Clueless Dhimmitude and Denise Spellberg
Posted on August 6, 2008
Starting in 2002, Spokane, Wash., journalist Sherry Jones toiled weekends on a racy historical novel about Aisha, the young wife of the prophet Muhammad. Ms. Jones learned Arabic, studied scholarly works about Aisha’s life, and came to admire her protagonist as a woman of courage. When Random House bought her novel last year in a $100,000, two-book deal, she was ecstatic. This past spring, she began plans for an eight-city book tour after the Aug. 12 publication date of “The Jewel of Medina” — a tale of lust, love and intrigue in the prophet’s harem.
This sounds like a great book. Historical fiction can be exciting, often more exciting than the real thing and can open up a dialog about a period in history so people can discuss the issues arising from events which transpired in the past. In this case opening a discussion with the Muslim world about their prophet and his consummation of his marriage to a nine year old girl is sorely needed, as the west as a whole can’t wrap their heads around a man who would have sexual relations with a nine year old prepubescent girl.
But that conversation isn’t going to happen, and neither is the book.
In an interview about Ms. Jones’s novel, Thomas Perry, deputy publisher at Random House Publishing Group, said that it “disturbs us that we feel we cannot publish it right now.” He said that after sending out advance copies of the novel, the company received “from credible and unrelated sources, cautionary advice not only that the publication of this book might be offensive to some in the Muslim community, but also that it could incite acts of violence by a small, radical segment.”
emphasis mine
So what isn’t offensive to the Muslim community? Oh, that’s right….sex with nine year old girls, beheading people, subjugating those who aren’t Muslim, oppressing women, need I go on?
The real kicker in this story is it wasn’t a Muslim throwing the wrench into the gears. It was an American Academic named Denise Spellberg, who is an Associate Professor at the University of Texas in Austin.
Can we say DHIMMI? If you can’t now you will after this next bit;
On April 30, Shahed Amanullah, a guest lecturer in Ms. Spellberg’s classes and the editor of a popular Muslim Web site, got a frantic call from her. “She was upset,” Mr. Amanullah recalls. He says Ms. Spellberg told him the novel “made fun of Muslims and their history,” and asked him to warn Muslims.
emphasis mine
The University of Texas motto is “What Starts Here Changes the World.”They couldn’t be more right because if Denise Spellberg had her way we probably would have seen riots, embassy burnings and protests by Muslims around the world being angry that someone would dare to take the truth of their “religion” and look at it through the lens of historical fiction.
Let’s see what we have so far.
We have an associate professor who specializes in Islamic studies.
She receives an advance copy of historical fiction focusing on the prophet Mohammed’s nine year old child bride.
Instead of calling the publisher and saying “Listen, I study these folks for a living and publishing this is really gonna tick ‘em off if you publish it” she instead contacts the editor of a popular Muslim website and says “Hey, I have an advance copy of a book and it makes fun of Muslims so you should warn everyone.”
As I said DHIMMI!! In fact I would go so far as to say she is inciting unrest and hatred. But what can one expect from a graduate of Columbia University? Columbia is a well know bastion of far left thought and hatred for all things American. Apparently they are also now teaching Dhimmitude and appeasement. Maybe we should move the whole campus to France.
At the end of the day the FACT that Mohamed had sex with a nine year old girl is hanging there quietly, causing many people to wonder why anyone would willingly support a religion started by a murderous caravan raider who molested a prepubescent girl. The chance for us to open a dialog with Muslims over this slipped away when Denise Spellberg went running to her Muslim friend like clueless, appeasing idiot hoping to prove her loyalty to a group of backwards thinking 8th century zealots who, if given half a chance, would have her in a burkha before you could say “enshallah master.”
Drop Associate Professor Denise Spellberg a line at the email address below and let her know how thankful you are there are people such as herself giving us all great examples of what clueless dhimmitude looks like.
dams@mail.utexas.edu
» Filed Under 1st Amendment, History, Islam, Islamicfascism, Liberal Media/Bias, Multiculturalism/PC, News, Revisionism, State of Education
Trackback URL
Comments
31 Responses to “Clueless Dhimmitude and Denise Spellberg”
Leave a Reply
Be sure to check out Ms.Spellberg’s publications….a very interesting read. Especially the first one…….so she can write about the “prophet’s” 9 year old wife but no one else can? Very interesting,here we have have a professor who appears to be deliberately interfering with someone else publishing something that just might show her own “published” work for what it is: a complete fantasy………..
