![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||
|
Jihad Watch Board Vice President Hugh Fitzgerald explores a website dedicated to the mighty works of Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl, some of whose less exhilarating utterances I discuss in Onward Muslim Soldiers:
Devotees of the genre know the pleasure to be derived from reading Hamid Dabashi's eulogy to Edward Said, with its echoes, for the connoisseur, of Dzhambul's 1936 "Song About Stalin" -- the first verse of which you can find, if you wish, in Ogonyok, No. 14, 14 March 1990. The "Song About Stalin" goes thus in rough translation:Stalin-Sun! For our happiness, may you live [forever] in the Kremlin, We bring offerings to you -- our songs, our hearts, and our flowers. In the whole wide world, on this earthly sphere of Man, No one is more important for All Humanity [or: the Folk} than You.Now, with those lines dew-fresh in your memory, quickly google “Hamid Dabashi" and "Edward Said.” You will certainly detect the influence of the "Song About Stalin" on Dabashi’s “Ode to Edward Said” as surely as you would, in “Hyperion,” that of Milton on Keats (two names that naturally come to mind when Said and Dabashi are mentioned).
Why bring up Dabashi on Said yet again? Only because I never dared hope to find something else that would supply the kind and degree of pleasure you obtain from Dabashi’s immortal work. But I have, and it would be churlish not to share it.
Here it is:
Write that down. E-mail it to your friends. Send it to UCLA law students in the final-weeks-before-exams blend of doldrums and despair. They, while trying to keep straight Future Interests and the Rule in Shelley’s Case, or anticipatory breach and anticipatory repudiation, or to memorize some simple-minded three-or-four part “test” in Constitutional Law that something has to meet for something else to withstand strict scrutiny, would welcome some cheering up.
It is just the thing to post on the Bulletin Board in the lower-level lobby of the designated Washington hotel at the next annual meeting of the American Association of Law Schools. What better way to raise the general level of “collegiality” about which so much fuss is made nowadays, and then to have a good laugh? And “collegiality” is so very important, now that the race is never to the mentally swiftest, but to those who can not only churn out articles (plagiarism or triviality or illiteracy be damned), but who can also most enthusiastically engage in mutual backslapping and blurb-swapping, and can attend a “departmental retreat” where everyone can “share experiences” and exchange “thoughts” and “feelings” while “expressing” himself, herself, themselves.
For www.scholarofthehouse.com is the work of “Friends and Supporters” of Khaled Abu El Fadl. Like hagiographers of the Middle Ages producing the “Vita morte e miracoli” of a favorite saint, these magnificent friends choose to remain self-effacingly anonymous. Khaled Abu El Fadl would be the first to deplore anything that smacked of self-promotion, and certainly would have no reason to know who is behind this site dedicated so effusively to him. He may not even know that the site exists. Under these circumstances, one should be grateful to those friends and supporters for managing to ferret out so much about and by Khaled Abou El Fadl, for the permanent edification of so many.
The “Friends and Supporters” explain that the website is "dedicated to the thought and scholarship of the distinguished Islamic scholar, jurist and professor of law, Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl, the most important intellectual in Islam and Islamic law today."
The domain name “scholarofthehouse” is also explained:
"We chose to name the site "Scholar of the House" as tribute to Dr. Abou El Fadl's having earned this high academic distinction early in his scholarly career while at Yale University….We felt it [the website name] a fitting title and name for an organization dedicated to Dr. Abou El Fadl's distinguished work. For more information on other related efforts, please e-mail us."
This “high academic distinction” is received by a dozen or more undergraduates each year at Yale for getting good grades, and allows those undergraduates to continue to pay tuition in their final year but exempts them from taking courses, so that they may at long last concentrate on their concentration. When El Fadl was named one of the dozen “scholars of the year” as a junior at Yale, the news traveled to Cairo, and his feat received mention in Al-Ahram.
Khaled Abou El Fadl is simply a specific example of a more general phenomenon: Every Man His Own Hero. In pre-Internet days, hundreds of millions of Chinese (some of them now the proud parents and grandparents of single-minded capitalists) held aloft Chairman Mao’s Little Red Book. Tens of millions of Russians in bad old Soviet days put Stalin’s “Short Course” on their bookshelves, even though it was hardly the stuff that would qualify, nowadays, for Oprah’s Book Club. In Libya, Khaddafy flogged his “Green Book,” containing the Wisdom of Muammar Khaddafy; once upon a time, thousands read it, for the book was the talk and the toast of the town, if the town was in Tripolitania.
