500 Mas­sac­red in Nige­ria Are Vic­tims of Reli­gious Violence

March 9th, 2010 § 1

From ABC News:

The killers sho­wed no mercy: They didn’t spare women and chil­dren, or even a 4-day-old baby, from their mache­tes. On Mon­day, Nige­rian women wai­led in the streets as a dump truck carried dozens of bodies past burned-out homes toward a mass grave.

Rubber-gloved wor­kers pulled ever-smaller bodies from the dump truck and tos­sed them into the mass grave. A crowd began sin­ging a hymn with the refrain, “Jesus said I am the way to hea­ven.” As the grave filled, the grie­ving crowd sang: “Jesus, show me the way.”

At least 200 peo­ple, most of them Chris­tians, were slaugh­te­red on Sun­day, accor­ding to resi­dents, aid groups and jour­na­lists. The local govern­ment gave a figure more than twice that amount, but offe­red no casualty list or other infor­ma­tion to subs­tan­tiate it.

An Asso­cia­ted Press repor­ter coun­ted 61 corp­ses, 32 of them chil­dren, being buried in the mass grave in the village of Dogo Nahawa on Mon­day. Other vic­tims would be buried elsewhere. At a local mor­gue the bodies of chil­dren, inc­lu­ding a diaper-clad todd­ler, were tan­gled together. One appea­red to have been scal­ped. Others had seve­red hands and feet.

Reli­gious vio­lence is not a new thing. Some of the most endu­ring ima­ges I have from my Jewish edu­ca­tion are desc­rip­tions of the vio­lence that has been per­pe­tra­ted for cen­tu­ries against Jews by Romans, Greeks, Chris­tians and, though perhaps less often, Mus­lims. One sub­text of those les­sons was that the Jews, because we were so stead­fast in our reli­gious beliefs, because we refu­sed to assi­mi­late, have been made to suf­fer reli­gious per­se­cu­tion more than any other group; and, indeed, when I was youn­ger, I often expe­rien­ced real cog­ni­tive dis­so­nance when I heard about reli­gious vio­lence that did not involve Jews. Over time, as my vision of the world and my place in it wide­ned, that dis­so­nance disap­pea­red. I came to unders­tand as well that reli­gion was some­ti­mes merely the jus­tif­ying veneer that one group would place over the vio­lence they wan­ted to do to another, a way of hiding their more poli­ti­cal and mate­rial motivation.

The more I heard and read about reli­gious vio­lence, the more fami­liar the scrip­ting of it became – and it is remar­ka­ble how simi­lar the scripts are; how care­fully scrip­ted the inci­te­ments to vio­lence are, if not the vio­lence itself, regard­less of the reli­gious deno­mi­na­tions invol­ved – and, even­tually, the sto­ries I would hear left me fee­ling more numb than anything else. Yes, it was horri­ble that peo­ple were killed, but, I would think, as long as reli­gion con­tai­ned within it the pos­si­bi­lity for someone to decide that he or she is follo­wing the one true path and that all those not on that path are morally and spi­ri­tually infe­rior and the­re­fore sus­pect, then the poten­tial for reli­gious vio­lence inhe­red in reli­gion, and there was no esca­ping it.

I con­ti­nue to believe that, I sup­pose, which is why I tend not to write about reli­gious vio­lence as such: I just don’t think there is all that much to say, or, rather, that I have much to say that would be use­ful. Still, this story, which has also been repor­ted on Yahoo! News and other news out­lets – the New York Times puts the death toll at 500 – brought me up short. In part, this is because I have a very close friend from Nige­ria, and she has tal­ked often about the ten­sion bet­ween Mus­lims and Chris­tians in her country. Indeed, this mas­sacre is said to have been reta­lia­tion for a simi­lar slaugh­ter of Mus­lims per­pe­tra­ted by Chris­tians some time ago, and I can even ima­gine, from the way in which she talks about it, that my friend might have been among those Muslim-killing Chris­tians had she been in the country and the cir­cums­tan­ces been “right.” I feel, in other words, a per­so­nal con­nec­tion to this story that I have rarely felt, not least because my friend might have been among those killed whether or not she had par­ti­ci­pa­ted in the prior massacre.

