Michele Khleifi’s Wedding in Galilee (1987) unveils the longstanding tradition of a Palestinian wedding although under Israeli control. Not only does the movie reveal the difficulties between Palestine and Israel, but it also displays the increasing detachment of tradition along multiple generations. The negative linear relationship between the strength in belief of tradition and generation can be seen through the taunting old man, Muhktar, and the groom.
Throughout the wedding, the discontent of many individuals with the Israelis can be seen but the older generation can be seen taunting the Israeli soldiers directly. Before the wedding took place, a group of men huddled in a room and discussed their discontent with Muhktar’s decision to allow such guests. One old man can be seen telling a young boy how they used to fight the opponent and not invite them into their homes. Unfortunately for them, they must obey Muhktar’s decision due to the way of the tradition but this does not stop them from showing displeasure publicly with the soldiers. During the dinner, an old man can be seen disrespecting the Israeli soldiers by regularly making sly remarks directly toward them. Khleifi employs the old man in this film to show the strong dissatisfaction amongst the older crowd with the unwelcomed Israeli guests and contrast the personality of the older crowd with the younger crowd. The older members of the village have no issue showing their disgust while the younger members are more willing to put on a performance for the soldiers as well as for the wedding.
Muhktar can be seen as the middle generation between the older men and his son, the groom. By being an age that is directly between the old men and his son, he can be seen as having ideas that support the tradition of the wedding while going against it as well as displaying a personality that seems to be weaker as the generations go on. This is evident by the fact that Muhktar allows the Israeli soldiers to attend the wedding. He believes in the tradition of the wedding so he must have it, but he is not strong willed enough like the older men to bar the Israelis from the wedding and potentially throw an underground ceremony. The viewers are led to believe that this had been the case years ago, the decision of not allowing the soldiers to attend the wedding would have been given without hesitation. Muhktar is a hint of an increasing discontent with the strict rules that the tradition imposes on the Palestinian people (Cultural Evolution).
Finally, the groom can be seen showing his displeasure with the ceremony throughout the wedding. While he follows the tradition of being showered by his friends and family, his face quickly changes from being happy to discontent as he realizes this may not be what he wants. When it comes time for the groom to take the virginity from his wife, he refuses and goes on a tirade on how he hates his father for making him do this. Khleifi uses the groom to show how the discontent with tradition grows as the world becomes more modern. In contrast with the older men, they would have no problem with the ceremony and taking their wife’s virginity while the current groom struggles. The groom hates his father so much for putting him through this that he debated on ending the father’s life. These thoughts and actions would never have been seen in the older generation’s ceremonies.
Khleifi produced the movie Wedding in Galilee to show the audience a subtle conflict experienced by Palestinians with Israelis, while expressing how modern change brings cultural change (Gertz and Khelifi 9; Gertz 22). It is possible that political change as well as industrialization have a significant impact on the views of tradition by each and every generation (Inglehart and Baker 3). Khleifi shows that at the very least, political change has a significant impact on culture and the views of future generations.
Works Cited
“Cultural Evolution.” Religion in Science Fiction : The Evolution of an Idea and
the Extinction of a Genre (n.d.): n. pag. Web.
Gertz, Nurith, and George Khleifi. “A Chronicle of Palestinian Cinema.” Film in
the Middle East and North Africa: Creative Dissidence (2011): 187-197.
Gertz, Nurith. Palestinian Cinema: Landscape, Trauma and Memory: Landscape,
Trauma and Memory. Edinburgh University Press, 2008.
Inglehart, Ronald, and Wayne E. Baker. Modernization, Cultural Change, and the
Persistence of Traditional Values (2000): n. pag. Web.
Wedding in Galilee. Dir. Michel Khleifi, 1987. DVD.
Through an Arabic Lens: the Intersection of Film and Culture 
Your interpretation of the traditional values and the inclusiveness of your ideas were great. Including the traditionalist values depicted in the wedding you included details of the conflicts within the movie which I agree is significant of the film, even if the focus seemed primarily on the wedding. The idea of the difference in opinions between generations was a strong point of view especially if you analyze the conflict between the father and groom.
While I think you made an interesting point by saying that Muhktar was the middle generation. It is not something you really consider seeing as he is the one so wrapped up in the traditions. He seems to lean more towards the older generation in his views and his belief in the up holding of traditions. So much so that he was willing to invite the Israeli’s to the wedding.
I think this is a very interesting analysis. I think it would have been interesting to include your analysis on how the group of young men was so dissatisfied with the Israeli soldiers that they started to plan an attack. Why would the younger group be more willing to show their discontent in a dramatic way while the elder group shows it in a teasing way?
When you mentioned that the older crowd was willing to show their dissatisfaction with the Israeli presence and that the younger crowd was able to hide their distaste and pretend everything was okay, I feel like the younger crowd did not follow society’s expectations but that they simply did not feel passionate enough to show their anger as the older crowd did.
krisia lazo
kl16c@my.fsu.edu
I think this is a well thought out description of the movie’s internal politics. You made a good point at showing how the village elders respected Muhktar without any real constitutional authority. Muhkar, while displeased about the situation, is more open to helping make sure his son’s wedding happens rather than keep his pride.
Samuel Mascaro
sgm15@my.fsu.edu
I do not know if I would directly call the younger generation weak but maybe just desperate for peace. As with the young boy in the film who chases after the horse he is seen as desperate for freedom like the horse. I do agree with you that there are big differences between the generations within the film though.
Since your topic is cultural changes among generations, it would have been interesting if you would have included the way the female characters in this film serve as a representation of cultural change. Particularly, how the younger sister is such a coquette throughout the film and thus represents a direct challenge to the traditional culture that viewed that kind of action as impure or immoral.
This was very in depth article about the other inner confrontation in this movie besides the outright Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I especially liked how you mentioned the groom and how he had his own way of rebelling against his father even if it was unintentionally. However, you did not mention the youngest daughter of Muhktar who was even more instrumental to this message of tradition versus modernity. However, this was a good blog post overall.
I like how you identify the generation gap between the couple and the parents. They are going about things in the usual traditional way for the ceremony, but behind closed doors they take their lives into their own hands. Like when the bride took it upon herself to stain the sheets because she wanted to please her husband. In that moment there is a mix of the old and new generation.
I enjoyed reading this article because I agree with the points you made about the different generations. Throughout the film different age groups are shown in a certain light and I believe you touched on that perfectly. I appreciate how you tied the older generation with tradition while tying the younger generation with modification because I believe that is something that is proven in almost every scene.
Your analysis of the sharp contrast between the older and younger generations is spot-on, in my opinion, and very interesting. I especially like your understanding of Mukhtar as the bridge between the old and the new. I had not thought of him in that context, but your explanation actually makes a lot of sense. In some ways he was caught between two worlds and was trying to compromise each.
What I enjoyed most about your blog post was your focus on an issue other than the apparent conflict of Palestinian struggle under Israeli control. Your focus on the conflicts within the Palestinian culture, in my opinion, was a great choice because it is something different and may not have been as apparent to much of the audience as the external struggle between Israelis and Palestinians was.
I enjoyed that you focused on the difference of view points from the different Palestinian generations. It is something that we do not see in America. There are not many cultures in America where so many strict rules are set in place on how you can act and which gender hold the power.