Now, with the Internet, disinterested “Friends and Supporters” of virtually anyone can offer that anyone’s words by way of a Spiritual and All-Purpose Guide to Just About Everything. It is not merely that Everyman can now blog here, and post there, over and over again. Now Everyman Can Appear on the World-Wide Web as The Glorious Helmsman of Humanity, courtesy of his self-effacing “Friends and Supporters.” On the Internet, at a dedicated website, you can be not only King or Queen of the Universe, and not just for a day but from here on out, and from beyond the grave (your website will outlast you). Everyman can now count himself a king of infinite space, even if bound in his own gigabyte nutshell, in mysterious Googlelandia, or of something, somewhere.In offering so many different aspects of Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl’s Life and Works, www.scholarofthehouse.com is simply ahead of its time. It would be hard to choose which section most impresses. There is the biographical “About Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl.” There is the scholarly “Bibliography of Khaled Abou El Fadl.” There are the epistolary “Letters to Dr. Abou El Fadl.” There is “Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl In the Media.” There are “Unedited Interviews with Khaled Abou El Fadl.” And there is even “Recommended Reading” –“recommended” by none other than Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl, some of whose books are among those he finds most recommendable. But that is not cause for carping. It would be silly indeed for someone to write a book that, afterwards, he felt he could not recommend.
Indeed, Khaled Abou El Fadl’s refreshing absence of humility, rightly understood, is truly humble. Was it not Golda Meir who once cut short someone engaging in pro-forma self-deprecation: “Don’t be so humble, you’re not that great.” Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl is “not so humble”; it logically follows that, therefore, he is very likely great.
Not the least of Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl’s services is the list he compiled, available at www.scholarofthehouse.com, of what he calls “The Worst Books About Islam,” books so bad that Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl hopes no one will waste his time even opening one of them. That list includes, among much else, Professor John Wansbrough’s “Qur’anic Studies,” Ibn Warraq’s anthology of scholarly articles “The Quest for the Historical Muhammad,” and Joseph Schacht’s “Introduction to Muhammadan Law.” Wansbrough and Schacht have long been admired by Western scholars of Islam: the first as a pioneer in the study of early Islam and a teacher of Patricia Crone and Michael Cook; the second as one of the most scrupulous and authoritative students of Islamic law in the Western world. But neither Wansbrough nor Schacht was a Muslim. And by now it should be obvious that one cannot rely on any non-Muslim scholar’s supposed “understanding” of Islam, no matter how many languages that scholar may know, or how many decades of tireless and, on the surface, disinterested study he may have devoted to the matter. The simplest of seminarians at Al-Azhar, the most grizzled Afghani poppy farmer, by virtue of being a Muslim, necessarily understands Islam in a way that no non-Muslim, no matter how learned, possibly can.
This should not be confused with the whole business of “Orientalism.” Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl is no Edward Said, who has been receiving so many palpable hits that his likeness is beginning to look like St. Sebastian. Khaled Abou El Fadl realizes that Schacht and Wansbrough and Crone and Luxenberg and Ibn Warraq may well have had nothing to do with the “imperialism project.” He needs, other Muslims need, to find an objection broader and deeper and sturdier now that burnt offerings are no longer made with quite the same frequency at the Temple of Said.
No, Khaled Abou El Fadl’s objection is broader and deeper and much more profound. It is just that non-Muslims obviously cannot be expended to feel, deeply, the profound richness and variety and multiplicity of Islam, and the permanent impossibility of any non-Muslim making any valid generalizations about Islam ever -- or indeed, of saying anything at all about Islam from “the outside,” as richly various and variously rich as Islam is, so different in its theory and practice, depending on the time, depending on the space. There are practically as many Islams as there are Muslims, and non-Muslims – who seem disturbingly confident that they can make pronouncements on matters they know nothing about -- should never forget it. Especially when they are about to say something negative, as they do so often nowadays, simply because they need that old whipping-boy – the Other. Ever since the Communist lead retired, they have been grooming Islam to fill that role.
Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl knows that non-Muslims cannot talk about “Islam” because “Islam,” as one thing, does not exist, but only as many things, and only Muslims can talk truthfully, without rancor or hidden agendas, about those things which seem never to overlap or add up to one thing. One particular kind of non-Muslim – the kind that speaks Arabic, and has an Arab name, and calls himself an Arab, but happens to be Christian – may sometimes be exempted from the ban, because the genetic makeup of such people, their DNA, permits a special insight into the nature of Islam. But Schacht, Wansbrough, Snouck Hurgronje and a thousand other scholars did not possess that precious strand of recombinant DNA. The entire corpus of their work, as a result, was fatally vitiated.