I did not know about how deeply my friend’s fear, mis­trust, and hatred of the Mus­lims in Nige­ria ran until after our friendship was well-established. She says she feels this way only about Nige­rian Mus­lims, not about peo­ple who follow Islam in gene­ral, and I believe her, and she tells sto­ries about her own expe­rien­ces in Nige­ria and the expe­rien­ces of the peo­ple she knows to jus­tify her­self. The fact that she makes this dis­tinc­tion, of course, sug­gests that the issues at stake are not really reli­gious, but the fact that they are expres­sed reli­giously – in terms of spi­ri­tua­lity and mora­lity and the one true path to God – makes it hard, even just bet­ween the two of us, to get at what those sta­kes really are; and then I think about the way our inva­sion of Iraq and ous­ting of Sad­dam Hus­sein made space for the Sunni and Shia to go at each other’s throats – check out this NPR inter­view with Debo­rah Amos about her new book, Eclipse of the Sun­nis: Power, Exile, and Uphea­val in the Middle East–and even the Israeli-Palestinian strug­gle over the sta­tus of Jeru­sa­lem, which is so often pla­yed out in reli­gious terms. And when I think about how may more exam­ples I could list, I can­not help but feel that maybe it’s all, always, poli­ti­cal; maybe the god or gods all these peo­ple fight over is just a way of not having to take res­pon­si­bi­lity for their own poli­tics, their own desire for power, their own ina­bi­lity to share, their own fear of everything that makes them vul­ne­ra­ble; maybe the need to make your reli­gion the only true one is nothing more than fear and cowar­dice, and we all know how thin the line is bet­ween the coward who cowers and the coward who beco­mes a bully.

It has been a very long time, since I was an under­gra­duate in fact, that I have known per­so­nally someone who could place her or him­self so easily, so firmly, so abso­lu­tely, on one side of this kind of divide and so tho­roughly for­get that the other side is also inha­bi­ted by peo­ple; and yet even as I write that, it would be disho­nest of me not to own up to the fact that I too once stood with Israel, as a Jew, in strictly reli­gious terms, in a way that denied the huma­nity of the other side.

That we all have this capa­city within us is by now a cliché, but how do you learn to accept that impulse in someone who has become your friend? Because if you can­not accept it – which is not the same thing as appro­ving of it, or allo­wing it to go uncha­llen­ged – then there can no lon­ger be a real friendship. This is the ques­tion that I am confronting.

What I’m Rea­ding Now — 2

March 2nd, 2010 § 0

Some things I’ve been rea­ding when I should’ve been gra­ding papers or doing other work:

