Send us a text

Satanic Verses by Salman Rushdie

Salman Rushdie is one of the great English language literary figures.  He has won the Brooker Prize for the best Novel in English and was a finalist twice. 

The focus of this talk is on the Rushdie novel, the Islamic traditions around the most controversial passages, comparisons with Christian traditions, and the reaction of Ayatollah Khomeini. 

But a core focus is upon how we interpret texts, especially religious texts.  Consider an incident in the gospels.  It is called The Woman at the Well.  Jesus is thirsty and asks a woman drawing water if he can have a drink.  She says yes and gives him a drink.  It turns out she is a “loose” woman, maybe even a prostitute.  But that aside there is a problem in translation.  In at least one African culture, when a woman gives a man food or drink from her hand, it is a prelude to sex.  In that particular translation of the Bible, there is a footnote explaining that Jesus is not hitting on this woman. Lesson 1:  Fidelity to the words as written can often be wrong rather than right.  Lesson 2: Our understanding can also be wrong, even if we have a clear understanding of the words. 

There is also a tension between the overarching goal of revelation (for those who are believers) and specific texts.  If the divine goal of revelation is to empower humans to achieve their full potential, then a focus upon a specific text intended to put a check on sin can be in contradiction with the higher goal if it is emphasized in a way that constrains human empowerment by overlooking  the higher divine purpose.   

All believers want to know God’s Will but God is often opaque in terms of our understanding.  (Go back to the podcast on Feuerbach is you missed that one).  I am reminded of what the great Catholic theologian Hans Kung said when he came to Dearborn in the 1980s and was challenged from the floor about how he had interpreted a specific passage. The person challenging him had absolute certainty about the meaning of a specific text regarding the future: Kung  said, “God does not act to satisfy human curiosity.”  Ouch!  

Some of you will find this lecture provocative.  Good! I hope it is provocative in a way that makes you think.  

This was a class lecture.  There is some interaction with students and some  references to readings.  Sorry about that.  I thought the lecture came out well and did not want to re-record it. 

Books by Salman Rushdie are Satanic Verses and  Joseph Anton.  

Some terms and names
Qureish, Hagar/Hajar, Ishmael, Abraham/Ibrahim,  Mecca, Medina, Gabriel/Jibril, circumambulate, Mahound, Salman the Scribe; Pantheon (a building in pre-Islamic Mecca where there were 360 gods); Taif; demiurge;  intersession; garaniq. 

Three female goddesses from Taif: Al-lat, al-Uzza, Manat.  
Ayatollah Khomeini, fatwa.  Iran-Iraq War of 1980-1988.  
Early biographers: Ibn Ishak, Tabari, Ibn Saad; 
Apostasy, blasphemy, heresy. 

One glitch:  A favorite translation of the Bible is The Jerusalem Bible, not The Jefferson Bible.  (There is a Jefferson Bible, consisting entirely of the words and teachings of Jesus, but it is not the one I mentioned). 

Thoughtful Comment:  [email protected]

Send us a text

Six Months of Stocktonafterclass, and Counting.

August 6, 2021 is the six month anniversary of the beginning of this podcast series.  This is a short description of how this podcast got started, the philosophy and approach of the series,  some of the themes followed, and some data on the downloads, including where they are occurring.  

There is also a discussion of feedback, including one very positive and one not. 

Thanks for your interest in this series. 

It is far more fun and far more rewarding than I had ever imagined. 

There is a Stocktonafterclass Podcast Discussion Group on Facebook if you are interested.  

Thoughtful comment:  [email protected] 

Send us a text

My favorite novel is Gilead by Marilynn Robinson.  It is up there in my pantheon with Les Miserables and Spoon River Anthology by Edgar Lee Masters.  Spoon River Anthology is a dialogue from the grave, short one-page, free-verse statements from the deceased about their lives.  After a while you realize they are interacting with each other, in death as they did in life.  It is one of the most creative books I have ever read.  All three of these are books I have read more than once.  Each time, they are new.  (Which is a characteristic of world-class literature). 