Ibn Warraq, whose The Quest for the Historical Muhammad makes the list compiled by Khaled Abou El Fadl of “The Worst Books on Islam,” suffers from a different, equally fatal handicap. Although Ibn Warraq was raised as a Muslim, and began attending a madrasa at the age of 6 (the very age at which, Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl began to attend his own elementary classes in Qur’an at Al-Azhar), Ibn Warraq fell away from Islam, and ultimately renounced it. And now he spends his time writing about Islam, as if he understood it.
But a mysterious phenomenon, of which Muslims have long been aware but which is insufficiently appreciated by non-Muslims, is that of the complete mental disarray, accompanied by severe memory loss, that results from the shock to the apostate’s system. It’s akin to whirling about in a centrifuge in a dark laboratory, with a mad scientist rubbing his gleeful hands as he watches you whirl, and whirl. And the name of that mad scientist is Shaytan -- Satan. Apostasy from Islam is a truly wrenching experience, often proving fatal. For in leaving Islam, one is giving up all chance for Eternal Happiness and throwing away the Total Explanation of the Universe, which gives daily life the only coherence it may be said to possess. Imagine stumbling upon the Secret of the Universe, and failing to recognize it, or picking it up, and then throwing it away. That is what apostates from Islam do.
Naturally there are consequences. Whatever they may once have known, or thought they knew, about Islam before, the very act of apostasy renders them incapable of recalling anything of value about the faith that for so long sustained them. Their apostasy renders them incapable of understanding or speaking about Islam. Their so-called “testimony” about Islam is thus essentially worthless. That is true of Ibn Warraq (at www.secularislam.org) as well as of Ali Sina (at www.faithfreedom.org) and so many others. The minute they became apostates, they no longer knew what they were talking about, when they talked about Islam.
A comparison may be instructive. At www.secularislam.org, Ibn Warraq inflicts his articles on Islam on the entire universe, or at least the universe of those who happen to stumble upon his website, free of charge, there for the taking. At www.scholarofthehouse.com, Khaled Abou El Fadl, or rather his Friends and Supporters, do things differently. Visitors have nothing inflicted on them. Instead, they are politely offered his articles, his lectures, his interviews, all demurely on sale. Only those who demonstrate a real interest, by sending in the appropriate sum, will read or hear in detail what Khaled Abou El Fadl wishes to say on a great many subjects. He does not believe in inflicting his views on the entire world, but on a self-selected group.
Perhaps that marks the difference between a coarse apostate such as Ibn Warraq, with his anthologies of pseudo-scholarship (just look at a list of the “scholarly”contributors to his other books, such as The Origins of the Koran and What the Koran Really Says), and the refined Islamic luminescence that is Khaled Abou El Fadl. He is not only a scholar of the house, but if those website sales hold steady, that house should in due time have many mansions.
One marketing trick of Ibn Warraq, and of other ex-Muslims, is the assumption of an alias, designed to make it seem that they are in some danger. Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl, in contrast, does not use an alias despite the “many threats” he has received, and has repeatedly told us about only with great reluctance. He is determined, he says, to continue his heroic refusal to kowtow to the “Wahhabists” who are giving Islam such a bad name in some quarters.
Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl has been just as brave in speaking truth to powerful non-Muslims. It was he who fearlessly argued that “Jihad” means “struggle” and not “Holy War,” and that therefore there could not possibly be any kind of “Holy War” in Islam. It was Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl who, just after 9/11, forthrightly expressed his immediate thoughts, which were to worry about harm that might come to Muslims as a result of this attack. That could not have been an easy and popular thing to say in America just after the attacks of 9/11. The cowardly, of course, would only offer some words of sympathy and solidarity with American non-Muslims; Khaled Abou El Fadl was not about to play the taqiyya hypocrite. He is a Muslim, and he worries about his fellow Muslims. Whether dealing with those threatening Wahhabists, or their mirror-image, the threatening Infidels, he will not trim his sails. “Ich kann nicht anders” – “I can do no other” is as much his motto as it is anyone’s.