  • A Tough Patron and an Old Ideo­logy Give Women a Lift in Bul­ga­rian Poli­tics, by Dan Bilefsky, The New York Times: What’s most inte­res­ting in this article about how Bul­ga­rian Prime Minis­ter Boiko M. Bori­sov has been appoin­ting women to poli­ti­cal offi­ces are the expla­na­tions peo­ple give for why he is doing so and why women are nee­ded in poli­tics. Boiko says, for exam­ple, “Women are more dili­gent than men, and they don’t take long lunches or got to the bar,” and also, “Women have stron­ger cha­rac­ters than men because when they say no they mean no, and they are less corrup­ti­ble.” Others sug­gest that women are less corrup­ti­ble because they have more to lose, and others talk about the fact that while Bul­ga­ria “never had a femi­nist move­ment” but that during “Com­mu­nism women in Bul­ga­ria were repre­sen­ted in almost every walk of life, from plant mana­gers to medicine.”
  • An inte­res­ting piece in The Lede about the poli­tics behind Iran’s cap­ture and the tele­vi­sed con­fes­sion of Abdol­ma­lek Rigi, lea­der of Jun­da­llah, a mili­tant group that claims to be defen­ding Sunni Mus­lims in Iran’s southeast and has killed hun­dreds of Ira­nian sol­diers and civi­lians since 2003. For some rela­ted artic­les in the news try here, here and here.
  • In I Was the One Rea­ding Andrew Mar­vell. You Were …, also in the Times, Alan Feuer turns some of the “Mis­sed Con­nec­tions” pos­tings on new​york​.craigs​list​.org into found poems.
  • I appre­cia­ted “Thoughts on the ‘hoo­kup cul­ture,’ or what I lear­ned from my high school diary, a guest post on Femi­niste by Nona Willis Aro­no­witz. One of my favo­rite bits: “We need to admit as a cul­ture that teens are sexual beings, and that more often than not, sexual matu­rity has a com­ple­tely dif­fe­rent time­line than emo­tio­nal maturity.”
  • Before I became a trans­la­tor, I was wor­king on what might have become a book explo­ring male hete­ro­se­xua­lity and por­no­graphy, of course, was one of the things I was researching. At the time, I was very disap­poin­ted at the narrow­ness and often impo­ve­rished nature of the dis­course I found not only about the repre­sen­ta­tion of men in hete­ro­se­xual video por­no­graphy (which was what I was loo­king at) but also in por­no­graphy that was tou­ted as pro­gres­sive and even femi­nist. Perhaps one day I will return to that pro­ject, but in the mean time I have been enjo­ying Male Sub­mis­sion Art, the mis­sion of which is to “show­case beau­ti­ful ima­gery where men and other male-identified peo­ple are sub­mis­sive sub­jects. We aim to cha­llenge ste­reoty­pes of the ‘pathe­tic’ sub­mis­sive man.” The ima­ges are often very cool, and what I like about the analy­sis is that its core tenet seems to be that for a man to “sub­mit” (wha­te­ver that word might mean in any given con­text) is not, by defi­ni­tion, for him to unman him­self or to be unman­ned by the one he is sub­mit­ting to (wha­te­ver to “unman” might mean in any given con­text). Lea­ving aside the ques­tion of whether the par­ti­cu­lar sexua­lity expres­sed by the site is one’s cup of tea or not, it is – for me, any­way – a new, inte­res­ting and inte­res­tingly sub­ver­sive way of trying to trans­form what we mean when we say the words “manhood” or “masculinity.”
  • It’s odd, and maybe a bit arro­gant soun­ding, to inc­lude something that I’ve writ­ten in this list, but I’ve recently been put­ting together my appli­ca­tion for pro­mo­tion to full pro­fes­sor, which invol­ved going through the two books of trans­la­tions that I’ve published. As I did so, I was remin­ded of how won­der­ful a poet Saadi was. (One of these days I have to add my work to the Wikip­de­dia entry on him.) So these words may be mine, but they are someone else’s work. It’s from Selec­tions from Saadi’s Gulis­tan:

The best thing for an igno­rant man is to be silent, and if he unders­tands that, and prac­ti­ces it, he will no lon­ger be ignorant.

If the lear­ning you pos­sess is less than per­fect,
keep your ton­gue tuc­ked safely in your mouth.
Empty words dis­grace the one who speaks them,
like ser­ving a wal­nut shell without a nut.
A fool was trying hard to teach his ass
to talk. A wise man watching him obser­ved,
“Aren’t you afraid of what they’ll say
when they find out what you’re doing? This beast
will never learn the trick of human speech.
Bet­ter you should learn the gift of silence.“
A man who does not think before he speaks
will almost always use the words foo­lishly.
If you will not take the time a wise man takes
to speak wisely, prac­tice an animal’s silence.

