While I think your criticism of Random House is a bit harsh, I do believe a public discourse is an excellent idea.

I agree that Bush and McCain put too little value in communicating with those with opposing views.

Why don't you do just that. Do a review of the book, and invite some muslims that you know to do the same.

I don't think your reaction to Random House's decision is harsh at all. This was a corporate decision by a company fearing a hit to their profits, with no sense of free speech, discourse, education, nothing. It was pathetic, and I say good for you for making that point. Well done!

I don't think you are too harsh on Random House. Not at all.

What Bush and McCain have to do with any of this is a mystery.

As far as your suggestion, that is what random House thought they did. The publication was shut down on advice of Islamic scholar and discussion by Muslims. In fact almost exactly how you described it in terms of getting input -- although this was on a listserv and on internet discussions.

After he got the call from Ms. Spellberg, Mr. Amanullah dashed off an email to a listserv of Middle East and Islamic studies graduate students, acknowledging he didn't "know anything about it [the book]," but telling them, "Just got a frantic call from a professor who got an advance copy of the forthcoming novel, 'Jewel of Medina' -- she said she found it incredibly offensive." He added a write-up about the book from the Publishers Marketplace, an industry publication.

The next day, a blogger known as Shahid Pradhan posted Mr. Amanullah's email on a Web site for Shiite Muslims -- "Hussaini Youth" -- under a headline, "upcoming book, 'Jewel of Medina': A new attempt to slander the Prophet of Islam." Two hours and 28 minutes after that, another person by the name of Ali Hemani proposed a seven-point strategy to ensure "the writer withdraws this book from the stores and apologise all the muslims across the world."

from Wall Street Journal, Aug.6.

I feel you are also side stepping the issue by calling for an open discussion in that you are assuming this consortium of Muslims would welcome the book with open arms.

But what if this open discussion came to the conclusion that the book should not be published?

I think you are not too hard on the House but too soft. I think this whole episode reflects a bit how near irrelevant and ossified this industry is. The whole thing. And of course cowardly and bereft of any belief in fighting for basic freedoms against those who seek to take them away.

It's a big issue, but random House is so pathetic this can only be expected.

____

I thought the Joyce Carol Oates headline was from the Onion.

This issue, based on web headlines, was a bizarre issue -- putting evrything down. People who drive cars are idiots, Doris Lessing's parents are insane (apple don't fall far from the tree would be my editorial comment), western world and US are bad and mess everything up. And whatever Stein and Toklas did or did not do, it was not intercourse.

____

Levi, rather than me blather on like usual, seriously, do you think this Random House decision to publish this book, then renege due to concerns is a serious matter that can have broader implications than just that book and that publishing company?

A good link for this is here where the first chapter or prologue of the book is available and there is a discussion going between various people, kicked off by a Muslim woman's opinion and including comments by the author, Sherry Jones.

Would publication of this book, put the author in danger? With so many small radical Muslim groups claiming GOD wants this or that and are willing to react on such thought processes with nonrational behavior, it is probably true. Asking muslim scholars with many diverse opinions is probably pointless. Radicals have no attraction to supposedly educated or supposedly theological diverse opinions to change their destructive behavior. The author obviously could make up her own mind after hearing theses so call scholars by just not agreeing to have it published. Rushdie remained hidden for years for a reason. Are we entering another so called Dark Ages against ideas or knowledge being transmitted through public media, I wonder. The age of political correctness or ideas contray to this or that particular group and being seen as threats to certain ideals or beliefs has grown exponetially in the last few years. Very scary indeed.

You know what? I like Herrera's poetry. I like some of it a great deal, enough to say so in public, rather vociferously, I thought. I teach his work in my courses too. (I don't mean to deride your snarky style: I just want to make clear that I like Herrera's poems... even though I don't like all of them.)

TKG, what I'm objecting is Random House's "talk to the hand" attitude towards anyone who might be offended by the book. This rules out any chance of a compromise solution (which is what would probably result from consulting an ad hoc committee of Muslim reviewers).

A compromise solution -- what a crazy idea, huh?

(By the way, another subtext of this whole mess is that Random House recently had a major management change. What's really going on here is that the new management is refusing to go to bat for the old management's controversial projects.)

TKG makes a good point that (a) Random House thinks they have already had the discussion that Levi is advocating, and (b) "what if this open discussion came to the conclusion that the book should not be published?"

As for the freedom of speech issue, Random House is not prohibting anyone's freedom of speech. They have the right to publish or not publish anything they choose. I recall Levi himself deleting certain comments from the old Litkicks site because he believed they were inappropriate. I agreed with his decision.

Of course, if Random House decides not to publish The Jewel of Medina, they should allow Sherry Jones to shop it elsewhere. AND keep the advance.