One question remains. There are so many things on sale at this website devoted to Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl. These include collections of his articles (for $60), and whole series of his recorded lectures on this or that aspect of Islam, which can be ordered on either audiocassette or CD. The first item at the website is “What’s New”: new articles new interviews, new Qur’anic commentaries, brave new books by Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl, each with the price helpfully appended.Should you, for example, want to buy Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl’s commentary on Surah 103: Al-‘Asr, that will be $8.00; for the same price, you can purchase his discussion of Sura 111: Al-Lahab. A lecture, “Islam and Democracy” goes for $4.00, while an Unedited Interview on “Islamic Democracy” is a bargain at $8.00. Full information about ordering is available at the site. And if you are moved to send a contribution to support those who operate the website in gathering, and posting, and selling Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl’s work, information about how to do that in the most expeditious manner is also conveniently available.
At the website, under the “Scholar of the House” rubric, the “Friends and Supporters” of Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl note that “Dr. Abou El Fadl is neither involved in nor responsible for any of the activities related to this website, including the naming of the site, the conducting of any matters of business, or the making of any decisions regarding its policies. Dr. Abou El Fadl does not gain any profit from the sales generated from the website.”
But someone must be making some money from the sale of Dr. Abou El Fadl’s articles, and the 10-part lecture series (on Audiocassettes and CD) on Marriage and Divorce, and on a gallimaufry of taped lectures, interviews, writings, and opinions on this and on that. The halo of the hagiographic sanctifies the brazenly commercial enterprise at this website dedicated so flatteringly, even djambullishly, to the Thought and Greatness of One Man.
This raises an awkward question. Could it be that these “Friends and Supporters” are trying to make money from the genius of Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl while purporting to honor him, and are using the website only to flog his wares? Meanwhile, the trusting and unworldly Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl himself, that “inexhaustible fountain of fertilacious fertility whose rivetting rivulets water the oasis where the roses and bulbuls of Gulistan bloom and twitter both day and night, even in the endless tract-housing wastes of the American intellectual desert,” as Hamid Dabashi might put it, is apparently receiving not a penny for his thoughts – at least not those of his thoughts that are available for sale at www.scholarofthehouse.com.
What kind of “Friends and Supporters” are these, anyway? Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl has a right to know.
Posted by Robert at April 5, 2005 12:47 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Duly sliced and diced by Hugh
Posted by: dennisw
at April 5, 2005 3:33 PM
Everyone should take a look at his book recommendations in his Culture/Economics/Politics section. Some of the names you will find include: Leila Ahmed, Tariq Ali, Noam Chomsky, John Esposito, Norman Finkelstein, Rashid Khalidi, Omid Safi, Edward Said, Christoper Hitchens, Michael Sells, and Azzam Tamimi. It seems to me that the only people that are missing in his recommendation section are Tariq Ramadan, Juan Cole, and Karen Armstrong. That would have made it a complete bibliography of the worst books on "Islam and Politics". It's kind of funny how he questions Ibn Warraq's scholarship yet doesn't do the same with Chomsky or Hitchens. And if Pipes's book on slave soldiers was so bad, why then, did Harvard accept his thesis on the same subject in their PhD program? The book was based on his thesis, was it not? I sincerely hope that Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl isn't implying that it wasn't on the same level of scholarship as say "Progressive Muslims" by Omid Safi.
Posted by: igor
at April 5, 2005 4:39 PM
And everyone may derive profit and pleasure from reading, at www.scholarofthehouse.com, the books that Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl disrecommends, in a section (to be found by clicking on "Recommended Reading") entitled "The WORST Books on Islam Identified by Dr. Abou El Fadl."
This list of "the worst books on Islam" is cut-and-pasted here so that everyone can study that list, so that there will not be a chance in hell that you might make the mistake of going out and buying copies of one or more of the books listed, or ask your library to buy them, or recommend them to friends and family.
Got that? Good.
Now here is his list:
"The Worst Books on Islam -- Identified by Dr. Abou El Fadl.
This is a partial list based on Professor O'Donnell's bibliography. More books will be added as time goes on. Check back!
Calder, Norman. Studies in Early Muslim Jurisprudence. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press, 1993.
Pipes, Daniel. Slave Soldiers and Islam: The Genesis of a Military System. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1981.
Rosen, Lawrence. The Justice of Islam: Comparative Perspectives on Islamic Law and Society. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Schacht, Joseph. The Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press, 1950.
Warraq, Ibn, ed. and trans. The Quest for the Historical Muhammad. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 2000.
Wansbrough, John. Qur’anic Studies: Sources and Methods of Scriptural Interpretation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1977.