Sexism in the Tech­ni­cal Wri­ting Classroom

February 25th, 2010 § 5

I have three or four sets of tech­ni­cal wri­ting papers to grade this wee­kend – I am teaching two sec­tions this semes­ter – and I was thin­king to get star­ted tonight, but I can’t bear the thought right now of having to deal with stu­dent wri­ting so I am going to proc­ras­ti­nate by telling you briefly about a dis­cus­sion I had Mon­day with the sec­tion that is all male (the other is mostly male) about the assign­ment they will be han­ding in to me next week. I am using a text­book called Ele­ments of Tech­ni­cal Wri­ting, by Tho­mas Pear­sall, the first seven chap­ters of which deal with the tech­ni­cal wri­ting pro­cess. Each chap­ter is given over to one step in that pro­cess, and Pear­sall has built an inc­re­men­tal assign­ment into the sequence of chap­ters: Stu­dents are to ima­gine that they work for a start-up com­pany that is thin­king about inves­ting in group­ware so that emplo­yees can work remo­tely. They have been asked by their super­vi­sor to do some research and write a report on group­ware that she can use to per­suade mana­ge­ment to spend the money. The first two steps in the wri­ting pro­cess that Pear­sall lays out involve put­ting together a work plan, a desc­rip­tion of the pro­ject and a list of the tasks that need to be com­ple­ted. On Mon­day, we were tal­king about the audience analy­sis sec­tion of the work plan, and I was asking my stu­dents to list what they knew about their super­vi­sor that might be rele­vant to how they would choose to write their report. They called out some obvious things about being a mana­ger, and then someone said, “She’s a woman.”

“Is that rele­vant to the wri­ting of your report?” I asked.

“Of course,” someone else answered.

“Why?” I asked, and the ans­wers came very quickly.

“Because women are more skep­ti­cal than men.”

“Because women over analyze everything”

“They pay too much atten­tion to details.”

“Women ask too many questions.”

“Because women never for­get when you make a mistake.”

“Because women in the work­place always feel they have something to prove; she’s pro­bably going to be really pushy.”

There were a cou­ple of more that I don’t remem­ber clearly, but all of them – with the excep­tion perhaps of the last one – were such unam­bi­guous ins­tan­ces of sexist ste­reoty­ping that I was, for a moment, shoc­ked into silence. It had been a very long since I’d heard anyone anywhere assert those ste­reoty­pes as if they were sim­ple fact. “Do you really think you want to write your report based on those assump­tions?” I asked. “Remem­ber, she’s your super­vi­sor.” A few of my stu­dents laughed; a cou­ple of them shook their heads; we had a brief and pre­dic­ta­ble con­ver­sa­tion about sexist ste­reoty­ping; and while I doubt I chan­ged anyone’s mind about women in gene­ral, they all see­med to get the point: don’t base work­place beha­vior on those kinds of assumptions.

Then, as the con­ver­sa­tion was win­ding down, someone said, “It’s good there are no girls in the class. If there were, they’d be figh­ting us all the way and we ‘d never have been able to talk like this.” Unfor­tu­na­tely, class was over and so I couldn’t pur­sue pre­ci­sely what he meant by that, but I wal­ked to my car with mixed fee­lings. On the one hand, there is wis­dom in what that stu­dent said; on the other hand, there would have been value for those men in having to deal with women’s anger; and it made me start to won­der about how to struc­ture a les­son, or les­sons, around the pro­blems of sexism in the work­place and ethi­cal beha­vior in the work­place, that would remain true to the course desc­rip­tion but also go a little dee­per than some ver­sion of When you go to work, check your sexism/racism/etc. at the door. It’s something I will be thin­king about, since it looks like I will be teaching tech­ni­cal wri­ting for the fore­seea­ble future.

Pro­fes­sor Scott Gallo­way Speaks for Me in So Many Ways

February 24th, 2010 § 1

Like Kit­ten­loss said in her or his com­ment on DeadS­pin, where I found this story – thanks to my friend Amy King–I expec­ted, based on the title, NYU Busi­ness School Pro­fes­sor Has Mas­te­red the Art of Email Fla­ming, to side with the stu­dent, but the details con­vin­ced me other­wise. The gra­duate stu­dent, and the gra­duate part is impor­tant, wal­ked into Galloway’s lec­ture one hour late on the first day of class and Gallo­way asked him to leave and told him to come back the next day. This is from an email that the stu­dent sent to Gallo­way com­plai­ning about the late­ness policy – you can’t enter class if you’re more than 15 minu­tes late – and explai­ning his lateness:

