The human aspect is fully appreciated: an artist who was absent from the art scene, and before her absence (2002), had a distinguished presence in various acting/lyrical genres, in theatre, cinema, and television, and here she is back, anyone with the slightest ties of human relations must welcome With this return. But after that he has to remember, if he knows, and search, if he does not, about the reasons for absence, and the motives for returning.
Absence is still in the grip of doubt, has not yet been freed from that huge pile of accusations hanging around the neck of a whole combination of politics, power, money, security and abnormal feelings. Two whole decades and Sherihan’s absence was enveloped in “myths” about complex relations with the pillars of power during Hosni Mubarak’s rule, and a few talks by Sherihan herself reinforced those “myths”.Absence, then, was in the grip of doubt and legend. It is not the absence of voluntary “retirement,” but rather, “absence,” or in the nicest cases, “avoidance of confrontation.” It is not an absence as “magical” as absence Greta Garbo, Or in a local copy as an absence Fatima Rushdie, or even Leila Mourad. Sherihan’s absence has criminal traces that have not yet been erased.
There is, of course, the unresolved “pathological” issue in turn, and in general, the absence enhances the state of absolute sympathy for the beloved/hidden star, and her return is undoubtedly a “victory” even over doubts and myths, but part of the sympathy will remain suspended until the doubts dissipate with confirmed confirmed facts.
The return announcement is also very confusing, confusing and intertwined with many issues. In early July, Turki Al-Sheikh posted a tweet on “Twitter”, in which he wrote: “Stay tuned for the return of the great star Sherihan to the spotlight after years of absence in a distinguished work on the Shahid platform sponsored by the Entertainment Authority.” In response to this tweet, Sherihan wrote: “I am happy…, hard work… I hope that MBC fans around the world will like it and my beloved fans. Congratulations.”
The face of confusion comes from different angles, for the “Shahid” website had published a news item titled “Sherihan returns to the stage in Cairo and Riyadh exactly a year ago, and charms hearts with a hundred dresses.” The world of art, through a large party held by the “Al-Adl Group” for artistic production, in 2017, the production company stated that it is in the process of preparing a major theatrical work that will monitor the life of the icon of the fashion world, the exceptional designer Coco Chanel, and Sherihan will be the star of the show. Filming the play “Coco Chanel”, but it will not be shown on television now, as it will be shown on stage first.Sherihan’s fans will be on a date to meet their beloved star at the beginning of next year, as the play is scheduled to be shown first in Cairo, and then in Saudi Arabia as part of the activities The next “Riyadh season”, after which the play will be shown on television.
This is the path of return: “Justice” contracted with Sherihan, about four years ago, to play a number of plays, bringing her back to the artistic scene, and the project led to one play, which went to the “Saudi Entertainment Authority” headed by Al Sheikh.
The scene is not a binary (Al-Adl – Al-Sheikh/Shahid, the Entertainment Authority, MBC), but a tripartite. In contrast, parallel, or intersection with them: “Watch.IT,” a digital platform affiliated with the United Media Services Company, was established in 2019 to coincide with the month of Ramadan 1440 AH, and was promoted as a “historic national event.” “, for a company affiliated with Egyptian sovereign authorities, and there was a lot of frank talk about “restoring the Egyptian artistic position that was almost lost in the Arab world, from competitors who do not have the lowest conditions for legitimate competition.” The common question at the time of its announcement was: “Has dramatic production become in Egypt? Under state control?
In the triple scene there are very faint shadows, distant shadows related to the person and position of the advertiser. There are undocumented conversations related to the Sheikh’s behavior towards a number of famous Egyptian artists, and there are documented news and denials of Saudi policies, and with the UAE, towards women in general, and towards a number of “runaway” princesses, and the monitoring of their phones.
These shadows, which in turn are like those that have enveloped Sherihan’s life for twenty years, are not settled, but their lightness, and their remoteness from the circle of documented facts, sow seeds of doubt about the purpose of “Coco Chanel” from the beginning to the show.
Is ‘return’ via ‘watch’, not via ‘what’, that important, or is it just speculation, if not illusion? What is the difference between them? The important thing is that Sherihan is back?
In the difference, it is noted that news websites and satellite programs market the return as taking place through: “Saudi Entertainment”, witness, MBC, Al-Sheikh, .. and not through its “Egyptian” counterparts.
