Some of the international aspect of Dubai is alluded to because only 10% of residents are from the city.
Probably the most interesting element in the article was a visit to a museum which outlines the “Old Dubai” which surprisingly is of little interest to most people. Lastly the author alludes to the ‘fake-ness’ of the city in that nearly every element to the city is artificial but she alluded that time will tell for the future of the emirate.
This paper postulates that Wilentz did indeed ultimately enjoy her time in Dubai however she finds a certain element of in-authenticity in this newly emerged powerful city state. The target audience that she seems to be addressing would most likely be potential tourists from an English speaking nation that are interested in visiting the Emirate of Dubai. The tone that is set by Wilentz is of a land with extreme dichotomies. Although some people may indeed enjoy Dubai, it is presented that there is a lot to dislike about the city state.
The means by which Wilentz establishes this argument is through example. Firstly, the author indicated that the city has firmly entrenched dichotomies. Although the city is very international (the statistic that she used indicated that approximately 10% of inhabitants come from the emirate) it is not a melting pot insofar as there is a firmly entrenched caste system.
During an excursion with Benedict Fisher of Nakheel Wilenty was exposed first hand to “The Palm” a man made land mass for real estate development. WIlenty indicated that although she found the land mass to be interesting there was a strong unnatural element about it even going so far as to describe it as being “like a developers ocean-view hallucination.”
Wilentz stated that her hotel room at the Burj Al Arab costs $2000 a night which is more that the foreign workers who built the structure earned in a year which further reinforces the dichotomy of visiting