Warraq, Ibn, ed. The Origins of the Koran: Classic Essays on Islam’s Holy Book. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 1998."
Remember that according to Dr. Khaled Abou el Fadl these are definitely "the worst books on Islam" at least up to the year 2000 (A.D., of course). Keep that in mind the next time you are making out a course syllabus (but not as a member of MESA Nostra), or ordering books on Amazon, or wandering through a well-stocked bookstore, looking for something to buy.
at April 5, 2005 5:22 PM
Thank you, Hugh. And thank you also, igor.
All this is why I shall continue to post links to similar articles (always related to islam and jihad, of course!)- because this is what they teach in our schools.
More info Here:
http://www.historytextbooks.org/
Posted by: Gary
at April 5, 2005 5:34 PM
Hugh - Thank you. A lesson in reverse logic -- any book that is banned by the "Scholar" is a must read!
Posted by: epg
at April 5, 2005 6:17 PM
Back slapping, self congratulations, inflated rhetoric, that must go along with egos of similar size, seem to be the norm in MESA. How about a couple of sticks on the bonefire of MESA self importance?
First, Hugh's masterful unmasking of Mark Le Vine that should never be forgotten; this piece should be required reading in the history department at UC Irvine.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/004273.php
And let us not forget the self-aggrandizing self desecription of Mark Le Vine himself oozing with I know not what; this "leader of the new generation of scholars of the modern Middle East and Islam, Globalization, and Popular Culture, and an award winning musician who has performed with some of the greatest artists around the world".
http://www.meaning.org/levinebio.html
Res ipsa loquitur.
And, finally, something new. I went almost randomly to the online edition of the Middle East Studies Association Bulletin and took a look at some book reviews (all from the Summer of 2001), including one by our old friend Omid Safi. I know little about the content of these books and the quality of the reviews, but the a rather consistent tone in many of the reviews tell us something about the culture of MESA.
http://w3fp.arizona.edu/mesassoc/Bulletin/35-1/35-1Literature.htm#Keshavarz
First, an excerpt from:
Curfew, by Adalet Agaoglu. Translated from Turkish by John Goulden. Review by Sibel Erol
New York University.
"Agaoglu (1929- ) is one of Turkey’s most distinguished contemporary writers. In each of her works, she creates a delicate balance between a lyrical approach to character, time, and language with a cogently realistic sense of history and society that frames the plot."
Well, "one of Turkey's most distguished contemporary writers", very impressive, yes?
Second, excerpt from:
In Search of Walid Masoud, by Jabra Ibrahim Jabra. Translated from the Arabic by Roger Allen and Adnan Haydar. Reveiw by Allen Hibbard, Middle Tennessee State University.
"Jabra, who left for Iraq when evicted from Palestine in the late forties, is without a doubt one of the best known Palestinian writers living in exile."
Another one, not quite as important, but "one of the best known Palestinian writers living in exile". Very nice to be that.
Third, excerpt from:
Three Tales of Love and Death, by Out El Kouloub. Translated by Nara Atiya. Review by Maggie Nassif, University of Pennsylvania.
"In her translation of Three Tales of Love and Death, by Out El Koloub El Demerdashiyya, Atiya, author of award winning Khuul Khaal: Five Egyptian Women Tell Their Stories, competently repaints scenes of love and death in the idyllic Egyptian countryside, busy streets of Medieval Cairo, and Europeanized suburbs of British occupied Egypt."
Another great writer, an 'award winning' author.
Fourth, excerpt from:
Women Without Men, by Shahrnush Parsipur. Translated by Kamran Talattof and Jocelyn Sharlet. Review by Persis M. Karim
San Jose State University
"Women without Men is an important and long overdue translation by one of Iran’s most important women writers, Parsipur, who now lives in exile in the United States."
Only important people get reviewed, it seems, because we have again, "one of Iran's most important women writers". And must mention that. No doubt about it.
Are folks starting to get the picture? 'Important', 'award winning', 'best known', 'most distinguished': there is a strange rhetorical consistency with the self description of the 'new leader' Mark Le Vine, and the writings of the 'Scholar of the House'. Everyone is someone, and no one is one one should not know. And is everyone someone one should buy? I guess so.
But, finally, this one takes the cake. A review by our friend, and a special friend of Spencer, Omid Safi, and in this case we might go beyond grand adjectives.