As of yes­ter­day eve­ning, I was inte­res­ted in three dif­fe­rent Mon­day night clas­ses that all occu­rred simul­ta­neously. In order to decide which class to select, my plan for the eve­ning was to sam­ple all three and see which one I like most. Since I had never taken your class, I was una­ware of your class policy. I was disap­poin­ted that you dis­mis­sed me from class con­si­de­ring (1) there is no way I could have been aware of your policy and (2) con­si­de­ring that it was the first day of eve­ning clas­ses and I arri­ved 1 hour late (not a few minu­tes), it was more pro­ba­ble that my tar­di­ness was due to my desire to sam­ple dif­fe­rent clas­ses rather than sheer complacency.

Here are  the barely tongue-in-cheek first para­graphs of Galloway’s response:

Just so I’ve got this straight…you star­ted in one class, left 15 – 20 minu­tes into it (stood up, wal­ked out mid-lecture), went to another class (wal­ked in 20 minu­tes late), left that class (again, pre­su­mably, in the middle of the lec­ture), and then came to my class. At that point (wal­king in an hour late) I asked you to come to the next class which “bothe­red” you.

Correct?

You state that, having not taken my class, it would be impos­si­ble to know our policy of not allo­wing peo­ple to walk in an hour late. Most risk analy­sis offers that in the face of subs­tan­tial uncer­tainty, you opt for the more con­ser­va­tive path or hedge your bet (e.g., do not show up an hour late until you know the pro­fes­sor has an expli­cit policy for tole­ra­ting dis­res­pect­ful beha­vior, check with the TA before class, etc.). I hope the lot­tery win­ner that is your recently crow­ned Mon­day eve­ning Pro­fes­sor is teaching Jud­ge­ment and Deci­sion Making or Cri­ti­cal Thinking.

In addi­tion, your logic effec­ti­vely means you can­not be held accoun­ta­ble for any code of con­duct before taking a class. For the record, we also have no sta­ted policy against burs­ting into show tunes in the middle of class, uri­na­ting on desks or taking that revo­lu­tio­nary hair remo­val sys­tem for a spin. Howe­ver, xxxx, there is a base­line level of deco­rum (i.e., man­ners) that we expect of grown men and women who the admis­sions depart­ment have dee­med tomorrow’s busi­ness leaders.

The rest of the let­ter is worth rea­ding as well.

For me, what jumps out here – aside from the obvious ques­tion of whether Gallo­way is just being a dick, which I think he is not – is the degree to which this stu­dent seems to take for gran­ted that, as a cus­to­mer of the college, he has the right, because the cus­to­mer is always right, to do what he did. I have run up against the “I am a cus­to­mer of this school and you have the­re­fore to give me what I want” thin­king a lot over the past cou­ple of years, and it trou­bles me. There are ways in which stu­dents are and should be trea­ted as cus­to­mers: they have a right to ade­quate par­king, to clean and com­for­ta­ble faci­li­ties, to access to tech­no­logy, to com­pe­tent teachers who come to class pre­pa­red, etc. But I a not a cus­to­mer ser­vice repre­sen­ta­tive and I resent the hell out of it when stu­dents treat me that way.

An Online Graphic Novel About Iran After the June 2009 “Elections”

February 23rd, 2010 § 0

Zahra’s Para­dise. Here’s the first page:

Only chap­ter one is up so far, but it looks like it’s going to be a very good book. Go check it out.

There is a “Hit­ting Girls Is Cool” Group on Facebook

February 19th, 2010 § 0

Check it out.

Here is John Krautzner’s – he’s the crea­tor and self-styled “Alpha Male” on the page – post called “Rea­sons to Hit Girls:”

There are many rea­sons to hit girls. First of all, it keeps those bitches in line. If a girl is mouthing off to you, slug her in the face. This accom­plishes three main goals. First of all, she shut the fuck up. Secondly, she will have more res­pect for you and your fists of jus­tice. But most impor­tantly, she will learn a valua­ble les­son that will keep her in line for years to come.