Contact the head of her department….Spellberg is a lost cause.
—The chance for us to open a dialog with Muslims over this slipped away when Denise Spellberg went running to her Muslim friend like clueless, appeasing idiot hoping to prove her loyalty to a group of backwards thinking 8th century zealots who, if given half a chance, would have her in a burkha before you could say “enshallah master.”—
Is that really how you go about opening dialog with someone by saying the other party is a groups of backwards zealots….or is that how one would go about inciting hatred, violence and oh, I don’t know…at the very least stirring the pot to prove how you are better than others.
I must’ve missed that in “opening dialog class.” Perhaps you can lend us the name of your mentors that open dialog with others by first calling them backwards zealots.
Eric, I am only calling it like I see it. Show me one way the muslim world in all its modern glory is not at its base backwards and seventh century (outside of spending oil money to build ski parks in the middle of the desert) and I will take it back.
The muslim world will stifle free speech when it “offends” them, by violence if necessary.
I stand by my analysis. They are backwards zealots and you are sounding like an apologist.
Sending this all over and to Denise Spellberg and Random House as well:
I am of course outraged at Random’s cowardice and completely sympathetic to Ms. Jones’ plight. I have to wonder at her own understanding of what exactly she was doing, given that she apparently thought Denise Spellberg would be supportive, or at least minimally decent as a critic and simply contact Random with her doubts. Ms. Jones seems to have been surprised about the vicious gossip-based threat system that Spellberg would activate against her. Sherry Jones seems a sensible and imaginative enough person and writer. How could she so misjudge the irrationality of the radical Islamist fever swamps, the extent of its self-loathing fellow-traveling haters of the West in academia and the media, of which Denise Spellerg is one, or the bureaucratic-editor cowards of a money-making operation like Random? I wish her luck in finding another publisher, one less beholden to the thought police.
Jonathan Burack
Stoughton, WI
This appalls me of course. I think Christmasghost nailed this one - Spellberg wants no competition, so she’s fanned the flames of Muslims.
What I object to here though is the focusing on Islam. Christians do what they can to censor what they don’t like, too. A professor in Minnesota got death threats and his college bombarded with calls for him to be fired because he threatened to desecrate a communion wafer. Religions are full of nutjobs.
Certainly ANYTHING anyone wants to say, short of slander should be permitted, and that goes for talking about religions as well, ANY religions.
Even though the book isn’t being published, a link to the prologue in pdf format can be found in my blog post The Jewel of Medina.
So much for freedom of expression, thought, research and the Enlightenment. This continual unholy alliance of the oddly named ‘liberal’ left and Islam, and feminists with the most patriarchal tradition on the planet, is just nauseating.
Violence really does pay now - and we thought the USA was the one place where they would publish freely and not be bullied into censoring at the behest of the hard liners.
Book burning now >>>>> ???? soon 1930’s stuff. Solzenhitsyn’s Nobel Speech spoke of the West’s ’spirit of Munich’ - he was so right.
To Fati,
If you read the prologue to Jones’ book you’ll see that it can hardly be compared to anything Solzenhitsyn wrote.
This book is just a trashy piece of fiction and not wrote even burning (unless you’re in a Russian Gulag and need to get warm).
should be “not worth burning”….sorry for the typo.
THIS should be the so-called war on terror. What’s the point of being able to invade two countries if a major publisher fears their employees could get killed for publishing a book? How can you say we’re fighting them over there so we don’t have to fight them here, when HERE is where a book can’t be published? Ridiculous.
Denise, you are so sad. Never mind upsetting the Muslims. You silly american woman!!!!!
This once again shows the total intolerants of the Muslim religion and it’s leaders.
The Fatwa is only another way of the religious leaders have of intimation and to call for anarchic to bring out the rabble to kill or destroy. Religion is OK as long at it does not hurt anyone. But, the goal of all religions is to stop progress and enlightment to make the world a better place to live. Religion places a great yoke of oppression upon all mankind.
Eric: I have never heard of starting a dialogue by attacking someone-an individual or a group. When you want to start a dialogue, you would look for common grounds.