Gilead is about a Congregationalist minister, John Ames.  He is an older man who lost his beloved wife and daughter during childbirth.  He has never quite gotten over that loss but then, decades later, a young woman appears in his church one morning.  A March-October marriage?  Can this possibly work?  In fact, it does and they have a son.  But then John gets a diagnosis.  He has a heart condition that will soon take his life.  "Why do you have to be so old? his loving young wife asks.  She would have loved having another 30 years with John.  But he recognizes reality.  He realizes that he will never be able to tell his son, now six, all the stories of his family history that he would ordinarily tell him.  Nor will his son have more than a fleeting memory of his father.  John decides to write a letter to the son telling him all the things he would have told him had he had the time, and discussing with him all the issues -- religious, philosophical, historical, personal  – that he would have discussed with him as he got older.  Gilead is the note that John left for his son.  

Those who know me know that I spend a lot of time in graveyards.  I frequently lead graveyard walks for friends and students.  When I discuss gravestones I always say that a gravestone is not about death.  It is about life.  It is about who we were, what was important to us, and how we want to be remembered.  

This letter is the gravestone that Ames leaves for his son.  Who I was, what was important to me, how I want to be remembered.  

By the way, Jane and I put our gravestone into place a few years ago.  It has the normal information:  names, dates, professions.  It includes the names of our two sons and our four grandchildren.  It has the date of our marriage.  And it has the slogan, “We were given the gift of time, and used it well.”  I stole the first part of that from Ted Kennedy’s memoir.  He had three older brothers, all of whom died violently (one in war, two from assassination). He said, “I was given the gift of time,” which his brothers were not.  His memoir is a reflection on his life, the achievements that would never have occurred had he died at the age that his brothers died.  

We added the last part to our stone to make it clear that we were grateful for our time. 

John Ames was not given that gift. 

Do you have a thought?  You can send me a reaction at [email protected]

Send us a text

Black Political Leaders                     

There are two talks on Black leadership, one on Political Leaders, one on Intellectual Leaders.  This is the talk on Political Leaders.   The focus is upon nine key leaders.  There are others who are worthy of inclusion. I thought of Rosa Parks, far more significant than the demeaning image as a simple woman with tired feet who sat down rather than stand. Parks was a defiant activist who moved to Detroit to keep from being assassinated.  Without her and others like her organizing car pools, the Montgomery Bus Boycott would have failed.  She organized women on the ground, and sparked a movement.  Her leadership was remarkable.  May I recommend that you consider reading Dark At the End of the Street, an amazing book on the role of women in the civil rights movement.  It will change your way of thinking.  And will help you see Rosa Parks in a totally different light. 

Note: I intentionally left out elected leaders, although some are very significant.  There are separate podcasts on Barack Obama, Vernon Jordan, and others.

Also Note:  There are two very good graphic-style biographies of John Lewis, the great civil rights leader and member of Congress.  One is called March, the other is called Run. 

Who are these leaders?   

Frederick Douglass, an abolitionist and Black-rights activist,  who wrote Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, the best of the slave memoirs. 

Sojourner Truth, activist, feminist who wrote a memoir. 

Brooker T. Washington, who wrote Up From Slavery

W. E. B. Du Bois, a founder of the NAACP and author of The Souls of the Black Folks

Marcus Garvey and the United Negro Improvement Association

Martin Luther King and the Southern Christian Leadership  Conference.  The film Selma describes one of his critical marches. 

Malcolm X, originally  of the Nation of Islam. His Autobiography of Malcolm X  is a remarkable work.  There is also an excellent film entitled Malcolm X  starring Denzel Washington. 

Jesse Jackson, who was an ally of Martin Luther King and then formed his own organization. 

Louis Farrakhan  of the Nation of Islam.  My conference paper (“The Political Ideology of Louis Farrakhan”) is deposited in Deep Blue.  