Another rea­son to hit girls is that it is Natu­ral. That’s right, it is NATURAL to hit girls. God, in his infi­nite know­ledge wrote into our DNA the ins­tinct to hit women. If you deny this ins­tinct, then you are not a man. If women didn’t get hit by men, they wouldn’t know what to do. They would panic and a lot of peo­ple would die.

More Rea­sons to Hit Girls:

it’s fun and healthy

it’s inex­pen­sive

Chuck Norris does it

it redu­ces your chance of con­trac­ting HIV by 17%

I want you to

it redu­ces stress

they like it

The page has been up since 2006, and it’s pos­si­ble that Krautz­ner has all but for­got­ten about it, but that is no excuse. Appa­rently, there used to be a page called “Hit­ting Women” that was taken down fairly recently. I have log­ged a pro­test with Face­book. If you’re on Face­book, you ought to do the same.

A Cle­ver Safe Sex PSA — Defi­ni­tely NSFW

February 17th, 2010 § 0

NSUGBY75EP7X

The spot is very cle­verly done, but there are all kinds of mes­sa­ges here, both impli­cit and expli­cit, both con­for­ming to gen­der ste­reoty­pes and not, and I am won­de­ring what other peo­ple see and how they feel about it.

What I’m Reading

February 14th, 2010 § 0

Laid up with gout today, and for the past four days – the most serious attack I’ve had in a while; I could barely walk on Thurs­day and Fri­day – but today is the first day my head feels clear enough that I can get some work done. I’ve been watching TV and rea­ding to dis­tract myself, and so this see­med like a per­fect time to start a “What I’m Rea­ding” series of posts, which I’ve been wan­ting to do for a while.