Excerpt from:
Reading Mystical Lyric: The Case of Jalal al-Din Rumi, by Fatemeh Keshavarz. (Studies in Comparative Religion)
"In the past fifteen years, the Persian Sufi poet Rumi (d. 1273) has emerged as a best-selling poet in English, thanks in large part to Coleman Barks’s popular versions. Somehow, however, the scholarly studies of this indubitably central figure had lagged behind. Keshavarz’s masterly analysis of Rumi’s poetics is a monumental contribution to Rumi studies, and (along with Frank Lewis’s recent encyclopedic work) ranks as one of the two most significant works on Rumi in the past decade.
"Reading Mystical Lyric is a must-read for all those seriously interested in Rumi, Sufism, and Persian as well as Islamicate literatures. Its reasonable pricing and manageable length make it ideal for a variety of undergraduate and graduate classes, including Persian literature, Sufism, Islamic Civilization, and Comparative Literature. Every serious student of Rumi would do well to add this work to the short bookshelf of the essential studies of Rumi, which includes Gülpınarlı, Foruzanfar, Zarrinkub, Huma’i, Chittick, Schimmel, Frank Lewis, and now, Keshavarz."
My goodness what a finale. Rumi, long dead but that does not matter, is a 'best selling poet in English'. Very impressive. Must mention that in a scholarly review, don't you think? And this analysis by Keshavarz is 'masterful', a 'must read'. The work also gets some marketing, surely well deserved, 'reasonably priced', 'manageable length', great for those pesky students who don't want to read that much, I suppose. Libraries should certainly get the message: if they do not buy it, they are behind the times. Marketing is a fitting role for a scholar. Why not? Its not that bad, is it?
Well, here is what Safi says when he does turn to scholarship:
"Keshavarz utilizes insights from contemporary discussions of literary theory and comparative literature, from a wide range of figures such as Wittgenstein, Bakhtin, Heidegger, Husserl, and others. It would be easy in today’s world of post-everything to dismiss this engagement as merely trendy. That would be a most unfair assessment of Keshavarz’s sophistication. To her great credit, she manages to deploy insights from many of the above theorists without either overwhelming the reader or being overwhelmed herself. The theory and the application in this case go hand in hand, illuminating the subject, not obfuscating it."
I do not have to read Keshavarz's book to know that this review is absolute nonsense. Wittgenstein, Heidegger and Husserl are not primarily concerned with literary theory and any commentary on these thinkers would require careful interpretation and textual analysis. And I thought Keshavarz's book was of manageable length? But somehow Keshavarz pulls off a miracle 'deploying insights', whatever that means, 'without overwhelming the reader or being overwhelmed herself'. What does that mean? I have no idea. Well, whatever it means, these insights are 'illuminating', according to Safi.
Any educated person who reads this review should feel a similar nausea to that induced by Mark Le Vine's self description. What a sham. This is not a critical review, but puffy, slipshod marketing that shows no appreciation for works by philosophers like Wittgenstein, who would surely shed this review and throw it in the fire.
MESA is a scholarly mess, and one need not be a middle east 'scholar', who almost by definition, it seems, is 'well known' and 'important', to see that.
at April 5, 2005 8:06 PM
Hugh - Thank you. A lesson in reverse logic -- any book that is banned by the "Scholar" is a must read! Posted by: epg
That's my criteria, when I order from Amazon and the book is reviewed by a Muslim, if it is one star or less, it is an automatic must have.
Posted by: Giaour
at April 5, 2005 9:12 PM
How did a paganistic death cult inspired by a barbaric warlord evolve into an industry? For a paltry sum, the illustrious "scholar" Khaled Abou El Fadl will share his awesome interpretations of Qur'anic palaver. I can't imagine who would part with their hard-earned money for such worthless tripe.
This amazing creature should return to his native land and anoint himself caliph. Such great talent and intellect shouldn't be wasted in America, the land of Islamophobia.
Posted by: Susanp
at April 5, 2005 11:11 PM
I'm disappointed not to see any of Robert Spencer's books on the ten worst list. I hope it is only an oversight and not an intentional slight.
Posted by: Patrick
at April 6, 2005 3:52 PM
The list goes up to the year 2000. Robert's books came after. And Bat Ye'or had not yet swum into Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl's ken by that time. But she has now. I doubt he'll be offering another, updated list of "Unrecommended Books" any time soon.
Posted by: Hugh
at April 6, 2005 4:44 PM


(Note: Comments on articles are unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Jihad Watch or Robert Spencer. Comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying may be summarily deleted. However, the fact that particular comments remain on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Robert Spencer of the views expressed therein.)