Terms used:  Seneca Falls, Talented Tenth, Maroons, Black Nationalism, Black Star Line, Elijah Mohammed, Boston Latin High School, Calypso music, Fruit of Islam, J. Edgar Hoover, Paul Tillich, Rosa Parks, Southern Christian Leadership Conference/SCLC. 

The remarkable essay by Garvey that I call “Advice to Young People” is actually named “Intelligence, Education and Universal Knowledge.”  It is available on the internet.  If you read it, you will be glad you did.  ("Never forget that intelligence rules the world and ignorance carries the burden"). 

Send us a text

When our 50th anniversary rolled around, I decided to write up a reflection on how we came to become a couple.  That occurred back in the 1960s when dating practices were a bit different from today, to say the least.  I wrote this with an idea of entertaining my family members.  I also shared it with friends and colleagues and even with some students.  Most people thought it was worth their time.  I hope you also find it worth your time. 

For those who didn't catch the joke, the title is borrowed from that delightful film When Harry met Sally.  

And some of you will remember the line from Jerry Maguire:  "You had me at hello." 

Send us a text

Osama issued two declarations of war on the United States, one in 1996 and one in 1998.  The one in 1996 was more lengthy and more filled with passion.  The one in 1998 was in the name of a collection of leaders, some of whom were religious leaders.  Both were called "fatwa," a term much misunderstood to most Americans.  A fatwa is a an advisory opinion by a religious leader explaining how to apply a principal of faith in a specific situation.  I recently saw an opinion by a local religious leader about whether an observant Muslim was allowed to work in a grocery store that sold alcohol.  That is just guidance for someone who is confused about what the faith requires of a person trying to do the right thing. 

The problem with Osama's 1996 "fatwa" was that he was not a religious leader and had no authority to hand down rulings.  And the problem with both "fatwas" is that they do not follow the proper format of a fatwa.  It typically starts with a passage from the Koran and then may quote something the Prophet Mohammed said, or one of his devoted followers, or a subsequent scholar.  It is not just a political opinion with some quotes thrown in for "proof texting."  

Still, there is a question of who has authority to speak when the recognized religious leaders are not speaking or have even taken the wrong side.  In such a case, righteous people (as Osama and his followers would considered  themselves to be) can step into the breach and take the place of those who are not doing their duty.  

This is a discussion of the 1996 fatwa.  The text is widely available on the internet for those who want to read the whole thing (which I recommend). 

The previous podcast on Background to Osama bin Laden has a list of terms.   If you have not listened to that podcast, you might want to do so.  These two are a matching pair. 

A note on how I taught this material:  My goal was to show bin Laden’s view of world conflict, not to argue with him or critique his perspectives.  When students were asked to write on this, they were asked to analyze without revealing their personal perspectives.  I told students that if their thinking after reading and analyzing a document was the same as before, then no new learning had taken place.  A serious review of a document should make you understand things you had not understood before your analysis.  (Check out the podcast on Rules of Good Studenting) 

After students had finished their paper, they were asked to add a Personal Response in which they would tell how they reacted to what they read.  That was not graded.  Most said they still did not like Osama but they understood him better.  A few felt guilty because they found several of his arguments logical.  All thought this was a very good topic to address and a very good assignment.  

Also, students were asked to write a paper comparing the Maccabees uprising (on which there is a previous podcast) with the Al Qaeda uprising.  These uprisings are 2200 years apart and yet they have many parallels in terms of the issues, the structure of the conflict, the nature of the outside force, etc.  The students considered this a challenging and creative assignment.  

We call this critical thinking.  

This podcast is rather long, but it is worth your time. 



 

Send us a text

The Holocaust was an effort by the Nazi government to exterminate the total Jewish population of Europe.  It is a form of genocide but perhaps the most extreme form of genocide.  There is a separate talk on that topic which you can listen to if you wish.  

This talk will walk you through the Holocaust in eight steps.  There is nothing in this talk that is meant to be argumentative.  There are complex issues upon which serious scholars may disagree.  There are also points upon which there is no disagreement.  My goal is to outline those issues for you. 