  1. Via Fate­meh Fakh­raie: Why Tay­lor Swift Offends Little Mons­ters, Femi­nists, and Weir­dos. I don’t know Tay­lor Swift’s music – or, if I do, because I’ve heard it on the radio, I don’t know that I know it – but I enjo­yed this analy­sis of her image and music.
  2. From Cri­ti­cal Mass: The Blog of the Natio­nal Book Cri­tics Circle Board of Direc­tors, which is doing a series called “30 Books in 30 Days,” each day given over to an NBCC award nomi­nee, this brief review of a bio­graphy of John Chee­ver made me want to read Cheever’s work again for the first time in a long time.
  3. Also from Cri­ti­cal Mass, this take on Louise Gluck’s new book, A Village Life. I have always liked Gluck’s work.
  4. I’d never heard of the poet Elea­nor Ross Tay­lor, till I read this – yet one more from Cri­ti­cal Mass–appre­cia­tion of Cap­tive Voi­ces: New and Selec­ted Poems, 1960 – 2008. She sounds like someone I could learn something from, not to men­tion I enjo­yed the poems quo­ted in the piece. Now all I need is a semes­ter with the time to do nothing but read.
  5. New York Times wri­ter Kathe­rine Bou­ton reviews two books about Mary Anning, The Fos­sil Hun­ter: Dino­saurs, Evo­lu­tion and the Woman Whose Dis­co­ve­ries Chan­ged the World, by She­lley Emling and Remar­ka­ble Crea­tu­res, by Tracy Che­va­lier. The first is a bio­graphy, the second is a novel. Here is Bouton’s lead: “Mary Anning was one of the few women to make a suc­cess in paleon­to­logy and one of the fewer still whose suc­cess was not lin­ked to that of a paleon­to­lo­gist spouse (or any spouse: she was sin­gle). She made five major fos­sil dis­co­ve­ries from 1811 to her death in 1847 and many les­ser ones. Why then is she best known as the ins­pi­ra­tion for the ton­gue twis­ter “She sells seashells by the seashore?”
  6. In the same issue of the Times, Denise Grady wri­tes about the ethi­cal issues that arise when doc­tors take cells from patients and then use those cells in research and, some­ti­mes, in com­mer­cial ven­tu­res that make a whole lot of money. “A Las­ting Gift to Medi­cine That Wasn’t Really a Gift” is a res­ponse to The Immor­tal Life of Hen­riette Lacks, by Rebecca Skloot. Hen­rietta Lacks was an African-American woman who died of cer­vi­cal can­cer in the 1950s, and Skloot’s book is an attempt to come to terms with both sides of an issue mired in ques­tions of race, class, medi­cal ethics and more: Lacks’ can­cer cells, which were taken for analy­sis, went on to become a mains­tay of modern medi­cal research, being used in deve­lo­ping the first polio vac­cine and in the deve­lop­ment of drugs for disea­ses inc­lu­ding Parkinson’s leu­ke­mia and the flu, and they not inci­den­tally have made some peo­ple in the medi­cal field very, very rich. Lacks’ family, who can’t even afford their own health insu­rance, has never seen a dime of that money. The story is not as sim­ple a one of exploi­ta­tion as that out­line would sug­gest, which is why Skloot’s book sounds like it is worth rea­ding, but so is Grady’s opi­nion piece.
  7. Due in 2013, the fifth edi­tion of the Diag­nos­tic and Sta­tis­ti­cal Manual of Men­tal Disor­ders, will con­tain some sig­ni­fi­cant revi­sions that could result, accor­ding to Times repor­ter, Bene­dict Carey, in “fewer chil­dren [get­ting] a diag­no­sis of bipo­lar disor­der[,] ‘[b]inge eating disor­der’ and ‘hyper­se­xua­lity’ [beco­ming] part of every­day lan­guage” and a sig­ni­fi­cant change in the way many men­tal disor­ders are diag­no­sed and trea­ted. This book is used to define the line bet­ween the so-called nor­mal and the so-called abnor­mal; chan­ges in it could have a pro­found impact, the­re­fore, on society. It is, the­re­fore, worth paying atten­tion to.
  8. If any of you, like me, have gout, you want to know about Gout­Pal, the only infor­ma­tio­nal site about gout that I have found – and it’s got a ton of infor­ma­tion – that is not also trying to sell you something. I have glan­ced through it a cou­ple of times, and I am begin­ning to rea­lize that I need to read it. If you have gout, you pro­bably should too.
  9. An opi­nion piece on Teh­ran Bureau that’s worth rea­ding about how to unders­tand what hap­pe­ned in terms of the Green Move­ment in Iran on February 11th: Were the Greens Defeated?
  10. Also from Teh­ran Bureau: Why North Teh­ra­nis Don’t Revolt: Why some peo­ple who clearly see the régime as “them,” don’t see the oppo­si­tion as “us,” or at least not enough of an “us” that they are willing to risk joi­ning the protests.

Kun­di­man Asian Ame­ri­can Poetry Retreat, June 22 — 27, 2010

February 10th, 2010 § 0

If you’re an Asian Ame­ri­can poet, you should con­si­der appl­ying for this retreat. Kun­di­man does great work. Here’s a basic description:

In order to help men­tor the next gene­ra­tion of Asian-American poets, Kun­di­man is spon­so­ring an annual Poetry Retreat at Fordham Uni­ver­sity. During the Retreat, natio­nally renow­ned Asian Ame­ri­can poets will con­duct workshops with fellows. Rea­dings, wri­ting circ­les and infor­mal social gathe­rings will also be sche­du­led. Through this Retreat, Kun­di­man hopes to pro­vide a safe and ins­truc­tive envi­ron­ment that iden­ti­fies and addres­ses the uni­que cha­llen­ges faced by emer­ging Asian Ame­ri­can poets. This 6-day Retreat will take place from Tues­day to Sun­day. Workshops will not exceed eight students.

Read the rest here.