Eric: I agree with your comments.
I wish some of you who are screaming about “the total intolerants [sic] of the Muslim religion and it’s leaders” would take a few minutes to read the pdf of the book’s prologue.The link to it can be found here.This book is just a piece of trivial trash. And remember…..no one has threatened violence.
Robert, trash or not the fact that Random House pulled the book is indicative of the fact that publishing something even POSSIBLY derogatory about islam or any facet of it can cause riots and worse.
The fact that spellberg, instead of going to random house and saying “this is trash” went to a muslim and called out the troops. This smacks of dhimmitude and appeasement. As serious academic would have contacted the publisher to complain not rallied those who may have been offended by the book.
Write a book denigrating Christianity and no publisher would think twice about publishing it because of possible threats of violence but even the hint of angry muslims causes the book to be pulled.
See the difference?
So, the logic is…..they trash Christianity so let them trash Islam as well.
Why trash either?
Some,like PhillyChief,want to antagonize all religions.
We could all be more civil towards people we don’t agree with.
Respecting people is not the same as respecting religion. Religion is an idea. I should respect you, I should respect your right to have your idea and I should respect your right to practice your idea (provided it doesn’t hurt or impose on others), but I have no obligation to respect your idea.
It’s hypocritical to trash liberal ideas but then argue conservative or religious ideas can’t be trashed. Free speech is a two-way street, Robert.
Robert said;
“We could all be more civil towards people we don’t agree with.”
Robert? I think you are telling the wrong group of people about being more civil to those we don’t agree with. I think perhaps you should talk to the muslims about that one.
Robert, since you linked to your own blog, I went and read it. I want to make sure that I comprehend your position both there and here.
It sounds like you think this book should not be published because you and Spellberg consider it trashy. Do I have that correct? Your taste,and hers, should determine the actions of publishers in America.
In many blogs, including yours, I see a severe misunderstanding of the publishing process. Production on a book takes up to or over a year. This book was going to press and would be released in two months.
Spellberg was not asked for a critique, or to give advice on whether to publish or whether the book was factual enough to be deemed worthy of publication. She was sent an ARC (advanced reader copy) in the hopes of an endorsement for the cover.
Random House was committed. It had paid an advance, edited the book, designed the cover and sold it to booksellers by the time the ARC was sent to her. That is how a publishing timeline works. The text had been set in type already, or there would not have even been an ARC yet. The investments had all been made.
Random House had already decided whether the book was worthy of publication on the basis of style or whatever else might qualify under critques like “trashy” or “literary” or even “historically accurate.” They did not need Dr. Spellberg to advise them on that part of their job and it was too late in the process for them to request it of her. Since Dr. Spellberg has a book undergoing the same timeline, she knew this.
Dr. Spellberg says in her letter to the WSJ today that she merely critiqued. Hardly. She played the trump card of potential violence to get her way and to sidetrack this book.
She did not care for the book’s style or content? Fine. She should have declined to endorse and left it at that, and saved her true critique for reviews once it was published. But she did not want it published, so she pulled out the stops.
She continues to speak of the book presenting the history of Islam incorrectly, but she has not in any way itemized incorrect facts. The bottom line seems to be that she does not care for the author’s interpretation and presentation of history because it does not fit with her own view of how it should be seen. It does not, in her opinion, get history “right”—an odd concept coming from a professional historian. She deems it too trashy, not literary enough for such an important subject in the least. Or, I suspect, at most.
So now we are going to have people stopping the presses, speaking darkly of potential violence, marshalling intimidation tactics, based on dislike of an author’s vision and style?
And we will have blogs like Robert’s basically saying “don’t get your knickers in a twist over this because the book is not well written and looks to me to be a bodice-ripper and popular fiction is less worthy of protection. Now if it were to MY literary taste, THEN you should have some concerns.”
Well, no. You don’t quite have my position down pat.
Random House can and does publish whatever they deem fit.
If someone wants to publish this book, it is certainly within their rights to do so, as is your right to read it.
I believe, because of it’s lack of literary merit, anyone buying the book would be throwing their money away.
There seems to be a lot of anti-Muslim sentiment where this book is concerned and that is unfortunate.