In teaching my class on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict I noticed an interesting pattern:  most students, be they Jewish or Palestinian or something else, were able to handle this difficult material with an open mind.  But people who were Holocaust-centric in their thinking about Jews, i.e., they saw Jews through the lens of the Holocaust, were sometimes resistant in a way that other students were not.  I think this period of history is so traumatically horrible and beyond human comprehension that it is exceptionally stressful to hear someone such as me try to discuss it from an academic perspective, without expressing trauma.  On the other hand, students have told me that an academic perspectives is very valuable in helping them think analytically.  I hope it works that way for you. 

If this topic interests you, you might want to listen to two other podcasts in this series.  One is the podcast on genocide, which discusses the range of definitions and cases;  the  podcast on the Palestinian Refugees of 1948 discusses a different situation.  

Are you looking for something to read?  Ron Rosenbaum, Explaining Hitler, consists of interviews and profiles of the top Holocaust scholars and how differently they think about what happened and why.  Rosenbaum also discusses some of the controversies and issues that are often unclear.  (Example:  Did Hitler have Jewish ancestry?);  Lucy Dawidowicz’s book, The War Against the Jews, is a good single book   I found it very helpful.  Raul Hilberg’s book, The Destruction of the European Jews, is considered the best single book.  It is a shortened version of his multi-volume definitive history; Hannah Arendt’s  Eichman in Jerusalem is a classic report on the trial of a top Nazi leader.  The excellent film Hannah Arendt shows the vilification directed at this astonishing woman for her report;  and The Reader by Bernhard Schlink tells about a simple young woman who got caught up in the conflict without really understanding what the issues were.  It was also made into a good film.  It raises complex and disturbing issues. 

This was a talk delivered to a class in the fall of 2020.  I had provided students with a list of names and terms, and with a chronology and some data on the number of Jews who died in different countries.  I try to summarize them for those listening. 

Welcome to class

Some Terms and Names: Raphael Lemkin, Dr. Kastner; Transfer Agreement; Adolph Eichman; Kristallnacht of 1938; Madagascar Plan; Israel as a “gift” of the Holocaust; Biltmore Conference of 1943; Evian Conference of 1938; Munich Conference of 1938; Wansee Conference of 1941

The music, Stockspeaks, was written by G. Kevin Dewey. 

Send us a text

Background to Catholicism.  Everything you wanted to know but were afraid to ask.

This is an introduction to the Catholic Church.  We start at 1868 when Italy became a country and the pope was stripped of his “temporal” power, i.e., he stopped being the ruler of a state.  He got very irritated and renounced the very existence of Italy and Germany.  Not good. 

The Church shifted to a very right wing position during those decades.  This withdrawal from the world was reversed in 1891 with the encyclical Rerum Novarum by Pope Leo XIII. There is a separate podcast on that significant encyclical.  

This podcast will walk you through the organization of the Church, some key concepts of theology and organization, some issues that came up (such as secular government, papal infallibility, the Dreyfus Affair,  and what Catholics can read or think).  We will also talk about the structure of the Church and the role of the College of Cardinals. 

Here are some names and terms and concepts that will appear along the way.  

Some Supreme Court Justices who are conservative Catholics: Scalia (R.I.P.), Alito, Thomas 

Anti-clerical

Lord Acton

Encyclical:  Its meaning and importance

Apostolic Succession

Infallibility; Ex cathedra; Vatican I, 1870; Dogma; Revelation

1950 infallibility teaching on the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the  Immaculate Mother of God

Secular Government (i.e., separation of church and state)

Some Encyclicals:  Rerum Novarum, On Civil Government, Populorum Progressio 

Otto von Bismarck, the Iron Chancellor; Kulturkampf

Dreyfus Affair

Syllabus of Errors and the “index” of books 

Hierarchy

College of Cardinals, Princes of the Church

Concordat

Curia

Conclave

Holy See

Papal Nuncio

Graham Greene, The Power and the Glory

Magesterium

Sola fide, sola scriptura

Some Popes:  Leo XIII, Pius XII, John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul II, Benedict XVI, Francis.