The Teh­ran Symphony Orches­tra in Geneva and Richard Taruskin’s “Com­mon Fallacy”

February 8th, 2010 § 0

Wri­ting in this past Thursday’s issue of The New York Times (February 4th), Michael Kim­mel­man com­pa­res the Euro­pean tour on which the govern­ment of Mah­moud Ahma­di­ne­jad sent the Teh­ran Symphony Orches­tra to simi­lar tours on which the for­mer Soviet Union would send its own world-class per­for­mers, such Svia­tos­lav Rich­ter.1 The con­certs these per­for­mers gave ser­ved both to dis­tract Wes­tern audien­ces from the dis­si­dents the Soviet govern­ment was exi­ling to the gulags and to force those audien­ces into “the moral com­pro­mise [that] atten­ding such pro­pa­ganda events” would require. Given that the Ira­nian symphony’s tour took place “around the time the Ira­nian govern­ment exe­cu­ted two more poli­ti­cal pri­so­ners, char­ging nine others with waging war against God, a capi­tal offense,“2 it is likely that the Isla­mic Repu­blic was trying to imple­ment a simi­lar stra­tegy. Indeed, the title of the music the orches­tra per­for­med, “Peace and Friendship Symphony,” by Majid Ente­zami, would seem to make that stra­tegy expli­cit. Kim­mel­man, howe­ver, does not have kind words for the music, calling it “a four-movement jere­miad of mar­tial bom­bast and almost unfatho­ma­ble incom­pe­tence and silli­ness, ori­gi­nally per­for­med, accor­ding to Teh­ran Times, last February in Iran to cele­brate the 30th anni­ver­sary of the revo­lu­tion [and] retit­led for this occasion.”

What struck me most about Kimmelman’s article, though, was not what he had to say about the simi­la­ri­ties bet­ween what Teh­ran was trying to do last month and what Mos­cow did during the Cold War, but rather what he had to say about the differences:

The dif­fe­rence now isn’t just that the Teh­ran orches­tra pla­ying a pathe­tic Peace and Friendship Symphony is such a far cry from Emil Gilels pla­ying Beethoven’s Empe­ror con­certo. More fun­da­men­tally, it’s that a tour by an anoin­ted symphony orches­tra from the other side barely regis­ters in the Wes­tern poli­ti­cal cons­cious­ness. In an Inter­net age when everyone’s sup­po­sedly savvy to crude pro­pa­ganda, the pre­sump­tion seems to be that the Ira­nian tour doesn’t even rise to the threshold of newsworthiness.

But this pre­sump­tion is a result of what the Ame­ri­can musi­co­lo­gist Richard Tarus­kin calls a com­mon fallacy. The fallacy, he has writ­ten, con­sists in tur­ning “a blind eye on the morally or poli­ti­cally dubious aspects of serious music,” as if “the only legi­ti­mate object of praise or cen­sure in art” is whether it’s good or not.

“Art is not bla­me­less,” Mr. Tarus­kin wri­tes. “Art can inflict harm.”

We take the blame-worthiness of art for gran­ted when it comes to popu­lar cul­ture, cri­ti­ci­zing Ava­tar, for exam­ple, for being yet one more movie about a white guy who saves a nature-loving peo­ple of color or the wri­ters of a show like Battle Star Galac­tica for how they write rape into the show’s narra­tive; but it is good to be remin­ded that no art, not even clas­si­cal music, is without poli­ti­cal sig­ni­fi­cance, that it too can be used as pro­pa­ganda, to rein­force, or to sub­vert, the sta­tus quo.

In the conc­lu­sion to his review, Kim­mel­man quo­tes an Ira­nian busi­ness­man living in Geneva. This man was angry because he kept “seeing Ahmadinejad’s face in the music.” He said, howe­ver, that his heart “goes out to the musi­cians. They’re vic­tims like the rest of us.“

  1. Inte­res­tingly, the piece has two dif­fe­rent tit­les: “A Swiss Con­cert For an Audience Back in Teh­ran” is the print ver­sion; the online ver­sion reads, “The Sour Notes of Iran’s Art Diplo­macy.”
  2. And some of them are likely to be exe­cu­ted as well, as the govern­ment in Iran gears up to inti­mi­date the oppo­si­tion further in the days before February 11th, the anni­ver­sary of the foun­ding of the Isla­mic Repu­blic.