — of the “elite gaze.” Essentially, I believe that those living “comfortable” lives are intrinsically obsessed, on a subconscious level, with experiencing the untouched. This leads artists and writers to travel the world in search of something that hasn’t been written about, or the hipster mentality of “liking it before it was cool.” I believe this is actually at the heart of many world issues, colonialism, appropriation, and delving into the economies, politics, and cultures of foreign lands. But the biggest issue, in my mind, lies in the “spoiled” factor of having discovered and brought to light the formerly untouched. The conquistador’s dilemma: once you’ve conquered the unknown, it becomes known. This leads Bowles to become exasperated with the modernization of Tangier, instead of recognizing the value of a booming trade and tourism industry. Likewise, this leads to long term damage of countries like the UAE: they are intended to satisfy the spontaneous “pioneer” impulses of consumers, but do not recognize that this appeal is by definition unsustainable.

This may be far-fetched, by the entire discussion reminds me of societal obsession with virginity. Because, in the male gaze, women are for consumption — plus the added appeal of the untouched — there is a widespread sensationalization of virginity. A woman “unspoiled” is romanticized across cultures and throughout history and even several world religions (i.e. The Virgin Mary, houris, etc). And yet this construct is short-lived; it exists for one partner and is thereafter “spoiled.”

Much like Tangier, the female body becomes the subject of this sensationalized obsession with being the first to discover or experience. The “elite gaze” turns to all untouched subjects, eager to conquer, consume, and then cast away when the subject is no longer “authentic.”