Note: There I am planning future podcasts on How a Pope is Elected; Rerum Novarum; Populorum Progressio; Liberation Theology, Vatican II, and maybe the Pope’s recent encyclical on fraternity. 

Send us a text

Black Intellectual leaders .   

Because I think race is the single most critical and most divisive issue in American politics, I always included a unit on Black politics in my course on American government.  And in my course on Revolution.   And in my Honors course.  The approaches in these three courses were very different but they all followed a theme:  resistance to injustice.    

There are two podcasts on Black leaders. One is on Political leaders, one on intellectual leaders.  This is the lecture on Intellectual leaders.  These are people who write books and analyze situations.  The other talk is on those who take leadership positions and head organizations.  

The goal of this talk is to show how complex the issues are and how various Black intellectuals approach the problems of the Black community in different ways.  In each case I try to follow the Rules of Good Studenting, to explain that person’s position to their own satisfaction.  

As you listen to these different ideas, please remember that all of these people are trying to make the situation better.  They do not agree with each other on what is the proper approach. 

Regrettably I did not discuss James Baldwin (The Fire Next Time) or Ta’Nehisi Coates (Between the World and Me) or Derrick Bell (Faces at the Bottom of the Well), all of which influenced my own thinking.  I do plan future podcasts on Louis Farrakhan and Critical Race Theory (which will include Bell's book).  Meanwhile, do yourself a favor and add them to your reading list, if you have not already read them.   

Names mentioned in this podcast: 

                St. Clair Drake

                Nicholas Lemann

                Marcus Garvey (who is discussed more fully in the talk on leaders) 

                Franklin Frasier and his book The Black Bourgeoisie

                Shelby Steele and his two books, The Content of Our Character and White Guilt 

                Barack Obama and his Father’s Day Speech (plus his books Dreams from my Father and The Audacity of Hope). 

                Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post and his book Disintegration

                Murray and Herrnstein and their book The Bell Curve

                Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie and her book Amerikanah   (I love this book). 

Some terms used:  Race Man, Bronzeville, caste, Black Conservative 

Send us a text

Ian Lustick is a prominent political scientist at the University of Pennsylvania.  He is known for his analysis of intractable conflicts:  South Africa, Algeria, Northern Ireland, and Israel-Palestine. I discussed some of his ideas in the podcast on The Black Swan.  

 In his book Paradigm Lost Lustick discusses why the option of a two-state solution is no longer possible.  He says there is now a single state reality containing Israel and Palestine.  

He also discusses how Israeli thinking of the Holocaust has gone through four stages, with dramatically different implications for public policy.  

There were several opportunities in the past for Israel to make a serious effort to create a Palestinian state.  There were partners available.  Why did Israel not take this opportunity to solve a problem that could potentially destabilize the state?  He says there are two reasons rooted in how the Israelis think – one involves the idea of an Iron Wall and the other an understanding of the Holocaust.  There is also a political factor, the role of the Israel Lobby in America.  His discussion of these factors is deeply analytical and grounded in reality.  After all, he is a political scientist. 

This is my summary of Lustick’s thinking.  If you are concerned about this conflict, you should listen to this podcast.  And if you think it is as important as I do, you should probably buy this book to discover all the things I did not have time to discuss.   

Glitch:  The Reagan Plan, also called the Comprehensive Solution, was in 1982.  Sorry for the confusion. 

People Mentioned: Meir Pa’il,  David Ben-Gurion, Vladimir Jabotinsky, Menachem Begin, Ariel Sharon, Konrad Adenauer, Shimon Peres, Yitzhak Rabin, King Fahd, James Madison, Golda Meir, Adolph Eichmann,  President George H. W. Bush, James Baker. 

Other Things Mentioned:  AIPAC, Reagan Plan, Resolution 242, Oslo Accords, Holocaustia, Yad Vashem, Sabra and Shatilla, Ibrahami Mosque massacre (Hebron), Federalist Ten, Treblinka.