1. Don’t conflate “The Jewel of Medina” with “Clueless Dhimmitude and Denise Spellberg”. The novel builds upon historical facts, presenting, not condemning. The article does the condemning.
2. Other readers might have had different reactions. Religious leaders are abnormal: Moses slaughtered the worshippers of Ba’al; Christ died a thirty-three year old virgin; Buddha tried living on a leaf or nut a day. Muhammad seems more in the Warren Jeffs mode.
3. Grammar for “Robert”: Ironically, you catch “intolerants” (for “intolerance”), but miss “it’s” (for “its”) six words later. And your “because of it’s lack of literary merit,” just repeats the “it’s” for “its” error.
The content of the novel is almost irrelevant. The facts are it was slated for printing and distribution this month, Spellberg worked up the Muslims, they went into Jihad mode, Spellberg pointed to that and warned Random House, and finally Random House pussed out and decided they wouldn’t print the novel.
The novel’s merit is meaningless. In fact, it’s probably a stinker which ironically will sell better now once the author finds a new publisher, which I’m thinking she will, even if it’s a small independent. In fact, it might be the thing that puts a small publisher on the map.
Robert, many here have stated it and stated it well, but I wish to put into plain English the point of this post.
Spellberg didn’t like the novel, not because it was trashy but because it painted her dear muzzie friends in a bad (but honest) light. Mohammud was a pedophile. He had sexual relations with a NINE YEAR OLD GIRL and the muzzies of today emulate this in their culture. Spellberg used the muzzies threat of violence to get a book pulled because she is an appeasing dhimmi and a traitor to Freedoms Cause.
Anyone who backs her up on this (Robert) is just as guilty of the hate crimes she has committed on us by bowing down to the muzzies.
And Spellberg, if you read this, what makes you think you’d be spared by some radical muslim on a jihad? Just because you prostrate yourself at their feet singing their praises? You deserve more than most, Denise, to suffer under a caliphate so keep working on it little girl. Someday you may get your wish.
That Mohammad had a nine year old wife is not news. This book did not expose that.
Someone will publish this book and you’ll all have the chance to read it.
I hope you enjoy it.
Well , one thing you could do is harness the power of the net :
Put the book on a website in pdf format , and ask for donation. Within days , the entire world will have the book.
If they treathen your website owner to remove the file , you can be certain other people will put it back online somewhere, or share it trough p2p networks , etc.
Good luck
Does the phrase “Watch List” apply here?
Yes, I can hear the clicks of the keyboard adding Ms. Spellberg’s name on it. The left has did it again; they don’t realize that by banning books and thoughts, they are eroding their own power of free speech. Ms. Spellberg is in the wrong line of work. She should be harvesting opium poppies while caring an AK.
This really should be all over the news but isn’t. It is utterly ridiculous yet very serious too. I might mention that Spellberg put a book out on Aisha also a few years ago…………Hmmmm. Regardless, this is really scary. We will never protect our way of life this way……………
As an analogy: If a similar novel were written about L. Ron Hubbard, would we respect Scientologists’ demands that it not be published? I think not.
The Triumph of Threats
When one of the world’s largest publishing houses - the Random House, bow its head to threats that have not even been made, then, one must say: the dark force has won a big victory. It is more than embarrassing, but it is a fact. It is not Imams who have threatened Random House to cancel the contract with Sherry Jones. It is a group of American academics, so-called experts in Islam, and, I would say, led by professor Denise Spellberg. They are a gang of cowards who do not deserve to live in a free country, and, least of all Denise Spellberg. She belongs to Yemen or Saudi Arabia. Everyone knows how women are treated there. But, but, I have good news: Sherry Jones may very well have her book published in Denmark by a group of great men who do not bow cowardly and pathetically for Islam and Islamism. They see clearly how dangerous Islam and Islamism are, and how important free speech and a free, open and sound debate are.
Well, this site does indeed have some interesting takes on liberals - who they are and what they stand for. I’ll leave that aside for now. I’ve taken a class taught by Ms. Spellberg at UT titled “Islam in America”. Let me inform you: yes, she is a bit of an oddball, but, never once did I gleam anything from her that made me think she supported hurting people. First hand experience leads me to question this. I sincerely doubt that Ms. Spellberg supports terrorist activity in any way, shape, or form.