A Seminar on Tourist Promotion in Yemen [Archives:1999/50/Culture]

Akram Al-Saqqaf,
Yemen Times

A seminar was held on Monday, December 6, 1999 at Taj Sheba Hotel. The seminar discussed the process of tourism in Yemen. Dr. Abdulmalik Mansour, Minister of Tourism and Culture, Mr. Hazem Derae, Manager of Look Advertising in the Middle East, members of the tourist promotion board, owners of tourist companies and agencies in Yemen, general manager of Look Advertising in Yemen, Mr. Khaled Khoresheed, and a number of officials, correspondents and journalists attended the seminar. Mr. Hazem Derae opened the seminar by defining the aims and details of it. He indicated that Yemen is a distinguished country in the field of tourism. Sheba Kingdom is the proof of Yemeni tradition and originality. A tourist can spend his vacation by enjoying the wonderful views in this beautiful country.
He pointed to tourism in Egypt and how it was before, and the role of Look Advertising as it improved tourism in Egypt until it has become one of the best countries in the field of tourism.
He highlighted that the aim of tourism promotion in Yemen should offer tourist facilities. Tourism in Yemen should be promoted by offering material in various languages in such international markets as Germany, France, Britain and Italy.
He specified the CNN Channel as the best way for advertising. He suggested that the motto for advertising should be, “Yemen is Incomparable Country.” An Egyptian documentary film on tourism promotion was shown during the seminar.
At the end of the meeting, they decided to form a committee of governmental and private sectors to discuss tourism promotion, and to study strategies to overcome the difficulties, provided that Look Advertising should organize the propaganda part because it is one of the biggest advertising companies in the Middle East.
Owners of companies asked questions on the difficulties which face tourism in Yemen such as tourists kidnapping, which is the most dangerous phenomenon that affects tourism in Yemen. On his part, Mr. Hazem indicated that there will be solutions for this bad phenomenon.

Frank Talk: Mama Cow has Last Laugh
Dr. Paramod Kumar
Taiz University
When you feel like smiling and crying at the same time, do neither. Meaning and absurdity usually do not belong to one and the same experience.
Had Wordsworth lived now, instead of writing, ‘And much it grieved my heart to see what man has made of man,’ would have lamented, ‘What (English) man has made of cow, you can make food out of cow but to make it mad! God forbid!’
But this is true about all good things. The lure for more is irresistible. In the case under review, it meant trying to get the maximum out of each cow in the shortest possible time. The attempt was to restructure and cut short nature’s labor. Translated in commercial terms, it meant how much pay-load a cow could deliver to the market, how fast and of what quality. If one of the cow-body was more market-friendly, the aim would be to make that part grow exponentially. In the process, the cow was likely to be blown up into a hapless lump of massive mass. It would get metamorphosed to vegetative growth. The consequences were indeed alarming. But, the temptation to test the frontiers of possibility got the better of sanity as the chromosome cord snapped.
Dolly, the duplicated lamb, was already creating ripples worldwide. Now scientists set their mind on creating another biological wonder. By modifying the physiology of a mammal through genetic engineering and other means, a new breed of cow was to be brought into existence. Hybridization was by now routinely employed in improving plant health, yield and such. It was to be replicated in the animal kingdom. The exercise would mean something like taking the genetic code for size from the elephant and for accelerated growth from the earthworm and transferring them to the DNA strand of a bovine ovum. The result would be a cow which was much bigger then seen in nature and growing much faster.
The task was clear-cut. First to select the right stock of cattle known for its fast growth; second, genetically engineer the embryo for even faster growth; and finally, to construct cattle-feed to sustain such growth.
Soon success followed on all fronts: the ideal breed identified and isolated; the embryonic surgery in place; and synthetic fodder manufactured. In addition, the technology for controlled mutation was perfected. From the lab to the cattle farm was a cake walk. It was a sensational break-though, something to brag about. The whole of the scientific community and the policy makers was neatly processed, packaged and presented for savoring by the most delicate palates. The whole exercise went through without a glitch. The cycle from idea to implementation was completed as one smooth operation.
And then it happened. Something snapped somewhere. The modified cows in the back-yard would not have mattered much; for, for sure, even the maddest of cows are not known to bite like a mad dog unless, of course, you take them as hot dogs.
Then, what are the French aiming at? Why are they so fussy, messy about British beef? Maybe E.M. Forster was right when he observed that between the two, the English and the French, the latter were more pronouncedly unstable, emotional and excitable. But then, such hysteria on such a non-issue, a mere edible, appears unwarranted, even by their standards.
Looking back, but for a brief interim like comic were up-stage, the French have always been at the receiving end of British largess. They ought to have got used to it by now. Being in the habit of consuming so much similar stuff in the past, one wonders, what they are bellowing and mooing about now!
The French insistence on having more scientific evidence before they signed green to red meat scoured from British isles, smacks of prudish indulgence. What better proof do they ask for than what can be obtained from behavioral science? The most in-depth observation of the British people in the recent past indicates no major deviation in their manner or moral. They look and behave very much their usual selves. They don’t betray any sign of being bitten by the cow-bug.
In more than one sense, the English are the most correct people on earth. During the last few centuries they were able to throw overseas all the unwanted elements from their pious land. What remains can be taken as the yard-stick of propriety and sobriety. Such a people, consuming their own beef with impunity and with no visual effect on their bearings what-so-ever, must suffice as a tell-tale. It is only when faced with irrational resistance to what the French derisively call, ‘British beef,’ that they get a bit jittery. But that is understandable given the circumstances. For instance, when the track of the Anglo-French tunnel blocking their access to European Union, they could be seen, with their heads down, frantically digging a new tunnel to the common wealth market with great vigour. There is certainly more than meets the eye!
Seen in historical perspective, for once, the French have turned the table on them. They talk science as the British scurry around in deputation to put the genie back into the bottle and march on Dunsinane.
We, the third world people, surviving in the back-waters of civilization, can not be more profitably employed but sit with our fingers crossed. In the mean time, we can stake our pound of flesh on which side the camel shall sit. It is a weird time and we should not be surprised to find even bananas and potatoes losing their heads and getting out of hand. Maybe, the whole world is going the cow-way!

——
[archive-e:50-v:1999-y:1999-d:1999-12-13-p:./1999/iss50/culture.htm]