This is in the figure. In the content, there is a procedural question about timing, and a question about classification.
At the time, it is not possible to ignore the synchronization of media talk, through reputable and reliable international media and websites, about the “persecution” and monitoring of women in Saudi Arabia and the UAE, with a play highlighting the celebration of women and their freedom, which was highlighted at the forefront of the television show where she appeared on the scene The inaugural plaque reads: “A bow of thanks to all women in the world.”
The “Justice” project, which motivated Sherihan to return, seemed very ambitious when it was offered to her: the production of 13 plays, dealing with the stories of influential and successful women in history. But the difficulties and limitations of “financing” – we will not guess who offered the project first – reduced the project to four plays, of which only “Coco Chanel” was implemented, and the contract term expired before its presentation, but the work had been filmed.
In the classification, the paradox of talking beforehand about the theatrical performance emerges. First, it doesn’t matter where you start, then the TV show, and then turn it off. It was clear that the work is a “play”, and there are frequent statements by producer Jamal Al-Adl that the play is a qualitative leap for the development of the art of Arab theater, and that “Al-Adl Group” has carefully selected the most important modern elements “decor, music, reviews, dancers”, with the aim of developing all The details of the theater and the realization of the elements of global dazzle for the Arab viewer. As for the scriptwriter and poet, Medhat Al-Adl
, who wrote the text and poems of “Coco Chanel”, and said about her: “It is a different need, no one saw it before, and I assure that Sherihan will appear as we are used to, the icon of beauty and elegance.”
The last sentence, is of paramount importance to the whole of the “project”. The strange thing is that the most prominent news of “Shahid” a year ago carried the detail of “one hundred dresses” as an indication of the magnitude of the show, but in the context of the entire four years, it was initially talked about that the importance of fashion requires that it be designed by a well-known and prominent person, and news spread about the designer’s choice. Global Lebanese Zuhair Murad
To design non-representative clothes, then other news was circulated that stated that Sherihan had chosen the Lebanese designer Fouad Sarkis
To design show clothes, the number of clothes that the star Sherihan will use will exceed 100.
But the costumes belonged to another person from the Al-Adl family, so he assigned its design to Reem Al-Adl.
What is different? Who considers this, which was shown a few days ago, a theater? What prevented the show in Riyadh and Cairo first? Who owns the decision?
There are many different questions. What was shown as “hybrid”, “canned” does not belong – with confidence we say – to the theater. It is also not a movie, not a series. It is an indeterminate form, made by completely unknown circumstances, which was eventually led to pour into the mill of Al-Sheikh and Saudi entertainment, and their dependencies.
What is most confusing, and perhaps infuriating, is the reduction of “justice” by the talented actress of great determination to a mere “icon of beauty and elegance”.
The artistic facts throughout Sherihan’s career prove that she was keen, persistently and persistently, to remove this perception from her, to be replaced by the perception that she is: an actress, striving with all her energy to perform complex and difficult characters, requiring her to appear in a completely opposite form to her life data.
This is how I went to counter worlds to confirm “justice” and confirm “Al-Sheikh”, and participated in cinematic masterpieces that foretold great talent, and was keen to master the broad gate of acting, and not out of “beauty and elegance”, and Sherihan’s audience must remember her in: “Ring and bracelet”
(1986)، “a very hot day”
(1993)، “dead phil”
(1996)، Date Sweat
(1999), and other films in which Sherihan was never an “icon”, but a diligent actress, who reached the threshold of excellence, and aspired to surpass it. It is widely known through the “Fawzier Ramadan”
With the showmanship, she did not leave long for that success, with all the temptations, which were presented by two plays “Because of your eyes”
And“Muhammad Ali Street”,
I went on artistic adventures.
It remains that Sherihan, in an Egyptian expression, seems crude, a “stump” artist, who supports colleagues, shares their adventures, and may bear a lot of material damage for them. So I did with Mahmoud El Gendy In his production experience: leader (1989), encouraged Radwan Al-Kashef To carry on with his experience, rejected by many, “Arq al-Balah”.
Thus, the reader can watch “Coco Chanel”, after attempts to untangle some of the entanglements surrounding a work in which Sherihan appears after a long absence. Sherihan, who is really waiting for her return. Appearance is not always a return. An appearance like this, amidst such entanglements and circumstances, is definitely not a return.